Should women vote? Or should women maybe vote depending on passing a test?

Should women vote?

  • Yes, as long as they are of legal age.

  • Yes, as long as they pass a test (a test which men don’t have to pass)

  • Nope

Results are only viewable after voting.
Thanks for the reply, dove of the sun.

I can’t comment on the Latin American health system. But I can comment on the health system I frequent.

Here in South Dakota we have the Avera health system. Avera Mckennan was started by The Presentation Sisters of Aberdeen (South Dakota). You can read more about that here. The Presentation Sisters are an order whom were founded by a nun named Honora "Nano" Nagle in 18th century Ireland. I encourage you to read about who Nano Nagle was and what she did for the Catholic poor in Ireland. She was an incredible women who is being considered for sainthood.

You can review the first page of family medicine practitioners for Avera Mckennan here. There are many men and women, on the webpage that I linked, with exceptional reviews. Patients have gone out of there way to leave feedback for these doctors and that feedback is overwhelmingly positive.

Women are rational creatures who can create amazing things (not just babies). They are different from men, no doubt, but they are also half of society. Anyone capable of creating a health system or being a respected doctor can reasonably decide who they should vote for.
 
Palsofchaos said:
Thanks for the reply, dove of the sun.

I can’t comment on the Latin American health system. But I can comment on the health system I frequent.

Here in South Dakota we have the Avera health system. Avera Mckennan was started by The Presentation Sisters of Aberdeen (South Dakota). You can read more about that here. The Presentation Sisters are an order whom were founded by a nun named Honora "Nano" Nagle in 18th century Ireland. I encourage you to read about who Nano Nagle was and what she did for the Catholic poor in Ireland. She was an incredible women who is being considered for sainthood.

You can review the first page of family medicine practitioners for Avera Mckennan here. There are many men and women, on the webpage that I linked, with exceptional reviews. Patients have gone out of there way to leave feedback for these doctors and that feedback is overwhelmingly positive.

Women are rational creatures who can create amazing things (not just babies). They are different from men, no doubt, but they are also half of society. Anyone capable of creating a health system or being a respected doctor can reasonably decide who they should vote for.
Click to expand...
I have never said women as a whole are unintelligent or incapable of reasoning and creating amazing things beyond babies or household chores but I mostly talk about psychological differences. Most women will have a nurturing side even if they call themselves feminists and tend to be more agreeable than men overall, so when you extrapolate this to government roles, it will turn out into a totalitarian state where governments become increasingly intrusive and will control absolutely everything such as education, healthcare, what you eat, etc. Mostly like a parental model which it is at some point detrimental to societies. Women are also more naturally passive than men so they (we) still tend to always look for more “security” so more women voting will often mean more totalitarian governments that will give women that false sense of “safety net” by trusting governments will take care of women’s best interest in the way of gun control or welfare policies, which is not true. This passive nature will also make women more prone to support lenient treatment or policies against criminals for example.
Needless to say, suffragist movement started to give women from upper class only the right to vote (by men) only as a tool to get more power and nothing else, therefore these upper class women were still ruled by men to achieve more power and they had no idea or ever cared about how changing traditional roles would affect women in lower social classes, where voting didn’t really have any impact in their day to day. Just like today, the most vocal feminist women are often well-off White women who have enough money to continue escalating corporate ladder while having other less privileged women cleaning their houses and babysitting their children. Or they keep telling young women they can delay motherhood until they’re 50 when they freeze their eggs, something most women specially outside the anglosphere don’t have access to.
 
I agree that in a "Real Society" women shouldn't vote and neither should a good amount of men, in general. Merely existing as a citizen shouldn't be the bare minimum for the privilege that is needed for responsible voting. There should be some kind of tangible investment by the voter that shows a real commitment to the future of the country, e.g., military service, employment, children if possible, or even community services, etc. People using welfare or government subsides shouldn't be allowed to vote until they've repaid the tax dollars they used. They should be an active participant in their environment, that sort of thing.

But, in reality, we live in Clown World. So I'm generally ambivalent about a woman's right to vote in the current year (that Pandora's Box has already been opened). My personal opinion is that voting at a State or National level is smoke and mirrors nowadays to quell the masses while TPTB enact whatever measures they want. California's vote against gay marriage was possibly the last legitimate vote that really mattered and, since then, the measures that the TPTB wants passed get passed, regardless of how people vote on the ground. So when I see the trend of liberal women voting one way, it appears (to me) not that they are influencing policy with their votes but that their desires happen to align, for the moment, with what TPTB already have decided and planned and will implement despite how anyone actually voted.
 
The way I see it is sure women can vote, but are they qualified to vote? I don’t believe in universal suffrage. I believe in “citizen suffrage.” What is lost among us today is the concept of CITIZENSHIP. What does it mean to be a CITIZEN. To me - a citizen has power over the polis but it’s married to responsibility. I have my own opinion on how voting should work and it works like the corporate model. I call it the “corporate republic.” You get a say if you have ownership. Pay your taxes and provide to your local and national Government? COOL you get to vote for your representative. Are you a welfare sponge like my most recent ex? NO VOTE. Did you serve in the armed forces? Then you get to vote for who is commander in chief. No service? NO OPINION. I live in the US so we have an extra legislative body. The senate. That should be appointed, not elected. It’s not so much women voting that’s the issue - it’s qualified voters. Unfortunately many more men will vote because more men served and are net tax contributors.
 
dove of the sun said:
Due to the downside and cheapening of education in the name of “equality” and fairness, a woman or man having a degree basically says nothing about the cognitive ability or character of someone, since affirmative action quotas have also taken over. And it means even less outside of Anglosphere, I live somewhere in Latin America and graduated from medical school here and you would be surprised about how many men and women got the highest scores via the immoral and incorrect way because corruption and doing whatever -even losing self respect- if it means getting some short-sighted and direct benefit. But still they are worse than average doctors and shouldn’t be allowed to treat any patients.
Click to expand...
I have been to Latin America and I’m not surprised at all by what you are saying. In Latin America the top doctors usually studied in English speaking countries. The other doctors can be hit or miss just luck of the draw really.
 
Chiosboy90 said:
Maybe if we have some requirement I could change my NO, to a Yes. They need to:
1.) Have children
2.) Not divorced
3.) Only Christian

Thats it. Fair isnt it?
Click to expand...
Then nominally Christian turboliberal women with henpecked simp husbands would be able to vote, though.

Literally just have men make the decisions, there's zero reason to make things more complicated than that. If it's a married woman then there's no doubt that her husband will vote with her best interests in mind anyway.
 
One thing we have seen in the West in dozens of countries, over the last 150 years, that is undeniable: on a long enough timeline nearly all women will eventually vote for Socialism, Collectivism, and eventually Communism. Daddy State becomes the husband/father/provider/coddler.
In the end, it results in tyranny, civil war, or the destruction of that nation's culture and society. Sadly, stupid men go along with this, just in order to please these women, which makes the insanity snowball even faster. Just look at the USA and Western Europe right now.
I'll take it one further: NO ONE should vote (men included), unless they are married, educated, own land/home/property, and are at least 2nd generation born in that country. If you have no skin in the game, you should have no vote. This is not far from what the Founding Fathers in the USA originally designed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top