• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

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

Drug Tests for Welfare and Food Stamps?

Should people have a mandatory drug test before getting welfare or food stamps?

  • Absolutely not - it is insulting.

    Votes: 11 36.7%
  • No - There is no need, other.

    Votes: 11 36.7%
  • Undecided, indifferent.

    Votes: 3 10.0%
  • Yes - I don't see the harm, why not?

    Votes: 3 10.0%
  • Absolutely - It would improve perceptions, other.

    Votes: 2 6.7%

  • Total voters
    30

Dreamwolf

Blissful Insomniac
This is an idea I ran across on Facebook of all places. I had never given it a second thought, and was shocked to see the opinions on Facebook (incredibly one-sided). So I was curious what the opinions would be among a different group of people. I came here because the people are generally more informed people and don't debate solely on emotion.
 

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
I think it would set a bad precedent that could be extended to, say, drug tests for other government benefits. Besides, I don't see it as contributing to a solution to the drug problem.
 

Dreamwolf

Blissful Insomniac
Possibly. I can see both sides of it. There are a lot of people who angry right now about the whole government situation who would jump on any little opportunity to take away aid. I also see where testing would cost a lot of money and a lot of time. Drug tests aren't free and they definitely aren't quick.
 

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
Possibly. I can see both sides of it. There are a lot of people who angry right now about the whole government situation who would jump on any little opportunity to take away aid. I also see where testing would cost a lot of money and a lot of time. Drug tests aren't free and they definitely aren't quick.

It seems to me it would be a merely punitive program. Drug dependency should be dealt with more as a medical problem than as a crime. Criminalizing it has not worked worth a bucket of warm spit.
 

Dreamwolf

Blissful Insomniac
This would result in a lot of hungry children.
Also a possibility. Would you support making drug treatment more readily available? Perhaps with a government run treatment facility or making it covered under some future option of healthcare?

It seems to me it would be a merely punitive program. Drug dependency should be dealt with more as a medical problem than as a crime. Criminalizing it has not worked worth a bucket of warm spit.
Very true, it is obvious that creating more harsh punishments aren't working also. So what would you think of treating marijuana use just like we treat cigarettes or alcohol (assuming it had a shot in hell of being legalized)? Do you think that would help in some way (removing the mystique and keeping kids from starting to do drugs) or just make harder for people get off drugs (being faced with a legal option everyday)?
 

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
Very true, it is obvious that creating more harsh punishments aren't working also. So what would you think of treating marijuana use just like we treat cigarettes or alcohol (assuming it had a shot in hell of being legalized)? Do you think that would help in some way (removing the mystique and keeping kids from starting to do drugs) or just make harder for people get off drugs (being faced with a legal option everyday)?

As I understand it, the Netherlands have all but legalized marijuana and yet they have a lower per capita use of the drug than the US, which has harshly criminalized it. I think we could learn from them.
 

Dreamwolf

Blissful Insomniac
As I understand it, the Netherlands have all but legalized marijuana and yet they have a lower per capita use of the drug than the US, which has harshly criminalized it. I think we could learn from them.
Interesting! I did not know that. Would you happen to know if their culture glamorizes drug use in the same way that ours has? There is something to say for the people who only started doing drugs because of rebellion, and the constant kids that just want to be cool.
 

freethinker44

Well-Known Member
Imposing a drug test wouldn't stop people from taking drugs. They would just have to choose between buying food for their children or buy drugs and I see no reason in punishing children for their parents bad habits.
 

Dreamwolf

Blissful Insomniac
Not just the Netherlands. Rates of drug usage, drug related deaths, crime, HIV transmission, &c go down anytime you take the glamor and adventure out of drug usage, and start treating, not punishing users. Eg: The Raw Story | Portugal's drug decriminalization 'bizarrely underappreciated': Greenwald

That's what I figured, that it helped to have a culture that wasn't either trying to rebel or act cool by doing drugs. I highly doubt that legalization would ever happen though. I think people are concerned that if you legalize it might somehow get worse, I am not really sure how they think it could get worse though.
 

Dreamwolf

Blissful Insomniac
Imposing a drug test wouldn't stop people from taking drugs. They would just have to choose between buying food for their children or buy drugs and I see no reason in punishing children for their parents bad habits.

I think the argument is that some people (hopefully a very few) are already making that choice already and the money is going to drugs.

