• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Welfare and Drug tests

Status
Not open for further replies.
G

glfredrick

New Member
carpro said:
Great idea!!!!!

Come on Texas. Get with it!
Click to expand...

Actually, that would cost the citizens more money, and they could continue to use the treatment program as a way to keep the checks rolling in.

I'd say just cut them off and they'll figure out how to work or quit drugs. One or the other... :thumbsup:
 
Salty

Salty

20,000 Posts Club
Administrator
glfredrick said:
Actually, that would cost the citizens more money, and they could continue to use the treatment program as a way to keep the checks rolling in.

I'd say just cut them off and they'll figure out how to work or quit drugs. One or the other... :thumbsup:
Click to expand...

yup, that is the leagal catch - and then what if mom (of course no husband) has kids....
 
G

glfredrick

New Member
Salty said:
yup, that is the leagal catch - and then what if mom (of course no husband) has kids....
Click to expand...

She gets to decide if they eat or not.

The moment we made it a "right" to eat, we ended up also making it an obligation to pay, no matter what. I'm all for love -- God knows I've needed it myself -- but not when that love is merely enabling a lifestyle that perpetrates itself ad infinitum.
 
Salty

Salty

20,000 Posts Club
Administrator
glfredrick said:
She gets to decide if they eat or not.

The moment we made it a "right" to eat, we ended up also making it an obligation to pay, no matter what. I'm all for love -- God knows I've needed it myself -- but not when that love is merely enabling a lifestyle that perpetrates itself ad infinitum.
Click to expand...

But if she chooses drugs over food, then Child Protective Services will step in...
 
G

Gina B

Active Member
Definitely. I've had to submit my share of urine samples, fingerprints, local checks, and federal background checks just to work.
Yet when I was was on welfare I didn't have to do that. That makes NO sense.
I happily submitted to those tests and continue to do so for work. I even had to pay for my own fingerprinting and federal background check this year thanks to school budgets being cut as they were.
I'm beyond happy that they require them and think they should have made them federal YEARS ago. I had no idea that they didn't do federal background check and prints at the schools, yet let them be alone with children all day? WEIRD

So yeah. Do so. I will be the first person to scream bloody murder over the insane power abuse children's social services has but feel they would be justified in taking any child into protective custody to be placed with a family member who cares and is capable or with a foster family unless the other parent is clean, then that parent keeps the kid and the offending one should leave the home until they get treatment and test drug free, then testing should be repeated without warning until the child reaches adulthood or is no longer under the parent's care.

I hate drugs, hate when parents use them and then call themselves parents...and to use the money meant for their kids for drugs? Uh uh. I wouldn't give a rip if they made drug tests mandatory for every kid in a public school either.
 
B

billwald

New Member
OK if the drug testing requirement is also put on the executives of non-profits, that also being a form of welfare.
 
carpro

carpro

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
glfredrick said:
Actually, that would cost the citizens more money, and they could continue to use the treatment program as a way to keep the checks rolling in.

I'd say just cut them off and they'll figure out how to work or quit drugs. One or the other... :thumbsup:
Click to expand...

Agreed.

I didn't read the whole thing.:eek:
 
R

rbell

Active Member
billwald said:
OK if the drug testing requirement is also put on the executives of non-profits, that also being a form of welfare.
Click to expand...

Earth to billwald: Unless the non-profit is supported by taxes, you're wrong. As usual.

Good gravy, do any of your ideas ever make sense??
 
F

FR7 Baptist

Active Member
Gina B said:
Definitely. I've had to submit my share of urine samples, fingerprints, local checks, and federal background checks just to work.
Click to expand...

I've never been a big fan of drug testing for employment. I find it degrading. My current employer did a criminal background check prior to hiring and I had to undergo a Federal background and fingerprint check when I worked for the Census Bureau. I've never been drug tested.
 
G

Gina B

Active Member
Paul3144 said:
I've never been a big fan of drug testing for employment. I find it degrading. My current employer did a criminal background check prior to hiring and I had to undergo a Federal background and fingerprint check when I worked for the Census Bureau. I've never been drug tested.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's not the most fun a person can have.
At least they didn't do it armed services style where you go along with your friends in a bathroom with no stall door and ever watchful eyes on your every move so you don't cheat while you silently pray "please don't let me miss the cup, please don't let me miss the cup!" :BangHead::smilewinkgrin:

It's just part of life though. If someone was responsible for taking care of one of my loved ones I would want them drug tested too. Probably every day. But I'd settle for on occasion! And I think after the first time you gotta kinda give them a reason. I remember getting pulled aside once and found out later that one girl smelled like alcohol but they didn't want to single her out so they grabbed five of us. (and she did test positive) If they hadn't done that she may have been able to hit them with a discrimination suit. I was glad to donate to the cause...
 
G

glfredrick

New Member
I was a professional driver for over 10 years, and as a part of the federal CDL program, random testing was a part of life. One could fail by eating a couple of poppy seed muffins for breakfast, so that was out of the diet. At any given moment, in almost any place, I could be expected to follow a uniformed officer to the nearest restroom or to follow in the truck to a particular donation site, where I was expected to give an "offering." Just a fact of life. Didn't stop drivers from using either drugs or alcohol, but it was a deterrent knowing that your job was on the line for lack of compliance.

I'm not against the program for welfare checks, school teachers, ALL public officials and workers, etc. Call it an economic stimulus. Hiring all the people to collect and run the tests will put a lot of folks to work, which should displace all those who loose jobs from failure in their personal life habits.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top