Why can't we require drug tests in order to draw welfare?

page: 17
20
<< 14  15  16   >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 23 2008 @ 10:58 PM
link   
I'm sure somewhere in the 15+ pages of responses to this question my point of view on this matter has been echoed by others many times. However, I feel I have to say something about this. Just a few key points.

1) No employer or government agency has the right to dictate what we do with our bodies on our own time, despite this kind of carry-on becoming the norm. Drug testing is a violation of basic human rights. What we do on our weekends and our evenings off is our own business. Our employers and the government do not own us. They cannot tell us what to do. Sometimes they think they can, but in reality they cannot.

2) FACT: Taking drugs is not illegal. Posession of drugs is what is illegal.

3) Where do you get off calling for the unemployed to be drug tested? are you suggesting we should withold welfare for those who are found to have taken drugs? What happens then eh? they just starve? If you long for a country where this kind of fascist nonsense prevails I suggest you move to Iran or somewhere like that where you'd feel more at home.

4) There is more than enough maniacal anti-drug knee jerk bull# flying around the US at the moment. This drug testing stupidity is the sharp end of it. I personally moved here from the UK not long ago and I find the backward attitude to drugs here disturbing, in some circles if you even mention you've smoked pot or condone it folk act like you might eat their children. It needs to stop.

Where is the so called freedom this country is proud of ? Gradually slipping away I fear, If people like you continue to get their way.

Live and let live. If its not harming others leave them to it. There is a big difference between someone getting stoned at work and getting stoned at the weekend with their friends. This kind of drug testing crap doesent discriminate. It needs to be condemned not encouraged and expanded to other sections of society.




posted on Aug, 24 2008 @ 12:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Amaterasu
 

Several good points. To submit to a warrant less search of a body cavity lacking probable cause that a crime has been committed, is a violation of a citizens rights.
To demand that a citizen submit to a forced urine test for any reason constitutes nothing less than a form of criminal accusation and is both a libel and a slander, and as such could constitute cause of action to seek damages from a jury at trial.

It is all part of our Fraudsters classes and their continuous plots to damage and degrade labor.

Those who have been forced to undergo a urine test as a requirement for employment may be settling some time in the future for damages to name and reputation arising from the criminal accusation made against them at the time of their hire which caused them to submit to a warrant less search of their body cavity and fluids...



posted on Aug, 24 2008 @ 12:52 AM
link   
reply to post by asmeone2
 


Why can't our government conduct IQ tests of political candidates? Private companies can give tests to qualify or disqualify job candidates, why are we stuck with low IQ business failures like Bush and Cheney running things?

In fact, how about lie detector test to see if all these "Christian" republicans are secretly homosexuals posing as straight males? Goodness knows, seldom a week goes by one of them isn't arrested for soliciting sex from someone in an airport bathroom, or trolling for underage males on the internet.....



posted on Aug, 24 2008 @ 03:38 AM
link   
Drug tests are a fraud perpetrated on people to deny them full status in our society the same as a test for "Aryan" heritage was used in Germany. People that use drugs can gain mental and physical advantages over those that use nothing to enhance their perceptions. Some drugs can clearly focus attention and the mind. Also, some drugs can create an anti-consumerist intention in the user, making them almost unmarketable as far as trying to rip them off with useless consumerist garbage, these drugs are demonized, while the drugs that encourage consumption are accepted. We live in the dark ages. Our science about the mind limited to our own interpretation of reality influenced only by the drugs we are allowed to use, much the same like we once were not allowed to read books and the church was the only source for true knowledge. We need a different perspective if we want to compete with the rest of the world if they are already using drugs to enhance their minds, we will get left in the evolutionary dustbin if we keep up this war on thinking.



posted on Aug, 24 2008 @ 03:40 AM
link   
reply to post by alupang
 


Because IQ tests have been proven over and over to be flawed, just as phrenology was flawed and just as personality tests are flawed. You can't base a conclusion on flawed methadology.



posted on Aug, 24 2008 @ 03:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by angus1745

1) No employer or government agency has the right to dictate what we do with our bodies on our own time, despite this kind of carry-on becoming the norm. Drug testing is a violation of basic human rights. What we do on our weekends and our evenings off is our own business. Our employers and the government do not own us. They cannot tell us what to do. Sometimes they think they can, but in reality they cannot.



