Poll: Would you be in favor of the described test for your rights?
Poll Options
View poll results: Would you be in favor of the described test for your rights?
Yes, I would be in favor of the test.
31 39%
No, I am against the test.
48 61%
Voters: 79.
#1
Would you be in favor of taking an annual test that would determine what civil liberties you are entitled to? Many have complained that most laws exist to keep stupid people from doing stupid things. What if these laws only applied to them? It would be interesting if you were to take a test each year that would be on nearly all subjects which there are laws that the government feels the nonignorant could be exempt from.

Know a lot about why you have free speech and how you're allowed to use it? Then you are exempt from many laws restricting it, etc.

I was just interested in knowing how you all feel about this. I for one would not be in favor of said test because while I believe most laws are unnecesary restrictions that exist only to keep a few psyco's in line, all people should be subject to the same laws.

P.S. Pretend it was impossible to cheat on the test and that this system would not be anymore difficult to enforce.
Quote by RHCP94
It's an option for the "Which one of E Daws parents are uglier?" thread.
#2
There'd be riots over the double standards.

Actually, I'm not quite sure what you mean. You mean for example, if people had to take an IQ test to see whether they would have the right to have children?
...
#3
Sounds good on paper, but who determines what is ignorance and how it applies? The whole thing would fall apart fairly quickly.
Is it a bad thing if one of your testicles is larger then the other two?
#5
Really, everyone should be equal under the law. Except me, who should be allowed to do whatever I like.
#7
No because the law must treat all people equally, that is the foundation of the justice system.
"Why should we subsidise intellectual curiosity?"
-Ronald Reagan

"Knowledge is in every country the surest basis of public happiness."
-George Washington
#8
No, I'd never take the test. As much as we like to think we do, we don't have the same opportunities as everyone else. Some people have to quit school because they need a job to support their family. Thus not having an education so you could get a high score on the test. It's just an example, the test would be unfair. Also, what would the questions be? The man that can't do addition in his head could also know the ins and outs of cars and know how to repair and build them perfectly.
BRIGHT LIGHTS PUT ME IN A TRANCE.
but it aint house music that makes me want to dance.
#9
why should one person be allowed to break the rules while others cant. I guess politicians and celebrities these days already get treatment like this
#10
Quote by bartdevil_metal
There'd be riots over the double standards.

Actually, I'm not quite sure what you mean. You mean for example, if people had to take an IQ test to see whether they would have the right to have children?


Well, not like an IQ. Let's say drinking for an example. It would be legal for you to drink if you pass a test in which your score adequately demonstrates that you understand the side effects, consequences, and safe practices.

The idea is that there are many laws out there which limit your freedom because there are certain people who do not have a certain understanding of some subject that need such laws to prevent them from doing stupid or dangerous things.
Quote by RHCP94
It's an option for the "Which one of E Daws parents are uglier?" thread.
#11
Quote by Joe-Fish
No, I'd never take the test. As much as we like to think we do, we don't have the same opportunities as everyone else. Some people have to quit school because they need a job to support their family. Thus not having an education so you could get a high score on the test. It's just an example, the test would be unfair. Also, what would the questions be? The man that can't do addition in his head could also know the ins and outs of cars and know how to repair and build them perfectly.


It wouldn't be the kind of test you would need an education for. it would test your logical skills, which you can't really learn at school
#12
Quote by E Daws
Well, not like an IQ. Let's say drinking for an example. It would be legal for you to drink if you pass a test in which your score adequately demonstrates that you understand the side effects, consequences, and safe practices.

The idea is that there are many laws out there which limit your freedom because there are certain people who do not have a certain understanding of some subject that need such laws to prevent them from doing stupid or dangerous things.


haha i kind of like that idea but it should more be about who can hold their alcohol better. So theyd have to do a drinking section of the test
#13
Quote by The_Crumpet
It wouldn't be the kind of test you would need an education for. it would test your logical skills, which you can't really learn at school

This guy has the idea.

This test wouldn't be adding additional restrictions, just loosening some existing ones.
Quote by RHCP94
It's an option for the "Which one of E Daws parents are uglier?" thread.
#14
I dont think thats a good idea. I do think that you are probably an idiot.
I'll be your number one with a bullet.
#16
It wouldn't technically be democratic then, and it would be a far worse system. It just wouldn't work at all.

Anyway, fundamentally I believe it is wrong in principle. Every human being has a right, because we are all born into the same species, and simply did not choose to be 'retarded', regardless of if it were their government, or they were born with some sort of condition.

I am dyslexic, so does that mean I wouldn't be allowed to have any rights? It would just turn into a totalitarian state.
Quote by Necrophagist777

I agree, i always help people up. At the last show we all protected this little kid who was tying his shoe in the middle of the pit.


http://www.mylot.com/?ref=Phase3
#17
As an American citizen, I'm entitled to equal rights as everyone else. Having this test set in place, making me less equal because I am not at the same intellectual level as them, would be a infringement on my civil and equal rights as a legal citizen.
Write your own lyrics or poetry? Post them HERE for a crit.
Follow me on Twitter
#18
Yeah we can call the people who pass the outer party and the people who fail proles and the government can be the inner party it'll be 1984 without nuclear war.
#19
Bad idea is bad. Seriously. That would encourage more crime, less equality, and more corruption.
We're only strays.
#20
I'd take it beacuse I know I'd ace it .

But really, I'd take it because it could limit things to those who know what they're doing.
#21
Quote by The Leader
Sounds good on paper, but who determines what is ignorance and how it applies? The whole thing would fall apart fairly quickly.

QFT.

In theory, it's genius.

But nothing ever goes as planned when it comes to civil liberties.
#22
Quote by E Daws
Well, not like an IQ. Let's say drinking for an example. It would be legal for you to drink if you pass a test in which your score adequately demonstrates that you understand the side effects, consequences, and safe practices.

There's a severe difference between regurgitating knowledge and behaving responsibly.

-SD
#23
Quote by SilentDeftone
There's a severe difference between regurgitating knowledge and regurgitating kebab.

-SD


Yep. No thanks.
And yet, to me, what is this quintessence of dust? Man delights not me: no, nor woman neither... nor women neither.
#24
Once again, most people seem to be missing something. It would not mean more laws against you. If you think it would rob you of a fundamental right (besides the right to be subject to the same laws as everyone else, which really isn't a right since you can be denied that already), you are missing what I'm saying. It would mean less laws apply to you. It means more rights for you.
Quote by RHCP94
It's an option for the "Which one of E Daws parents are uglier?" thread.