Florida drug tests for welfare law is struck down

[.blank cd]

There's no data supporting the idea that working class people are prone to drug use either, but my employer tests me as a condition of my employment.

Your employer is not required to test you, and you're not required to work for him.

I dont see an issue with drug testing being a condition of collecting welfare. If you dont want to be drug tested.... start your own business and do not collect welfare.

Youre changing the conditions to fit your argument

Suppose your employer pays you twice a month. After you've done whatever it is you do for him, he tells you the only way you can receive your paycheck is if you pass a drug test.

Now lets say you smoked one joint last week, another employee does meth, another is an alcoholic, and another smokes cigarettes, and every other employee passes the drug test but you. Why should everyone else receive a check but you?

Simple yes or no answer....

Should a person on illegal drugs be able to collect welfare?

Yes. Especially if a person on legal drugs can collect welfare.

[Sinfix_15]

Your employer is not required to test you, and you're not required to work for him. Youre changing the conditions to fit your argument

I missed the part where anyone was required to be on welfare.

Suppose your employer pays you twice a month. After you've done whatever it is you do for him, he tells you the only way you can receive your paycheck is if you pass a drug test.

against the law. they can fire me, but have to pay me for time served. I fail to see any connection to welfare.

Now lets say you smoked one joint last week, another employee does meth, another is an alcoholic, and another smokes cigarettes, and every other employee passes the drug test but you. Why should everyone else receive a check but you?

If i get fired because of drug use, i will accept responsibility for my actions. I make life choices and accept the risks of those choices. Its not your job to pay for my mistakes and its not my job to pay for your mistakes.

I think you're guilty of connecting this debate to the debate on what should and shouldnt be legal. Should weed be illegal? No it shouldnt. Currently i can be fired for smoking it.... if that's a condition of me earning my money, then i expect the same condition for those who are getting money for free.

Yes. Especially if a person on legal drugs can collect welfare.

If one employee had sex with his wife, one had sex with his girlfriend, another had sex with a girl he picked up at a bar and another employee raped his neighbor, why should the one who raped his neighbor get fired?? They all had sex, who cares if it was illegal or legal, right?

[.blank cd]

I missed the part where anyone was required to be on welfare.

There is no requirement to be on welfare, what does that have to do with anything?

against the law. they can fire me, but have to pay me for time served. I fail to see any connection to welfare.

you just made it.

I think you're guilty of connecting this debate to the debate on what should and shouldnt be legal.

You did that. I was just addressing your analogy. The debate is if there is any evidence that poor people are more prone to using drugs. The answer was no.

If one employee had sex with his wife, one had sex with his girlfriend, another had sex with a girl he picked up at a bar and another employee raped his neighbor, why should the one who raped his neighbor get fired?? They all had sex, who cares if it was illegal or legal, right?

What does rape have to do with this? Let's stay on topic.

[Sinfix_15]

There is no requirement to be on welfare, what does that have to do with anything?

Welfare is not a civil right. If you dont want to take drug tests, dont accept welfare benefits. The condition of welfare should be.... read this clearly............ You should be actively seeking and prepared to accept employment. If you lose your job or are denied a job because of a failed drug test, you're not prepared to accept employment and should be disqualified from welfare.

You did that. I was just addressing your analogy. The debate is if there is any evidence that poor people are more prone to using drugs. The answer was no.

Its not about whether theyre more or less likely to be on drugs.... that has absolutely nothing to do with anything........... drug testing is a condition of employment in X% of America. If you're on drugs, i view that as you declining 347589175894712358972348957 Jobs and i shouldnt have to pay for your stupid ass to sit at home and not work.

What does rape have to do with this? Let's stay on topic.

Your comment about legal drugs was on topic?

[.blank cd]

Its not about whether theyre more or less likely to be on drugs.... that has absolutely nothing to do with anything..........

Well the judge seems to disagree with you.

Your comment about legal drugs was on topic?

I don't think any reasonable, rational person could compare rape to personal recreational drug use. But not everyone is reasonable or rational.

[Vteckidd]

Well the judge seems to disagree with you.

I guess judges have never been wrong...........

[.blank cd]

I guess judges have never been wrong...........

So this judge was wrong and there is evidence that shows poor people are more prone to use drugs than non-poor people?

Could you show this peer reviewed evidence?

[Sinfix_15]

Well the judge seems to disagree with you.




I don't think any reasonable, rational person could compare rape to personal recreational drug use. But not everyone is reasonable or rational.

I love how liberal democrats love to say "ITS THE LAW ITS THE LAW ITS THE LAW".............. anytime anything goes their way..................










then when it comes to the constitution................................. King Obama knows better than the law.