Unfortunately while that sounds great in theory, practically speaking any like kind of restriction can be weaponized by bad actors to disqualify opposition. Who defines “mentally fit”?
If explicitly standardized, who sets the standard? How does the standard get ratified? Can that standard be “gamed”?
If deferred to some official, who appoints that official? What stops them from declaring as unfit anyone who doesn’t agree with their personal politics?
Common sense ideas like this break down when you try to figure out how to actually implement then without causing even bigger problems. If political history has taught us anything, it is the foolishness inherent in expecting political officials to execute their duties in good faith.
Unfortunately while that sounds great in theory, practically speaking any like kind of restriction can be weaponized by bad actors to disqualify opposition. Who defines “mentally fit”?
If explicitly standardized, who sets the standard? How does the standard get ratified? Can that standard be “gamed”?
If deferred to some official, who appoints that official? What stops them from declaring as unfit anyone who doesn’t agree with their personal politics?
Common sense ideas like this break down when you try to figure out how to actually implement then without causing even bigger problems. If political history has taught us anything, it is the foolishness inherent in expecting political officials to execute their duties in good faith.
Too true, unfortunately. We’d end up with witch trials immediately, and I could see someone like MTG leading the charge!