why is the left against drug testing for welfare?

[Vandalshandle]

I'm not sure exactly what the OP means by the word, "welfare', but I do know that liberals do not want innocent children who are unfortunate to have been born to drug addicted parents to go homeless and hungry, if we can do anything about it.

I agree
BUT are you saying instead we should just lwt them continue to be raised by their addict parents?

Well, if you want to give the government authority to determine who is allowed to have children, and who isn't, that would be another thread. China does that....

 

[TNHarley]

I'm not sure exactly what the OP means by the word, "welfare', but I do know that liberals do not want innocent children who are unfortunate to have been born to drug addicted parents to go homeless and hungry, if we can do anything about it.

I agree
BUT are you saying instead we should just lwt them continue to be raised by their addict parents?

Well, if you want to give the government authority to determine who is allowed to have children, and who isn't, that would be another thread. China does that....

I see where u are getting
u care abiut the children being fed but you could give 2 shits how they are raised. u would rather support deadbear addict parents than give the child a descent life.
I am sure, with addicts, the children are getting fed well.

 

[TNHarley]

"if u want to give the govt authority" lol
and I bet u fools that say that are for obamacare LOL

 

[High_Gravity]

so why?
is it because u dont want them to better themselves?
you all care as much about their drug habbit as they do!
I seriously dont understand the justification to be against that

Because your killing our buzz dude.

 

[Bfgrn]

Zero. When it came up, they backed down.

Guess you're pretty lucky then. If people can refuse to take the test, then why do most businesses then refuse to hire them because of it? How do they get away with it if it's not lawful? Seems that would be discrimination and they could sue for that.....explain how they get away with it.

yea, I dnt believe that either. I would not hire anyone that wouldnt take a test. I dont want an intoxicated individual handling my business.
I guess pogo doesnt agree with the implied consent law as well..

They don't test for the most deadly, destructive and costly drug on society.

 

[Vandalshandle]

I agree
BUT are you saying instead we should just lwt them continue to be raised by their addict parents?

Well, if you want to give the government authority to determine who is allowed to have children, and who isn't, that would be another thread. China does that....

I see where u are getting
u care abiut the children being fed but you could give 2 shits how they are raised. u would rather support deadbear addict parents than give the child a descent life.
I am sure, with addicts, the children are getting fed well.

I recognize that the government has the auuthority to take abused and neglected children away from their parents. I do not recognize the government authority to take a child away from a parant simply because his parent is recieving government assistance, and tests positive for drugs. That would include every person who has ever tried marijuana, which is about 75% of the populatuion.

 

[TNHarley]

Well, if you want to give the government authority to determine who is allowed to have children, and who isn't, that would be another thread. China does that....

I see where u are getting
u care abiut the children being fed but you could give 2 shits how they are raised. u would rather support deadbear addict parents than give the child a descent life.
I am sure, with addicts, the children are getting fed well.

I recognize that the government has the auuthority to take abused and neglected children away from their parents. I do not recognize the government authority to take a child away from a parant simply because his parent is recieving government assistance, and tests positive for drugs. That would include every person who has ever tried marijuana, which is about 75% of the populatuion.

u think if they failed a drug test they would lose their kid?
kinda took it as losing their welfare lol

 

[koshergrl]

The left is against drug testing for the same reason they are against verification of voter ID....it will expose their fraudulent and criminal base, and topple the empire they have built on it.

 

[koshergrl]

I have been privvy to CSD workers descending upon a residence with cops in tow to check IDs of everybody in the home and do spot drug tests. Parents who refuse or test positive have their kids taken from them on the spot.

That's the way it works.

 

[dblack]

so why?
is it because u dont want them to better themselves?
you all care as much about their drug habbit as they do!
I seriously dont understand the justification to be against that

I don't think there's anything like a universal consensus with 'the left' on this issue. There are plenty of authoritarian liberals who would be more than happy to use state dependency to dictate people's personal habits. They do it in plenty of other arenas, so there's nothing really ruling it out here.

On the other hand, there are a few genuine liberals left who don't think we should be using government to dictate people's personal habits. Likewise some conservatives, and most libertarians, don't want to see statist tax-and-spend programs used as excuses to expand state control over our lives.

 

[dblack]

"if u want to give the govt authority" lol
and I bet u fools that say that are for obamacare LOL

Exactly. The hypocrisy is rampant on both sides. You all want to control people, you just want to do it in different ways.

 

[TNHarley]

"if u want to give the govt authority" lol
and I bet u fools that say that are for obamacare LOL

Exactly. The hypocrisy is rampant on both sides. You all want to control people, you just want to do it in different ways.

how do I want to control people exactly?

 

[velvtacheeze]

so why?
is it because u dont want them to better themselves?
you all care as much about their drug habbit as they do!
I seriously dont understand the justification to be against that

Because I don't trust the GOP-led state governments to fairly administer the tests, for one. They will rig them to cull deserving people from the system.

