The Drug Free Families Act of 2008

[irishcowboy]

what about the person that is drawing disability check, under 50 years old, has his check direct deposit.... gets busted for cooking meth, spends his time in jail, and while in jail continues to draw his disability check to his direct deposit account, cause no one knows that he has it, and it does not get reported to the right authorities......

break the law, and get rewarded..... well, at least on this earth they do.....

mike

That is awful.....is this an actual occurance or a hypothetical one?

actual, i know the guy that was doing it.

[irishcowboy]

Drug addiction is of satan, he comes to kill, steal, and destroy, and that is exactly what drugs do, nothing less,

they kill the user, they steal the lives of those involved, and they destroy the families and homes of the users and dealers as well.

it is nothing but bondage, heavy chains that most people are unable to break by themselves, the chains are just too heavy, the only one I know of that can break these chains with ease is God, through the Holy Spirit, and there is only one way to get to God.

I have seen people go through programs and pass them and even stay dry for a while, but that pull is still there, and I have seen people that have allowed God to do it, and turn it all over to the Lord and it would be an instant change and they would be free with no problems.... ( with one, a lady friend of ours, with 4 kids and full blown aids is one, and she was healed of aids, not just remission, for in remission it can still be found, with her, there is no sign of HIV or aids when she gave her life to Christ, one check up, she is in very poor shape, the next she is clean, and free with nothing showing up.....)

nothing but problems come from the drug scene..... I just thank the Lord that the kids she had were born before her aids thing, for they are clean......

dealers, if caught dealing, need to be set up for life, for they are guilty of murder....indirectly, but they still are responsible for it.

mike

[Smalcald]

Morningglory I was trying to show Axxman how he tends to exaggerate by exaggerating this greatly myself and turning it into a ridiculous senario. Of course I really do realise that most kids taken away from their families - in the USA as they do here as well - go to private foster homes. I was being totally "over the top" by saying the bit about "statists and police informants" - not even I believe that.

Axxman sees me as always picking on police, so I thought I'd better be true to form.

I am concerned, however, for the kids of drug addicts. It would be incredibly traumatic for the whole family to have the kids ripped from the home by the government. It would be destructive, not only for the addict themself (and if the hope is for the addict's recovery, taking his/her kids away is sure not going to help) but destructive also for the kids themselves. Not only would they have to cope with drug addict parents/parents, but they would have to cope with being taken away from their own family and being put in an unknown environment.

Nice backbone you're showing there...and you accuse of me of saying things so I "sound tough." LOL You gotta be careful you don't get whiplash when you backtrack that fast.

Once again you are on the wrong side of an issue IMO. Now your standing up for drug addicts and are saying we should leave innocent kids in homes with drug addicted parents, and that we should provide them with welfare.

As far as your advice to say "there, but for the Grace of God, go I" the next time I see a drug addict...what kind of solution is that??? I'm not on drugs because I said NO everytime I had a chance to take them..EVERYTIME! Don't go blaming God because somebody is on drugs. Blame the person who choses to ruin their life.

If people were really concerend about drug addicts then they would commit to winning the war on drugs and stop pandering and being all willy-nilly about how to win it. The war on drugs could be over in no time if there weren't so many liberals in the way. Unfortunately, libs don't have the stomach to do what it takes to win wars.

I don't really agree with your last paragraph.

The war on drugs would not be over in no time. We have drugs in the US becuase we want drugs, not for a lack of effort to stop drugs from entering the US. People are out in thier backyards buying cleaning chemicals to cook into meth, all of the "war" efforts in the world would not stop someone with that sort of mentality. You stop coke from Columbia you get meth, you stop pot from mexico you get it from canada or home grown, you stop herion from the Far East you get Oxycontin right here (just ask Rush). Where there is a demand for something there will be a supply, the higher the penalties the higher the rewards for those willing to take the risks, but it won't stop the drugs from flowing.

So we must look at the demand and get to the bottom of that.

