NC New Welfare Drug Test Law: 1/3rd Tested Positive from Sample.

[koshergrl]

It's just another ploy to justify yanking the children away from the poor and placing them in state custody.

 

[koshergrl]

What I've gathered from this thread is that Pogo doesn't want anyone taking away his food stamps just because he likes to smoke weed.

What I want is for the Fourth Amendment to get the respect it's put there for.

Don't like it? Change the Constitution.

Our government is no longer a constitutional republic. This is just one of many, many violations of it. Most of which you approve.

This is where it starts to get away from you retards who got us here.

 

[Fair&Balanced]

What I've gathered from this thread is that Pogo doesn't want anyone taking away his food stamps just because he likes to smoke weed.

What I want is for the Fourth Amendment to get the respect it's put there for.

Don't like it? Change the Constitution.

LOL oh man you made this too easy.

When you go to a courthouse, do they search you for guns?

 

[Fair&Balanced]

What I've gathered from this thread is that Pogo doesn't want anyone taking away his food stamps just because he likes to smoke weed.

What I want is for the Fourth Amendment to get the respect it's put there for.

Don't like it? Change the Constitution.

Our government is no longer a constitutional republic. This is just one of many, many violations of it. Most of which you approve.

This is where it starts to get away from you retards who got us here.

You're wrong, but we'll get to that after Pogo answers my last question to him.

 

[Pogo]

What I've gathered from this thread is that Pogo doesn't want anyone taking away his food stamps just because he likes to smoke weed.

What I want is for the Fourth Amendment to get the respect it's put there for.

Don't like it? Change the Constitution.

LOL oh man you made this too easy.

When you go to a courthouse, do they search you for guns?

A courthouse isn't "private personal behavior" there, Oblivium.

 

[Pogo]

What I've gathered from this thread is that Pogo doesn't want anyone taking away his food stamps just because he likes to smoke weed.

What I want is for the Fourth Amendment to get the respect it's put there for.

Don't like it? Change the Constitution.

Our government is no longer a constitutional republic. This is just one of many, many violations of it. Most of which you approve.

This is where it starts to get away from you retards who got us here.

Do I now.

Links?

 

[Fair&Balanced]

What I've gathered from this thread is that Pogo doesn't want anyone taking away his food stamps just because he likes to smoke weed.

What I want is for the Fourth Amendment to get the respect it's put there for.

Don't like it? Change the Constitution.

LOL oh man you made this too easy.

When you go to a courthouse, do they search you for guns?

A courthouse isn't "private personal behavior" there, Oblivium.

Collecting SNAP isn't a "private personal behavior" either . And in fact, you can be COMPELLED to enter a courthouse, and thus be compelled to a search without your consent, whereas NO ONE can be forced to apply for SNAP, so no one has to be drug tested.

So, I ask you, do you support removing metal detectors from courthouses?

 

[koshergrl]

What I've gathered from this thread is that Pogo doesn't want anyone taking away his food stamps just because he likes to smoke weed.

What I want is for the Fourth Amendment to get the respect it's put there for.

Don't like it? Change the Constitution.

LOL oh man you made this too easy.

When you go to a courthouse, do they search you for guns?

A courthouse isn't "private personal behavior" there, Oblivium.

Collecting SNAP isn't a "private personal behavior" either . And in fact, you can be COMPELLED to enter a courthouse, and thus be compelled to a search without your consent, whereas NO ONE can be forced to apply for SNAP, so no one has to be drug tested.

So, I ask you, do you support removing metal detectors from courthouses?

Sure. Remove them.

 

[Pogo]

What I've gathered from this thread is that Pogo doesn't want anyone taking away his food stamps just because he likes to smoke weed.

What I want is for the Fourth Amendment to get the respect it's put there for.

Don't like it? Change the Constitution.

LOL oh man you made this too easy.

When you go to a courthouse, do they search you for guns?

A courthouse isn't "private personal behavior" there, Oblivium.

Collecting SNAP isn't a "private personal behavior" either

No but what you do in your own private time IS. And that, Elmer, is the only thing such a "drug test" ---- whatever that means --- can show. It does *NOT* show any evidence of where SNAP money has been going, because it can't.

That rat thar's the basic logical flaw that makes the entire basis inoperative. The same one you wanted to back away from, in your terms "switch gears". It ain't going away. There is no Reverse on this gearbox.

 

[Pogo]

What I've gathered from this thread is that Pogo doesn't want anyone taking away his food stamps just because he likes to smoke weed.

What I want is for the Fourth Amendment to get the respect it's put there for.

Don't like it? Change the Constitution.

Our government is no longer a constitutional republic. This is just one of many, many violations of it. Most of which you approve.

This is where it starts to get away from you retards who got us here.

Do I now.

Links?

 

[Coyote]

You know, I can see people in high stress jobs being drug tested, because they have to remain sharp while they are on the job.

People who are receiving welfare? No. I don't think they need to be tested. Why? If they aren't working in a job that could be hazardous to the public, there is no need for it.