If you're going to fly a plane any time soon, let us know


I personally wouldn't have any problem doing a drug test for employment, especially if it well-paying.

I wouldn't p##s my money up the wall on drugs anyway, so what's to worry about.



posted on Aug, 24 2008 @ 10:12 AM
link   
hahah wow... just when i think people arent really that stupid i read something like this... well first off im pretty sure there area lot of people on welfare... like several million.... now do you really want the state to tax you more so they can test everyone on welfare for drugs... none the less it is pretty easy to beat a drug test... just about anyone can do it... the majority of the tests would only find marijuanna as hardcore drugs are actually a bit harder to detect... coc aine only stays in your system for 3 days... so good luck catching all the crackheads that way... and to tell u the truth im a little more concerned with my pay check going to social security than welfare anyways... i personally dont see why im paying into a program that benefits old people that do nothing but bitch about my generation... while that program will almost certaintly run out by the time im 65 years old... at least welfare does help out a lot of people



posted on Aug, 25 2008 @ 04:04 AM
link   
reply to post by damurph
 


I do not think you are getting the point.

A drug test is complete waste of my tax dollars. I would much rather my money be spent on helping someone who is in need, than to go to a pharmaceutical or insurance company. Those crooks already get too much of our money as it is.

A drug test does not indicate who spent what money on drugs or alcohol! It does nothing to indicate addiction, intent, responsibility, etc.

Show me how a drug test can prove that anyone has spent government supplied money on alcohol!

You can't, all you can do is add more cost to that system.

You aren't making anything better but someone’s self righteous attitude over those less fortunate.

Think about what you are saying.



posted on Aug, 25 2008 @ 03:01 PM
link   
I keep hearing that it is an invasion of privacy for employers and the govt. to do drug tests.

Nobody is talking about randomly pulling people off of the street and issuing dt's, even though that is the path any sort of govt. drug testing would pave,
This thread asks weather or not it could be a requirement for getting MONEY

no dt no money. That sounds fair.
maybe it would give some people the excuse they need to get off the juice.

As for employers; What about thier rigth to hire or fire whoever they want? It's thier company, shouldn't they have rights to it?



posted on Aug, 25 2008 @ 05:27 PM
link   
As long as false-positives happen in drug testing (which they always will), it's pointless in using them. Innocent people will be denied welfare, which is disgusting.

Not to mention that using drugs has nothing to do with anything. What if the person on drugs didn't pay for them? What if a kindly neighbour gives them the drugs? Surely it has no bearing on their right to receive assistance from the state.

Now, if we made drugs legal, think of all the money that could be made by the government - taxation, employment, no spending billions of dollars a year on the "war on drugs" (which drugs are winning by a long shot).



posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 08:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by angus1745
I'm sure somewhere in the 15+ pages of responses to this question my point of view on this matter has been echoed by others many times. However, I feel I have to say something about this. Just a few key points.

1) No employer or government agency has the right to dictate what we do with our bodies on our own time, despite this kind of carry-on becoming the norm. Drug testing is a violation of basic human rights. What we do on our weekends and our evenings off is our own business. Our employers and the government do not own us. They cannot tell us what to do. Sometimes they think they can, but in reality they cannot.

2) FACT: Taking drugs is not illegal. Posession of drugs is what is illegal.

3) Where do you get off calling for the unemployed to be drug tested? are you suggesting we should withold welfare for those who are found to have taken drugs? What happens then eh? they just starve? If you long for a country where this kind of fascist nonsense prevails I suggest you move to Iran or somewhere like that where you'd feel more at home.