[buckthesystem]

Morningglory I was trying to show Axxman how he tends to exaggerate by exaggerating this greatly myself and turning it into a ridiculous senario. Of course I really do realise that most kids taken away from their families - in the USA as they do here as well - go to private foster homes. I was being totally "over the top" by saying the bit about "statists and police informants" - not even I believe that.

Axxman sees me as always picking on police, so I thought I'd better be true to form.

I am concerned, however, for the kids of drug addicts. It would be incredibly traumatic for the whole family to have the kids ripped from the home by the government. It would be destructive, not only for the addict themself (and if the hope is for the addict's recovery, taking his/her kids away is sure not going to help) but destructive also for the kids themselves. Not only would they have to cope with drug addict parents/parents, but they would have to cope with being taken away from their own family and being put in an unknown environment.

Nice backbone you're showing there...and you accuse of me of saying things so I "sound tough." LOL You gotta be careful you don't get whiplash when you backtrack that fast.

Once again you are on the wrong side of an issue IMO. Now your standing up for drug addicts and are saying we should leave innocent kids in homes with drug addicted parents, and that we should provide them with welfare.

As far as your advice to say "there, but for the Grace of God, go I" the next time I see a drug addict...what kind of solution is that??? I'm not on drugs because I said NO everytime I had a chance to take them..EVERYTIME! Don't go blaming God because somebody is on drugs. Blame the person who choses to ruin their life.

If people were really concerend about drug addicts then they would commit to winning the war on drugs and stop pandering and being all willy-nilly about how to win it. The war on drugs could be over in no time if there weren't so many liberals in the way. Unfortunately, libs don't have the stomach to do what it takes to win wars.

Axxman, you have got to brush up on your sense of humour.

I am not so much standing up for drug addicts as reminding everyone that drug addicts are still people and it is not always their fault if they have got caught up in something that is beyond their control. We really should try to be more understanding. This reminds me of the song "....... if they saw him (Jesus) talk at ease with the junkies, whores and thieves ......" So "what would Jesus do?"

You have even misinterpreted the saying "there but for the grace of God, go I", it means that God's Grace enabled you NOT to be a drug addict, but you just as easily could be one as someone you're condemning is. I am NOT blaming God for anything.

And "the war on drugs". That phrase is almost enraging. You can never win a war on a verb, a war on a verb is not a real war - it is just a ridiculous, overemotional excuse for having SWAT teams shoot up innocent people's houses (as well, of course, as guilty peoples' houses), kill people and their pets or injure them. It is just like "the war on terrorism" - that will never be won also - it is not winnable.

Be real, and admit to yourself that the government doesn't really want to get rid of drugs altogether, there is far too much money tied up in that industry. And if they really were concerned about the health of the population, they'd stop lacing their drinking water with fluoride.

[MorningGlory]

And "the war on drugs". That phrase is almost enraging. You can never win a war on a verb, a war on a verb is not a real war - it is just a ridiculous, overemotional excuse for having SWAT teams shoot up innocent people's houses (as well, of course, as guilty peoples' houses), kill people and their pets or injure them. It is just like "the war on terrorism" - that will never be won also - it is not winnable.

Be real, and admit to yourself that the government doesn't really want to get rid of drugs altogether, there is far too much money tied up in that industry. And if they really were concerned about the health of the population, they'd stop lacing their drinking water with fluoride.

So you believe that the government, presumably of the United States, is just looking for excuses to shoot up people's houses by implementing a 'war on drugs'? There's no way they could legitimately be trying to stamp out drugs and those who deal in them? And they are making money from the flow of illegal drugs into the U.S.? You equate putting fluoride in water with....what? Poison? Is there anything, anywhere, that's NOT a conspiracy, bts?

Btw, the war on Japan, the war on Germany, Britain's war on France, Spain's war on Britain, etc.....these were all wars on 'verbs'. Are you saying they weren't won?

[Axxman]

I don't really agree with your last paragraph.