Besides............of all the people I've ever known who received financial assistance, they were more interested in feeding themselves and keeping a roof over their head rather than taking drugs.

I like this part: "Why? If they aren't working in a job that could be hazardous to the public, there is no need for it."
The purpose of welfare is to help get people back on their feet. Not to simply subsidize them for sitting on their asses. Doing drugs isn't exactly helpful to the formers ends. 1/3rd of those tested in NC were found to have done drugs. We shouldn't invest in future of those who refuse to invest in their own future. You can't get a job if you fail a drug test. You shouldn't get welfare if you fail a drug test.

Shouldn't anyone who gets ANY form of government assistance be drug tested then?

Government subsidized loans, farm subsidies, etc etc.

I've already answered the question explaining how the ends of the program, indeed the behavior the government is trying to sanction, is enhanced by drug testing welfare recipients. The reasoning falls flat for almost every other program whereas government is sanctioning behavior.

The government isn't sanctioning any behavior - that's isn't the purpose of welfare and never has been.

 

[koshergrl]

You know, I can see people in high stress jobs being drug tested, because they have to remain sharp while they are on the job.

People who are receiving welfare? No. I don't think they need to be tested. Why? If they aren't working in a job that could be hazardous to the public, there is no need for it.

Besides............of all the people I've ever known who received financial assistance, they were more interested in feeding themselves and keeping a roof over their head rather than taking drugs.

I like this part: "Why? If they aren't working in a job that could be hazardous to the public, there is no need for it."
The purpose of welfare is to help get people back on their feet. Not to simply subsidize them for sitting on their asses. Doing drugs isn't exactly helpful to the formers ends. 1/3rd of those tested in NC were found to have done drugs. We shouldn't invest in future of those who refuse to invest in their own future. You can't get a job if you fail a drug test. You shouldn't get welfare if you fail a drug test.

Shouldn't anyone who gets ANY form of government assistance be drug tested then?

Government subsidized loans, farm subsidies, etc etc.

I've already answered the question explaining how the ends of the program, indeed the behavior the government is trying to sanction, is enhanced by drug testing welfare recipients. The reasoning falls flat for almost every other program whereas government is sanctioning behavior.

The government isn't sanctioning any behavior - that's isn't the purpose of welfare and never has been.

Paying women to be drug addicted whores and taking care of the illegitimate children of jailbirds IS "sanctioning" behavior.

 

[koshergrl]

Sanction: "...explicit or official approval, permission, or ratification." Definition of SANCTION

When the federal government pays you not to work, that is SANCTIONING that behavior.

Get it?

 

[Coyote]

I'm sure it does. But the fascists haven't taken over yet.

The government has no business subsidizing corporations, farms or loan money.

Drug test or not, we don't need to waste the taxpayers money.

Agreed. But two wrongs don't make a right.

What are the two wrongs? Stopping government waste is a wrong?

Making people get help from their destructive lives?

Stripping people of their Constitutional rights to privacy and due process. That's been spelled out repeatedly in this thread but it doesn't seem to register with you.

You give up the right of privacy when you take public assistance. You are not required to take public assistance, it is voluntary. They are not arrested, not denied due process. They are just ineligible.

No freedom lost, no privacy lost. Choices and free will are exercised.

According to who? What law?

The only action I've heard of where you lose your rights is if you commit a crime.

 

[Coyote]

The government has no business subsidizing corporations, farms or loan money.

Drug test or not, we don't need to waste the taxpayers money.

Agreed. But two wrongs don't make a right.

What are the two wrongs? Stopping government waste is a wrong?

Making people get help from their destructive lives?

Stripping people of their Constitutional rights to privacy and due process. That's been spelled out repeatedly in this thread but it doesn't seem to register with you.

You give up the right of privacy when you take public assistance.

Says you. The entire debate here is whether anyone should have to give up their rights in exchange for utilizing government service. Some of us are less eager to go down that path.

It seems that the only one's who are being forced to give up their rights are the poor. Presumably some think poverty is a crime.

 

[Coyote]

Stripping people of their Constitutional rights to privacy and due process. That's been spelled out repeatedly in this thread but it doesn't seem to register with you.

You give up the right of privacy when you take public assistance.

Says you. The entire debate here is whether anyone should have to give up their rights in exchange for utilizing government service. Some of us are less eager to go down that path.

Says you. I disagree with you. You have said nothing that sways me. Practicing an illegal activity then expecting government to help you continue down that path is wrong. The government is not in the business of enabling illegal drug activity and ruining families.

I can only appeal to a genuine respect for liberty. It's all too rare these days.

I agree, we have liberty and we have freedom and with both there are responsibilities and consequences. Is it asking to much that a person asking for government assistance refrain from taking illegal drugs that are ruining families and lives on a daily basis, that is almost certainly causing them to need assistance in the first place. Most drug abusers have other issues and drugs are taken to mask the issue.

Yes. It is. A private charity, can and indeed has every right to make whatever demands it wants of recipients, but the government can not discriminate in that way against a particular class of people because they are poor.

 

[koshergrl]

Agreed. But two wrongs don't make a right.

