Lowering the voting age

In this round of debate, in this round, I am going to talk about some rebuttals on Pros points, ask Pros some questions, and summarize my arguments. The proposition side has, firstly, said that in nowdays, students are very so smart that they can choose the president wisely. She also said some points from Dr. Sam. However, it cannot be true. First of all, she did not state the exact source and did not explain who Dr. Sam is. Second of all, she said about the studies and being smart. On the other hand, study does not really affect voting quality. For example, somebody who is very bad at study can choose the president very wisely. Even it is true, she did not tell us why it is. Also, she said most of the students are smart in these days, but does that mean the minorities are not people? Although there might be many students who are smart, what about the rest of the others who are NOT smart? Secondly, she has told us that if students can vote at the younger age, it can be their habit which can increase the voting turnout. In contrast, it is not always necessarily true. In 2007, the voting age has been already lowered from 20 to 19. However, in the latest Presidential Election, it showed the lowest voters turnout- It was shown that only 60% of the total voters had voted for the election. It finally means that lowering the voting age does not affect people for increasing voting turnout. It only gets decreased more. Now, I would like to ask MickeyMouse these questions: 1. Do you believe that 18-year-olds make better political decisions than the most mature in society, such as 50-year-old businessmen? 2. The Korean Constitution states that you are an adult when you are 20 years old and that when you're 19 years old, you can have certain political and business rights. So what do you think about that? What is your basis for saying that the standard of an adult is 18 years old in Korea? 3. Even 18-year-olds cannot set up their own businesses, they cannot invest, they cannot vote, they cannot participate in political parties, and such. So, how can you say that those who are younger than 19 year old actually do have these valid social experiences that you need for the basis of voting? 4. Do you have clear and objective standard for maturity? Moving onto my summary, I would like to emphasize, again, my points. First, people whose ages are under 19 are not really mature and they do not have any valid social experience. Those who are younger than 19, still have to be taken care of by older adults. Thus, they are not independent, which means that they are too immature to participate in election. Second, young people mostly like style better than substances. They do not really care about the quality of the candidates, but care about being stylish. It is because they are pop-oriented. So, they can choose the president wisely since they do not consider about what should be considered about. Lastly, it is because of the purpose. What we seriously need to talk about is more people voting good-quality president, not lowering the voting age. Lowering the voting age, does not really mean choosing a wise president. So, therefore, because we live in the country called Korea, where the age is 19, we believe that we should run away from the international trend unless we change the Constitution. We live in a society where the cultural basis of an adult is 19 years old. Therefore, ladies and gentlemen, we beg this motion does not pass. Thank you very much.