The U.S. Should Lower the Voting Age to 16.

I am hoping for a good healthy debate. First, since my opponent did not, I would like to look at a definition to run today's round by. Mature: fully developed in body or mind, as a person Now lets look at several of my opponents points first. My opponent brings up the idea of "taxation without representation" and brings up the IRS (no source? ) that says teenagers pay 9.7 billion dollars in sales taxes alone. Of course they do! Teenagers love buying things. Whether it be food, drinks, clothes, video games, movies, or any other of the many things teenagers buy they are going to have to face a sales tax. Regardless of your age you face sales tax. If a ten year old wants to buy something he is subjected to sales tax. Does this make him ready to vote? Of course not. She then goes on to say that 16 year olds can get a job. Just because you can work at a McDonald's doesn't qualify you to vote. Sure getting a job at 16 is good for several reasons. They mature even more in a work setting and learn how to adapt to a work setting. Does this automatically make them fully aware of politics and prepared to vote? Not by a long shot. This debate about lowering the voting age isn't only taking place in the United States. It is taking place all over the world. However, one things rings throughout most of the nations. People believe that 16 year olds just aren't ready enough to vote. I personally think that the age limit should remain the same. Whilst some young people mature earlier and have developed definitive opinions below this age, one thing I have learnt by my middle age is that our opinions and thoughts continue to develop throughout our life and that "maturity" is actually difficult to define. I think 18 is the right age, an age of independence for many, going to university, starting work etc and an age where people start to take responsibility for themselves and their future. Besides teenagers have enough to worry about. " (BBC News. Source below) She then goes on to state that the only reason teens aren't informed is because they can not vote. We can see through logic that this isn't true. I know people who are much older then the voting age who are uninformed about what they are voting about. Just having the ability to vote doesn't make them more informed or even give them the desire to be more well informed. She also says that students are learning about politics in school. The key word here is "learning. " They have not learned everything they needed to know yet. They need to continue to learn about politics, history, and the way our government works before we can put a ballot in their hands and send them to the polls. They just simply aren't prepared yet. My opponent then goes on to make her weakest argument of her case. She says that "16-ers are old enough to have a job, and have sex. .. " Wait up here! Is my opponent trying to advocate that once someone has sex they have the right to vote? That is absolutely untrue. Just because a teenager may have sex doesn't qualify them to vote. This is such a silly argument to advocate for people to vote. If we are to follow this line of thinking than having sex should be a qualification to vote since it some how proves that someone is mature. It does not prove this what so ever. This whole argument that 16 year olds are well informed is also bogus. Teenagers are worried about homework, girlfriends, boyfriends, gossip, personal image, video games, clubs, Facebook, and a plethora of other things. Now we expect these kids that are too worried about not having a date to Prom to have the right to vote. They wont become magically well informed if they get the right to vote. Now I am not saying all teenagers are misinformed or uninformed. However, my opponent is advocating not just for the well informed teens, but also for those who are out partying under age because they want to fit in. She is also advocating for those teenagers who don't care about school and are failing all of their classes. She is advocating for the worst of teens as well as the best of teens. The worst teens either don't care to vote, or will vote with whoever they think is cool. So the election will no longer be about the issues, but who is the most "hip" or the most popular among their peers. Teens won't care about the president's view on the war on terror or about the welfare program. They will go along with what their peers do. We should know this because we either are or were teenagers. My opponent's goal is a nice idea. However, we simply can see that most 16 year olds aren't well informed enough or mature enough to vote. Give them two years to learn more and get that high school diploma. At least then we know that those kids knew enough to pass their government class and that they have learned what was required of them to graduate. Teenagers aren't in control of their life yet. They can't get a better job then at a retail store or at a fast food chain because they don't have their diploma yet. What is two years going to be to a 16 year old? Let the teenagers be teenagers and enjoy high school. Let them have one less thing to worry about. In closing I'd like to ask my opponent to please list her sources websites. She brings them up but supplies no sources. Sources: . http://news.bbc.co.uk... . http://tigerweekly.com... . http://en.wikipedia.org...