What are the two wrongs? Stopping government waste is a wrong?

Making people get help from their destructive lives?

Stripping people of their Constitutional rights to privacy and due process. That's been spelled out repeatedly in this thread but it doesn't seem to register with you.

You give up the right of privacy when you take public assistance.

Says you. The entire debate here is whether anyone should have to give up their rights in exchange for utilizing government service. Some of us are less eager to go down that path.

It seems that the only one's who are being forced to give up their rights are the poor. Presumably some think poverty is a crime.

That's right!

Which is why it's stupid to have government interference at every level of our lives. The poor are ALWAYS the first to fall. But don't worry, eventually everybody will suffer equally. The day is quickly coming. Enjoy!

 

[koshergrl]

You give up the right of privacy when you take public assistance.

Says you. The entire debate here is whether anyone should have to give up their rights in exchange for utilizing government service. Some of us are less eager to go down that path.

Says you. I disagree with you. You have said nothing that sways me. Practicing an illegal activity then expecting government to help you continue down that path is wrong. The government is not in the business of enabling illegal drug activity and ruining families.

I can only appeal to a genuine respect for liberty. It's all too rare these days.

I agree, we have liberty and we have freedom and with both there are responsibilities and consequences. Is it asking to much that a person asking for government assistance refrain from taking illegal drugs that are ruining families and lives on a daily basis, that is almost certainly causing them to need assistance in the first place. Most drug abusers have other issues and drugs are taken to mask the issue.

Yes. It is. A private charity, can and indeed has every right to make whatever demands it wants of recipients, but the government can not discriminate in that way against a particular class of people because they are poor.

The government certainly can, and does, and will continue to. You don't give a shit when women are killing their babies...you don't care about that particular "class of people". You don't care when the class of people getting mowed over are rural people being mowed under by the feds in huge land grabs. You don't care when working class people get their checks raped every single month in order to support the millions of people you think shouldn't have to work to feed their families.

Unfortunately, as you've been told a million times, the government won't stop after they destroy the people you hate. Once they have that power, it will extend over EVERYBODY, and EVERYBODY will be treated exactly as they have been treating the unborn, the working man, the Christian.

Including you and the people you love.

 

[Coyote]

Says you. The entire debate here is whether anyone should have to give up their rights in exchange for utilizing government service. Some of us are less eager to go down that path.

Says you. I disagree with you. You have said nothing that sways me. Practicing an illegal activity then expecting government to help you continue down that path is wrong. The government is not in the business of enabling illegal drug activity and ruining families.

I can only appeal to a genuine respect for liberty. It's all too rare these days.

I agree, we have liberty and we have freedom and with both there are responsibilities and consequences. Is it asking to much that a person asking for government assistance refrain from taking illegal drugs that are ruining families and lives on a daily basis, that is almost certainly causing them to need assistance in the first place. Most drug abusers have other issues and drugs are taken to mask the issue.

Yes, it is asking too much. The responsibility associated with freedom is to respect the freedom of others; to ensure your actions don't bring harm to others and accept accounability for it if they do.

I'm sorry if it seems like I'm picking on you personally, because that's not my goal here. I'm simply trying to expose what I consider an unacceptable hypocrisy in modern conservatism, particular as it's implemented by the Republican party. For several decades now, Republicans have courted libertarians with claims that they favor limited government and protection of individual liberty. But the claims don't hold water, and drug prohibition policies are a good example.

Drug and alcohol addiction does a lot of damage to others, not just the person using. That I think is my issue. Addicts will use every means they have to get the next fix, giving them cash or food stamps enables them to keep going. Addiction is a huge issue, it ruins millions of people's lives each year.

Yes, it is, but refusing them basic benifits isn't going to stop the addiction. They'll just end up dying in the streets.

You aren't picking on me, we are discussing solutions to social issues. I am not a Republican, I am socially conservative, I don't care what either party thinks, I am thinking of those that have been ravaged by addiction and how to help them gain sobriety. I am also for legalizing drugs, taxing them, using the tax dollars for rehab. Less crap dealers can cut the drugs with. Also. We know who is using and who may need help.

How does giving them more money help them break free of their addiction is my question.

It doesn't. But...so what? Not giving them welfare doesn't help either. Addiction is powerful. It's a disease. Sometimes the best thing you can do is impliment harm reduction programs while trying to get them into rehab.

 

[Pogo]

What are the two wrongs? Stopping government waste is a wrong?

Making people get help from their destructive lives?

Stripping people of their Constitutional rights to privacy and due process. That's been spelled out repeatedly in this thread but it doesn't seem to register with you.

You give up the right of privacy when you take public assistance.

Says you. The entire debate here is whether anyone should have to give up their rights in exchange for utilizing government service. Some of us are less eager to go down that path.

It seems that the only one's who are being forced to give up their rights are the poor. Presumably some think poverty is a crime.

That's right!

Which is why it's stupid to have government interference at every level of our lives.

Tell that to the Statists here clamoring for the gubmint to go poking around in people's bodily fluids.