The war on drugs would not be over in no time. We have drugs in the US becuase we want drugs, not for a lack of effort to stop drugs from entering the US. People are out in thier backyards buying cleaning chemicals to cook into meth, all of the "war" efforts in the world would not stop someone with that sort of mentality. You stop coke from Columbia you get meth, you stop pot from mexico you get it from canada or home grown, you stop herion from the Far East you get Oxycontin right here (just ask Rush). Where there is a demand for something there will be a supply, the higher the penalties the higher the rewards for those willing to take the risks, but it won't stop the drugs from flowing.

So we must look at the demand and get to the bottom of that.

I respectfully disagree. You don't have to make something completely disappear to beat it. We won the war against Japan...and Japan still exists. We didn't have to completely vaporize a country to defeat communism. We beat communism...but communism still exists. We don't have to make drugs disappear to win the war.

If this country wants to win the war...they can...but it'll take some backbone and resolve that I'm not sure America has anymore. We can't even build a wall to protect our border without worrying about the rain.

Buckhesystem: "You can never win a war on a verb,"

Defeatest attitude that we've come to expect from liberals who never saw a battle they wouldn't back down to.

[buckthesystem]

And "the war on drugs". That phrase is almost enraging. You can never win a war on a verb, a war on a verb is not a real war - it is just a ridiculous, overemotional excuse for having SWAT teams shoot up innocent people's houses (as well, of course, as guilty peoples' houses), kill people and their pets or injure them. It is just like "the war on terrorism" - that will never be won also - it is not winnable.

Be real, and admit to yourself that the government doesn't really want to get rid of drugs altogether, there is far too much money tied up in that industry. And if they really were concerned about the health of the population, they'd stop lacing their drinking water with fluoride.

So you believe that the government, presumably of the United States, is just looking for excuses to shoot up people's houses by implementing a 'war on drugs'? There's no way they could legitimately be trying to stamp out drugs and those who deal in them? And they are making money from the flow of illegal drugs into the U.S.? You equate putting fluoride in water with....what? Poison? Is there anything, anywhere, that's NOT a conspiracy, bts?

'Cause not!

Btw, the war on Japan, the war on Germany, Britain's war on France, Spain's war on Britain, etc.....these were all wars on 'verbs'. Are you saying they weren't won?

"Japan", "Germany", "France", "Britain" are NOT verbs, they are proper nouns!

[MorningGlory]

And "the war on drugs". That phrase is almost enraging. You can never win a war on a verb, a war on a verb is not a real war - it is just a ridiculous, overemotional excuse for having SWAT teams shoot up innocent people's houses (as well, of course, as guilty peoples' houses), kill people and their pets or injure them. It is just like "the war on terrorism" - that will never be won also - it is not winnable.

Be real, and admit to yourself that the government doesn't really want to get rid of drugs altogether, there is far too much money tied up in that industry. And if they really were concerned about the health of the population, they'd stop lacing their drinking water with fluoride.

So you believe that the government, presumably of the United States, is just looking for excuses to shoot up people's houses by implementing a 'war on drugs'? There's no way they could legitimately be trying to stamp out drugs and those who deal in them? And they are making money from the flow of illegal drugs into the U.S.? You equate putting fluoride in water with....what? Poison? Is there anything, anywhere, that's NOT a conspiracy, bts?

'Cause not!

Btw, the war on Japan, the war on Germany, Britain's war on France, Spain's war on Britain, etc.....these were all wars on 'verbs'. Are you saying they weren't won?

"Japan", "Germany", "France", "Britain" are NOT verbs, they are proper nouns!

Okay, bts, I owe you an apology....I don't know if I was asleep or temporarily insane when I called those nouns 'verbs'. Go ahead throw that mud pie! I deserve one. Btw, I minored in English; how sad is that???

[Guest man]

We don't have to make drugs disappear to win the war.

I'm curious. How would you win the war on drugs without making them disappear?

And please don't say education.

[MorningGlory]

Okay, but drugs is still a noun?

Yep....