- All Debates
- Popular Debates
- Active Debates
- New Debates
- Open Challenge Debates
- My Challenge Debates
- Accepted Challenges
- Debate Communities
- Argument Waterfall
- New People
- People by Points
Closing statement: After this debate, I still feel like we should change the 26th amendment because t would increase the citizen's turnouts if it was a responsibility so that the government of the USA would have all the population votes rather than 60% population. This is why I believe that voting is a responsibility, not a right.
The 26th amendment states that voting at 18 is a right, it never said that we should lower the voting age to 16 or 17 I'm trying to change to voting is a responsibility at 18 because the law states that voting at 18 is a right, but I want to change it to a responsibility.
Yes, those are facts that it states that voting is a right, but if we change the voting amendments to voting is a responsibility than it would be better for the government to have all of the votes from every citizen of the USA rather than just 60% of the population.
You don't have evidence to support your claim that states that one person's vote does not affect the results because there are more people voting but what if people don't want to vote. What if since they have the right to vote, the citizens of the USA don't want to vote, Than there would be no one voting for their president
Argument #1: It Broadens Representation And Legitimacy. If voting is made mandatory, it will ensure that the government will be represented by a majority of the population, not just a few individuals. It will also guarantee that members of the society who are not as politically active will not be neglected. It will also prevent political leaders to claim greater legitimacy.
The word "soccer" is a British invention that British people stopped using around 30 years ago. Also the words "soccer" come from the term "association football" that was invented around 200 years ago. So the right term to use is Soccer not football