Should We Really Give Children the Vote? :: Exploratory Essays

Should We Really Give Children the Vote?Sixteen year old Vita Wallace is an activist for childrens rights. In her argument, Give children the vote, she attempts to show that an injustice has been made to citizens of the linked States. Wallaces major claim, or thesis (McFadden, 2003), is that citizens under the age of 18 shouldnt be denied the right to vote on account of age. Rather, she argues, children should be allowed to vote at whatever age suits them individually. By saying individually, she is utilize a qualifier, words and phrases used to limit and modify the overgeneralization of claims (McFadden). It is important that Wallace uses the endpoint individually, because she recognizes that an age limit would be inappropriate for some children. After this point, nigh of the essay is dedicated to her opinion on why it is important for children to vote. Wallaces uses appeal to the readers values, also known as warrants (McFadden). The stirred up pleas may cause the audien ce to stop and consider her logic, unless neglect of facts and evidence leaves the argument unconvincing. With her jumpy writing and scattered thoughts the argument is austere to read, and even harder to believe. Therefore, I found the essay to be unsuccessful in persuading my opinion. The logic and evidence used to support her major claim, known as grounds (McFadden) is hard to find. The strongest evidence in the whole essay is statistics of eligible adult voters. With this information, she points out that tho 36-40 percent of eligible adults actually vote. However, 25 percent of the population is under the age of 18, leading to Wallaces line of reasoning that Although elected representatives are responsible for all of us, they are responsible to only a few of us (Wallace, 1998, p. 146). This statement would be effective but Wallace loses her credibility at the end of the paragraph when she calls politicians and voters selfish. By doing this she is using a fallacy, statement s based on poor logic and mistaken belief (Clark, p. 81). By saying they are selfish she is using an Ad Hominem argument, which is an attack on the person rather than the issue (Clark, 1998, p. 83). Throughout the essay Wallace develops many nipper claims, which are secondary statements supporting the major claim (McFadden). Right external she discusses Discriminatory laws which prevent high school drop-outs from getting their drivers licenses.