Geniocracy

I will break my arguments up into 3 parts:1. What is a Geniocracy?2. Why is a Geniocracy a good idea?3. Intelligence over age First, however, I wish to talk about my opponent's question about MLA citations. I will ammend my rules and state that he is not required to use MLA format if he does not wish to do so. Notwithstanding, if he wishes to comply with that format, he can learn about the particular format on this site: . https://owl.english.purdue.edu....Now, I will begin my arguments. What is a Geniocracy? The government style, Geniocracy, was first created by Claude Vorilhon (Raël), who "[proposed] a system that is designed to select for intelligence and compassion as the primary factors for governance. " The basic idea is this:1. Now, an 18 year-old who knows nothing about politics is allowed to vote, while a 16 year-old who knows more about politics than the average adult is not.2. In a Geniocracy, the 16 year-old, who knows more, is allowed to vote, while the 18 year-old, who knows nothing, is not. It is based on rights by intelligence rather than age. In this debate, I shall be arguing that it is better to give people more rights when they are capable of handling them rather when they reach a certain age. Why is a Geniocracy a good idea? Throughout my life, I have met adults who are not the brightest or the most responsible. These are adults that I am higher than when it comes to intelligence. Yet, they have the right to buy a house, work as long as they wish, drive, drink alcohol, buy dry ice and propane, vote, have sex, control what doctors are allowed to do to their bodies, etc. , while I, on the other hand, do not have any of those rights, desipte my higher intellect. Many children do not care about their rights until a certain age, however the ones who do feel like their civil rights are being taken away. Looking at my opponent's profile, he supports freedom, for he said it is one of his 'highest values', so I wonder why he does not support a Geniocracy. Here is a personal example:Throughout my day, I come across people who I can tell are smarter than me and people who I can tell are not as smart as me. Because I support a Geniocracy, I treat these people as they deserve to be treated. Now, I happen to be someone who does not like to feel inferior, however I still treat people as they should: I 'look down' upon the people who are inferior to me and 'look up' to the people who are more capable than I am. People deserve to and should be treated as they are. I truly believe I should have the rights I mentioned in the first paragraph (the right to buy a house, work as long as they wish, drive, etc). I believe I am capable of 'handling' the responsibility of those kinds of rights. In my opinion, age restrictions, in a way, resemble Fascism, meaning adults have total power over children until they are 'of age'. I find this wrong and I do not see how anyone could not. When refrencing 'Fascism', I am using the definition "the philosophy, principles, or methods of fascism", 'fascism' meaning: "a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power. " Child age restrictions resemble fascism in the way that children are helpless when it comes to rights. Now that I have spoken of child rights, I will now speak of adult rights. As I mentioned before, I have met some very intelligent adults and some very idiotic adults. Both of those adults have the same rights, despite the fact that one of them is incapable of handling some of them. They both have the right to comsume alcohol, yet one of them may be an alcoholic and is inclined to drive after drinking. Why should the less responsible individual have the right to drink if he cannot handle it? The responsible person should be able to enjoy this right because he is responsible. Of course, I support Prohibition, so this does not really relate to me, however it is a great example to think about. While I am at it, I should also mention weapons. People with an IQ od 70 are allowed to own a firearm, as well as a person with an IQ of 150. The 70 IQ person is more likely to abuse this right, while the more intelligent person is more likely to hide it and only use it for self defense. In certain recent school shootings, the shooter responsible had a very low IQ. Again, there is a direct correlation between violence and exceptionally low intelligence. Don't you think these people should not be permitted to own a firearm if they cannot use it correctly? Intelligence over ageWho would you rather have leading you? An individual with a high comprehension level or an individual with a low comprehension level? Here is an example:1. George Walker Bush, previous president of the United States of America, was obviously a bad president. He also had an IQ od 91.2. Barack Obama, the current president of the United States of America, is a great president. He has an IQ of 130. As you can see, there is a direct correlation between great leadership and intelligence. Not only that, but there is also a correlation between responsibility and intelligence, common sense and intelligence, and logic and intelligence. One cannot simply deny that they would rather be led by an intelligent person than an unintelligent person. It is simple logic that the more intelligent, the more likely you are to be great. Honestly, a person with an IQ of 60 would make a bad president, congressman, or leader of any kind. A person with an IQ of 160 would make a great president. To me, this seems obvious. I wish for my opponent to tell me why this is not obvious to him and why he does not support a more fair system of government and law. ConclusionI have stated all the arguments I wish to state for now. I will continue my arguments in round 3. For now, it is time for my opponent to give his arguments. I look forward to reading them. MLA Citations"Geniocracy. " Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 13 Apr. 2014. Web. 14 Apr. 2014. <. http://en.wikipedia.org...;. "Claude Vorilhon. " Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 14 Apr. 2014. Web. 14 Apr. 2014. <. http://en.wikipedia.org...;. "Famous IQs. " Famous IQs. N. p. , n. d. Web. 14 Apr. 2014. <. http://archure.net...;.Archard, David William. "Children's Rights. " Stanford University. Stanford University, 16 Oct. 2002. Web. 14 Apr. 2014. <. http://plato.stanford.edu...;. "Fascism. " Dictionary. com. Dictionary. com, n. d. Web. 14 Apr. 2014. <. http://dictionary.reference.com...;.