4) There is more than enough maniacal anti-drug knee jerk bull# flying around the US at the moment. This drug testing stupidity is the sharp end of it. I personally moved here from the UK not long ago and I find the backward attitude to drugs here disturbing, in some circles if you even mention you've smoked pot or condone it folk act like you might eat their children. It needs to stop.

Where is the so called freedom this country is proud of ? Gradually slipping away I fear, If people like you continue to get their way.

Live and let live. If its not harming others leave them to it. There is a big difference between someone getting stoned at work and getting stoned at the weekend with their friends. This kind of drug testing crap doesent discriminate. It needs to be condemned not encouraged and expanded to other sections of society.


Where it gets gray is when one group (e.g. working people) pay for the life of another (unemployed). The working group are essentially "owned" by the corporation they work for, including all ideas these days while not even at work.

The problem with unemployed doing drugs etc is that they are doing it on the other workers dime, and that's almost infringing on rights. Almost, but it's very gray. If you want to live outside the law, by all means go for it. Just don't turn up for a cheque every week.

I think that's fair - why should one group be allowed to do drugs if the ones that are paying for their life not be (testing is rife in corporations)? It's almost paradoxical, and if you can't see that you are clearly smoking something strong


[edit on 28-8-2008 by sufusci]



posted on Aug, 31 2008 @ 08:47 PM
link   
Only people with true physical/mental disabilities who are unable to work should be allowed any aid. The rest should get off their lazy butts. Medical records could verify the truly needy people.

No welfare for physically capable people, citizens or not.



posted on Aug, 31 2008 @ 08:54 PM
link   
If you can spend the time and money on recreational drugs, I think you probably have time to get a job, or at least do something productive with your life. We don't need our governments money being spent on alcohol and illegal substances.

I have to laugh at the people who say that drugs open up your mind to different realms of reality and allow you to perceive things that otherwise you cannot. A really lame excuse for something they can't prove at all.



posted on Aug, 31 2008 @ 08:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by asmeone2
I'd like to pass along a thought.

Many jobs require random drug screens for their employees--if they do not pass, they lose the job. Most require them before hire, too.

Why can't our government require drug screens of people at the time that they apply for welfare, and at random intervals after they are accepted into the program?

I think if you are going to ask for "help getting on your feet," you should be willing to make the comittment, and part number one of that is staying off of drugs.



I am not going to read through the 300+ posts on this topic, but I will give you my answer.....

I believe that they should be tested, both before they get the aid/funding, as well as during the time that hey are getting it (randoms). I believe that if they require the assistance, that they should have to follow guidelines. There's my 2 cents worth.



posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 12:13 AM
link   
Good idea but i would go one step farther i would also test people living in public housing projects.

If they have the money to by drug they don't need low income public housing.
and they most likely are getting the money to buy the drugs by selling drugs in the projects



posted on Jan, 7 2009 @ 01:30 PM
link   
reply to post by mopusvindictus
 

That is the biggest load that I have ever read. With the writer the had the gall to wtire it... you must be one of millions a drain on the system. Those that are messed up make the choice to be that way. They make the choice to wake up and make the decision to either be a good citizen and get a job or sit on their butts get dope and cash in my tax money. How fair is that to us citizens that work hard everyday knowing that the lazy people are getting something for nothing. There should be drug testing for walfare. If you have no money to support your family then yo should have no money to buy drugs. Nobody likes a leech they drain the system for the ones that really deserve it. Do not be a leech...



posted on Jan, 7 2009 @ 02:54 PM
link   
Where I work they have just imposed randum drug testing company wide. If I have to be subjected to randum drug testing so should they. A I am opposed to this policy but it's my job and jobs are becoming more and more scarce nowadays. As a result of this new policy, I don't eat anything brought in for food days or company cookouts anymore unless they are prepackaged. It's too risky. Who knows what some current or disgruntled ex-worker would do preparing food for our dinners? Not much of a Christmas dinner for me this year.





top topics
 
20
<< 14  15  16   >>

log in

join