PursuitOfHappinessParty

Then what is the reasoning for 16 year olds not being considered adults? Why can't they vote?

You can let 16 year olds write laws if you want, I prefer not. Maybe this instance isn't so bad, but now that we've cracked one more seal makes me wonder what's next? 16 year old Congressmen? National vote on homework?

__________________
" Tie two birds together and though they have four wings they cannot fly " Blind Master in 'Circle Of Iron'

DanS.

I take issue with the whole "contest" thing...but his age is a non-issue...Either it's a good idea or it isn't. If he had used his story as a reason for the legislation without the contest you wouldn't have had an issue with it?

The whole why aren't 16 year olds adults thing is kind of a cheap argument though...it's arbitrary...there are 16 year olds smarter than 30 year olds...and neither of them should be credited or discredit based solely on their age.

PursuitOfHappinessParty

The age is relevent only in that they targeted 16 year olds with this contest. Your government officials taking cues from a contest aimed at those too young to vote. Sure, this kids solution may be a good idea. The point is that now that we've gone there, what's next. Why did we need a contest aimed at childred to solve our adult need? Is it really such a good idea he had? I can see many levels of BS in this scenario that my own ADULT experiences bring to light, something a 16 year old doesn't have access to.

So we should give them the vote and let them run for office? That's the litmus of this conversation. If they can directly influence laws and regulations, then they should be able to directly participate.

__________________
" Tie two birds together and though they have four wings they cannot fly " Blind Master in 'Circle Of Iron'

DanS.

I think you're missing my point...that while I agree a contest is stupid...the age does not disqualify the idea.

PursuitOfHappinessParty

My point is it isn't a disqualifying of the idea, it's disqualifying the scenario the idea came from. I would rather see my elected officials gleaning their policies from other sources. Let the adults that can vote come up with the qualifying ideas. Adults aren't perfect for this either, but at least they have life experiences to draw from. Adults, as citizens, are more directly influenced by these decisions.

As to his idea, while there are massive problems with welfare, do you really think that yet more intrusive drug tests are the answer? Are drugs destroying welfare? While there are instances, I think this is a huge, overbearing fix on a small problem that doesn't warrant such Draconian solutions.

But hell, let's ask middle-schoolers how to deal with Iraq. If one of the kids says to get the hell out, does that make that kid the best source for saying such?

__________________
" Tie two birds together and though they have four wings they cannot fly " Blind Master in 'Circle Of Iron'

Ptech

Drug tests are a boon for the prison industrial complex.

I wonder why the politicians won't test themselves??

PursuitOfHappinessParty

Thank you.
Politicians can't find the time to UA, too busy abusing paiges, three martini lunches, and looking for hook-ups at the local airport mens room. Drug tests are also a boon to UA companies, a growth industry.

__________________
" Tie two birds together and though they have four wings they cannot fly " Blind Master in 'Circle Of Iron'

ibex

If you support this idea, you have to say out loud that people on public assistance have no 4th amendment rights. It's just that simple. One horrible case of child abuse is no excuse for trashing the Constitution. Sympathy for the plight of the sixteen year old is understandable. Supporting this proposed legislation is short sighted, emotionally based, irrational and dangerous. Just how much power are we willing to cede to Big Brother?

W.M.DEEEZ

This saying rings true time and time again. Sometimes adults "can't see the forest for the trees"

I see no problem with encouraging kids to think at an adult level. It is afterall, and non binding contest.


The issue with those on public assistance is a sticky one, but consider this...

How can they afford the drugs (or cigs. for that matter) if they can't afford to support themselves?

Perhaps if you had to forego some basic rights (as we see them) to get a handout, so be it. Why should we support their habit. I have enough trouble supporting my own!

__________________
Don't it always seem to go, that you don't know what you've got til it's gone

SaraW

We shouldn't support their habit. But, maybe they are getting drugs from friends. That may not be likely with drugs like cocaine, meth and heroin. But, a marijuana smoker could pretty easily stay stoned with a little help from his friends and even occassional strangers.

I agree that people should not be allowed to use their welfare checks to buy drugs. One way to avoid it is by providing services and vouchers in place of cash aid. Of course, people can sell what they get with voucers in order to get cash for drugs. So, maybe that's not a great solution. But, I don't think drug testing is either.

Rather than require drug testing, they (we) should offer free residential treatment programs on demand to all welfare recipients. While not all addicts will voluntarily get treatment, many will if they can get it for free. Also, any welfare recipient who is convicted for a drug offense or treated for an overdose should be required to accept the offer of treatment as a condition to receiving further aid.