Drug use is over rated as a problem too. The fastest swimmer in world history, and multi-gold medal winner, is a dope smoker.

 

[dblack]

"if u want to give the govt authority" lol
and I bet u fools that say that are for obamacare LOL

Exactly. The hypocrisy is rampant on both sides. You all want to control people, you just want to do it in different ways.

how do I want to control people exactly?

Did I misread? It sounded like you were advocating for drug-testing welfare recipients.

 

[TNHarley]

Exactly. The hypocrisy is rampant on both sides. You all want to control people, you just want to do it in different ways.

how do I want to control people exactly?

Did I misread? It sounded like you were advocating for drug-testing welfare recipients.

no, you didnt. how is them getting drug tested to prove they are not using FEDERAL money on drugs controlling?
u think jobs requiring drug tests are controlling?
do you think reporting to your probation officer is controlling?
do you think the mlb suspending players for steroids is controlling?

 

[TNHarley]

so why?
is it because u dont want them to better themselves?
you all care as much about their drug habbit as they do!
I seriously dont understand the justification to be against that

Because I don't trust the GOP-led state governments to fairly administer the tests, for one. They will rig them to cull deserving people from the system.

Drug use is over rated as a problem too. The fastest swimmer in world history, and multi-gold medal winner, is a dope smoker.

I dont see a problem with smoking some grass. I have a problem when my tax dollars get used to support it

 

[Caroljo]

Anybody applying for a job has to be drug tested. If they want to make money, they go through this. So there's no reason someone applying for free money shouldn't have to go through the same thing.

Your ignorance of the law is no excuse.

There is no Constitutional right to apply for a job, but there is Constitutional protection from unreasonable searches.

Then please show me the law that states a business can not lawfully make you take a drug test and that they can not turn you away if it comes back positive. If there is one, then there's a lot of people out there that should be able to sue for not being hired because of a positive drug test.

OK!! It's been 2 days now.....no answer?????

 

[dblack]

how do I want to control people exactly?

Did I misread? It sounded like you were advocating for drug-testing welfare recipients.

no, you didnt. how is them getting drug tested to prove they are not using FEDERAL money on drugs controlling?

How is it not? It's taking away their fourth amendment rights as a condition of using a taxpayer funded service. This is the one-two punch of modern statism. The left creates programs that push us into dependency on the state, and authoritarians use it as an excuse to strip our rights and dictate our behavior.

We're seeing this same kind of dynamic as our health care costs become more and more of a government concern. Self-righteous authoritarians want to use the fact that government is footing the bill for health care as an excuse to ban all kinds of personal habits that might impact health care costs. What is your view on that?

If health care is socialized, will you demand that people with dangerous personal habits be penalized in similar fashion?

u think jobs requiring drug tests are controlling?

Not really. They're not taxpayer funded.

do you think reporting to your probation officer is controlling?

Yes, but as it only applies to convicted criminals, I'm not sure how it's relevant.

do you think the mlb suspending players for steroids is controlling?

No. Again, not taxpayer funded.

 

[Caroljo]

People here are saying being drug tested is unconstitutional. If that's true, then I want to know more about it. Personally, I don't think ANYONE should have to be drug tested to get a job or for any reason. But I'm being told now that people can refuse to do it....I don't know of anyone that has refused it and still got the job (except for maybe 1 person here that said he does). If the businesses are breaking a law (discrimination?) by requiring it to be hired, then something needs to be done about it.

I may be "right wing" but I don't believe the government, or businesses hiring, should be able to make up the rules if they're not lawful.

I agree. I believe it is a violation of our 4th amendment rights.

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

being drug tested for a job is not unreasonable. jesus christ, u have NOTHING LOL. explain to me how it is unreasonable to have someone high on coke to.operate a backhoe at ur business? running into walls, hitting a customers car, yes, that shit is unreasonable LOL

But what about a person that likes to smoke some pot on the weekends, but has never gone to work high? He goes for a drug test on Wednesday and it shows up in his system. Yes, there are ways to cover it up, some can be pretty expensive. Where I work they now do hair tests. They can pay to have the test go back for months, but most probably don't go more than 3 months as it can be pretty expensive. I know people that occasionally smoke, we do once in a while....but it doesn't effect our work. Now if they overlooked things like pot, and concentrated on things like coke, heroin, meth...that could be accepted. But pot is not a hard drug, in fact it's less harmful than alcohol, but they don't test for that.

 

[koshergrl]

Here's the problem with requiring welfare recipients to drug test clean...the system as it was originally conceived was supposed to help children whose mothers (originally, widowed wives of soldiers) could not support them. It was to keep children from starving.

The children who are most likely to be hungry today are not children in single parent households...they are those whose parents do drugs. Of all the people who are most likely to be harmed by removal of foodstamps, children of drug abusers are at the very tippy top.

I personally think that the foodstamp program could conceivably be limited to ONLY those who use drugs, and the children who are highest risk will be best served.