Say Anything Blog

If you are in favor of giving the right of the government to drug test, why are you opposed to this?

The difference here is that the drug testing that Rob agreed with was only performed on an individual if they applied for a job.  This is not any different from what a majority of employers already do to keep a safe and productive work environment for its employees.

This story is completely different.  Can the children chose not to be part of the database like the adult can by not applying for the job.  The obvious answer is no.

A political party cannot be all things to all people. It must represent certain fundamental beliefs which must not be compromised to political expediency, or simply to swell its numbers.

Poor communities are a statistically high source of crime. Would the British (or American) liberals support forcing poor people to register in a DNA database?

“Behind Communism, Fascism, behind all occupations and invasions lurks a more basic, pervasive evil… a parade of people marching by with raised fists and shouting identical syllables in unision.” - Milan Kundera

Hairy, I think we all know the answer to that question!

A political party cannot be all things to all people. It must represent certain fundamental beliefs which must not be compromised to political expediency, or simply to swell its numbers.

If you are in favor of giving the right of the government to drug test, why are you opposed to this?

Because this isn’t optional.  I think the government, both as an employer and as a distributor of our tax dollars in the form of entitlements, should be able to drug test in employment/entitlement situations because those situations are optional.

Certainly the government should be able to screen job applicants to weed out people whose substance abuse problems may impact their job performance.  And if someone applying for welfare because they cannot support themselves and/or their families shouldn’t get money if they have enough money for drugs.

You’re comparing apples to skyscrapers here.

Poor communities are a statistically high source of crime. Would the British (or American) liberals support forcing poor people to register in a DNA database?

You hit the nail on the head.  I have a hard time believing that genetics play a greater role in motivating crime than things like economic situation, parenting, etc.

The war against illegal plunder has been fought since the beginning of the world. But how is… legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime. Then abolish this law without delay … If such a law is not abolished immediately it will spread, multiply and develop into a system.

Frédéric Bastiat, The Law

Rob’s recently listened-to songs: