• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Deal OKs bill requiring drug testing for welfare recipients

radcen said:
Yep. Honestly, it's a waste of time. It's a waste of resources. It's also a diversion from real problems that they cannot solve, as it appeals to our collective need to feel superior, and too many otherwise intelligent people fall for it.
Click to expand...

ALEC writes all these bills.. but since the death of Trayvon Martin dozens of corporate sponsors have quit.
 
Cephus said:
It's called being responsible. I know you liberals don't have a clue what that means.
Click to expand...

Nice impersonation of a phallus.
 
Thorgasm said:
Would you like to give the government the power to sterilize irresponsible people?
Click to expand...

Irrelevent but no. There is a huge difference between procreation and drug use. To compare the two is one huge strawman.
 
I do like the personal responsibility line as if jobs were plentiful and paid well enough for everyone capable of working could find a job. I think if those who think it is as simple as 'personal responsibility' study who is on welfare, and that is a huge misnomer, more like working poor receiving food stamps, daycare and housing assistance, you would see the few who are lazy bums don't define the rest.

I do note the politicians duck being required to pee in a bottle to receive tax payer money.

Too bad...
 
Cephus said:
Maybe you could just answer the question instead of running around waving your arms.
Click to expand...

th_Arms.gif


I don't see how drug testing is going to make people responsible. That's your fallacy.
 
this is a good idea. many of those in these programs have a deficit of life skills and need to be steered in the right direction.
 
Kal'Stang said:
Irrelevent but no. There is a huge difference between procreation and drug use. To compare the two is one huge strawman.
Click to expand...

You can't ignore that children need food and shelter. It's a reality you would prefer to ignore. Drug testing doesn't make people responsible.
 
Military, law enforcement, and many civilian jobs require drug test. Why shouldn't welfare recipients be required to take them?

I don't buy the " what about the kids argument" if a welfare recipient is buying drugs they are willing taking away from what was intended to buy food, shelter, and clothing for their family.

What has happened to personal responsibility?
 
Last edited:
megaprogman said:
this is a good idea. many of those in these programs have a deficit of life skills and need to be steered in the right direction.
Click to expand...

You think they'll go in the right direction if assistance is cut off?
 
Kal'Stang said:
OH look..another "THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!!" post. :roll: Maybe if mom spent money on food instead of that joint the kids wouldn't "starve"? Maybe if mom hadn't smoked that joint then she would have gotten that assistance?

WTH happened to the concept of personal responsibility in this nation?
Click to expand...
Personal responsibility is still around, but when discussing government actions, it's more irrational to focus on what the government can do rather than what it cannot do. It can't force people to be personally responsible so that doesn't even factor into this discussion.
 
Paratrooper said:
Military, law enforcement, and many civilian jobs require drug test. Why shouldn't welfare recipients be required to take them?

I don't buy the " what about the kids argument" if a welfare recipient is buying drugs they are willing taking away from what was intended to buy food, shelter, and clothing for their family.
Click to expand...

They most likely sell drugs to support their habit. So in reality, it may not be taking away from necessities.
 
Thorgasm said:
You think they'll go in the right direction if assistance is cut off?
Click to expand...

probably not but we have limited resources and we unfortunately can only help those we can afford to.

its one of our society's failures but resources are finite :(
 
Thorgasm said:
You can't ignore that children need food and shelter. It's a reality you would prefer to ignore. Drug testing doesn't make people responsible.
Click to expand...

Don't need to ignore it. There are plenty of private charities that a person can go to in order to get help feeding their children.
 
megaprogman said:
probably not but we have limited resources and we unfortunately can only help those we can afford to.

its one of our society's failures but resources are finite :(
Click to expand...

And studies have shown that drug testing would use up more of those finite resources.
 
Paratrooper said:
Military, law enforcement, and many civilian jobs require drug test. Why shouldn't welfare recipients be required to take them?

I don't buy the " what about the kids argument" if a welfare recipient is buying drugs they are willing taking away from what was intended to buy food, shelter, and clothing for their family.

What has happened to personal responsibility?
Click to expand...
Personal responsibility died right about the same time that "innocent until proven guilty" died.
 
Kal'Stang said:
Don't need to ignore it. There are plenty of private charities that a person can go to in order to get help feeding their children.
Click to expand...

Are there? What about housing?
 
ThePlayDrive said:
Personal responsibility is still around, but when discussing government actions, it's more irrational to focus on what the government can do rather than what it cannot do. It can't force people to be personally responsible so that doesn't even factor into this discussion.
Click to expand...

You're right, we can't force personal responsibility. But we also do not have to support personal irresponsibility.
 
Kal'Stang said:
You're right, we can't force personal responsibility. But we also do not have to support personal irresponsibility.
Click to expand...

At what cost?
 
Thorgasm said:
Are there? What about housing?
Click to expand...

In order to get foodstamps you have to have a place to live. If you don't then you don't get foodstamps. So your question is irrelevent. But there are homeless shelters out there that are run by non-profit charity organizations.
 
Kal'Stang said:
In order to get foodstamps you have to have a place to live. If you don't then you don't get foodstamps. So your question is irrelevent. But there are homeless shelters out there that are run by non-profit charity organizations.
Click to expand...

And will they be able to handle all of the people kicked off of government assistance?
 
Kal'Stang said:
Sometimes spending more money is perferable to not spending the money and allowing a problem to continue.
Click to expand...

Spend more money they don't have? The states are broke already.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom