Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post - Would you vote for a generally well-qualified person who happened to be...

Gilda · 02-26-2007, 08:03 PM

I clicked on on all of them.

Lets start with sex, ethnicity, and orientation. These are indicative of a person's status, not their behavior, so they're entirely irrelevant.

Next, there's belief systems. This isn't quite so obvious, as these are indicative of a chosen pattern of thought and behavior, and it's possible that the belief system would impact the candidate's view of what makes good public policy. As a lapsed Catholic, I know the mindset of the devout Catholic and this did make me pause a bit. However, one of the conditions listed in the hypothetical is qualified, and I would not consider a candidate who makes public policy to reflect his or her religious beliefs to be well qualified. I'd look for whether the candidate respected separation of church and state, religious freedom, and a secular government, not at something as simplistic as the label given their religious beliefs.

Married three times. Why should I care?

72 years old gave me pause, but only for a bit. What would be the objection here? Surely it isn't the number. Obviously there would be concerns regarding health and mental ability, but that's shifting the concern from age to other factors. Any candidate with impaired mental abilities would be unqualified, and the hypothetical specifies that the candidate is qualified, so that's eliminated. With health, I'd have to consider whether it's a health problem that would prevent the person from being able to do her job. Is it a disabled hand? No problem. Being in a wheelchair? Still no problem. It would have to be something that disables the person's ability to perform the duties of office, and even then, it would be the medical problem, not the age that would be the disqualifying factor. Given that the question specified "qualified", I'm assuming that there is no age-related disqualifying condition, so this one gets a pass.

I'd vote for anybody who was qualified and with whose political ideals I agreed. Certain of those categories listed above would make that unlikely, but assuming that the candidate did meet those requirements, I'd think it foolish not to support that candidate.

02-26-2007, 08:03 PM	#43 (permalink)
Gilda 32 flavors and then some Location: Out on a wire.	I clicked on on all of them. Lets start with sex, ethnicity, and orientation. These are indicative of a person's status, not their behavior, so they're entirely irrelevant. Next, there's belief systems. This isn't quite so obvious, as these are indicative of a chosen pattern of thought and behavior, and it's possible that the belief system would impact the candidate's view of what makes good public policy. As a lapsed Catholic, I know the mindset of the devout Catholic and this did make me pause a bit. However, one of the conditions listed in the hypothetical is qualified, and I would not consider a candidate who makes public policy to reflect his or her religious beliefs to be well qualified. I'd look for whether the candidate respected separation of church and state, religious freedom, and a secular government, not at something as simplistic as the label given their religious beliefs. Married three times. Why should I care? 72 years old gave me pause, but only for a bit. What would be the objection here? Surely it isn't the number. Obviously there would be concerns regarding health and mental ability, but that's shifting the concern from age to other factors. Any candidate with impaired mental abilities would be unqualified, and the hypothetical specifies that the candidate is qualified, so that's eliminated. With health, I'd have to consider whether it's a health problem that would prevent the person from being able to do her job. Is it a disabled hand? No problem. Being in a wheelchair? Still no problem. It would have to be something that disables the person's ability to perform the duties of office, and even then, it would be the medical problem, not the age that would be the disqualifying factor. Given that the question specified "qualified", I'm assuming that there is no age-related disqualifying condition, so this one gets a pass. I'd vote for anybody who was qualified and with whose political ideals I agreed. Certain of those categories listed above would make that unlikely, but assuming that the candidate did meet those requirements, I'd think it foolish not to support that candidate. __________________ I'm against ending blackness. I believe that everyone has a right to be black, it's a choice, and I support that. ~Steven Colbert