We do need to remember though it is not just people with kids that are on welfare and get food stamps, my elderly grandmother was on food stamps for years with no one else to take care of, thankfully she was not on drugs - other than the bajillion that were prescribed for her.
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
That's what I figured, that it helped to have a culture that wasn't either trying to rebel or act cool by doing drugs. I highly doubt that legalization would ever happen though. I think people are concerned that if you legalize it might somehow get worse, I am not really sure how they think it could get worse though.

The key word here is "think." People aren't thinking. They're reacting emotionally. Ignore facts and history, legislate by emotion and naturally you're going to get ineffective results and unintended consequences.

Americans, unfortunately, are unaware of these things. Our media is heavily censored and owned by right wing corporations. Most don't read the foreign or progressive press.
We keep trying to re-invent the wheel, ignorant of the fact that others have perfected the technology and have been using it successfully for years.
 

Nepenthe

Tu Stultus Es
I voted "Hell Nay" in the poll.

Amsterdam is kind of unique in that technically marijuana and shrooms are legal(well shrooms were until December of last year) for private use only, and the cafes are actually not legal enterprises, but the law ignores them for the most part and only conducts the occassional raid. Also, though not legal, most of the cafes also sold ecstasy while I was there. But no glow sticks. Hmph. :shrug:

But Seynori gave an excellent link already with statistical evidence that the legalization of drugs does lead to less crime, death, disease and actual use.
 

Dreamwolf

Blissful Insomniac
The key word here is "think." People aren't thinking. They're reacting emotionally. Ignore facts and history, legislate by emotion and naturally you're going to get ineffective results and unintended consequences.

Americans, unfortunately, are unaware of these things. Our media is heavily censored and owned by right wing corporations. Most don't read the foreign or progressive press.
We keep trying to re-invent the wheel, ignorant of the fact that others have perfected the technology and have been using it successfully for years.

I agree with you that people are reacting emotionally and are either ignorant of other ways or just refuse to acknowledge them. I don't buy that the problem is some grand right-wing conspiracy though. It would be just as bad if far left corporations owned the media, I think we can at least agree that when only one is in power things don't go so well. There needs to be that competition of information so that the truth can be sorted out, at least partially.
It's like the healthcare thing going on now. No one trusts the other side, not many people (me included) trust either side. Everyone has something to gain, and that means that transparency and neutrality are dead. People don't know what media outlets to go to for accurate information anymore, and worse they know that some outlets on both sides of the political spectrum are willfully lying their heads off to further their own hide. This kind of 'he said, she said' crap is not fostering education at all, it just continues distrust and the cycle of stagnant debate.
 
Last edited:

Trey of Diamonds

Well-Known Member
I chose the second option which was no but didn't include the part about it being insulting. I don't think its insulting but rather counter productive, just another way to punish the abuser rather than the supplier. Law enforcement and politians target the abuser because they are so much easier to catch and they then use them as proof that they are making progress while ignoring the manufacturing and distribution sources that are very difficult to combat. They call it a war on drugs but they still refuse to go after the actual enemy and instead persecute the victims of the war as if they were the anti-christ himself. I'm not for legalising all drugs but I think if you are caught with amounts under the distribution limit, it should be confiscated and that's it. Think of the money it would save that could be used to fight the real enemy, those who make it and sell it.
 

Zephyr

Moved on
Of course not. It would result in a lot of hungry children, and besides, no drug should be illegal anyways. I do support more extensive addiction recovery support though.
 

Peggy Anne

Deist Aries
I wouldn't want my tax dollars supporting meth addicts, and crack freaks. If they can afford to buy dope, and destroy the quality of life, why enable them to sponge on the system for decades ?
 

Kathryn

It was on fire when I laid down on it.
I can't vote in this poll because I don't see the answer that I would give listed in the choices.

I don't believe the government should do mandatory drug tests for welfare or food stamp recipients because it would be cost prohibitive, and counter productive to the health of children. It would also be inconsistent. Would we test for alcohol abuse? Nicotene abuse? Sexually transmitted diseases? Morbid obesity? Would we test people who are on the WIC program? What about Medicare and Medicaid? What about VA participants? Would we test people who are drawing unemployment benefits? What about people with tax write offs for medical expenses? What about people who receive federal grants and subsidies for their education, their farms, their businesses? Surely if they're abusing drugs, then their ability to function at their best is limited by that drug use so they can't possibly be utilizing those Federal dollars as they should be.

You can't mandate morality.
 

Zephyr

Moved on
I wouldn't want my tax dollars supporting meth addicts, and crack freaks. If they can afford to buy dope, and destroy the quality of life, why enable them to sponge on the system for decades ?

Would you support your tax dollars being used for addiction recovery programs?
 
Top