Guest guest Posted June 27, 2002 Report Share Posted June 27, 2002 B " H I have never used illicit drugs in my life (not even pot).... I once upon a time applied for a job. There was a drug test involved. I had had a poppy seed bagel (never thought I'd have to take a drug test on a job interview) the day before. I'm convinced this is the reason I never got a call since this was an open interview for many openings for which I was VERY qualified.... With these tests, they don't ask questions. They make assumptions. Abridgement of civil rights, if you ask me.... Debbie What is so terrible about random drug tests on kids anyway? If they are drug-free they have nothing to fear from this, and if they have been given drugs, the problem can be discovered and they can be helped and encouraged to tell on the people who gave it to them. Don't you people want kids protected? You were a parent of young children at one time yourself. Maybe your kids were brought up to be sensible and never did drugs but not all children are well-protected and well-informed by the parents as to why they should say no, and even when the parents try really hard, it can still happen that the kids get bad influences from someone in school, hence the need for someone other than the parents to look out for them in some cases. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 27, 2002 Report Share Posted June 27, 2002 I had no idea that sort of thing could happen, I'm so sorry that eating something so innocuous went against you, obviously they went about the whole thing the wrong way, but I still don't think that means the idea of drug testing is wrong. Lesley compugraphd [compugraphd]27 June 2002 20:48 Subject: random access urine test -- was:RE: PledgeB"HI have never used illicit drugs in my life (not even pot).... I once upon a time applied for a job. There was a drug test involved. I had had a poppy seed bagel (never thought I'd have to take a drug test on a job interview) the day before. I'm convinced this is the reason I never got a call since this was an open interview for many openings for which I was VERY qualified....With these tests, they don't ask questions. They make assumptions. Abridgement of civil rights, if you ask me....DebbieWhat is so terrible about random drug tests on kids anyway? If they are drug-free they have nothing to fear from this, and if they have been given drugs, the problem can be discovered and they can be helped and encouraged to tell on the people who gave it to them. Don't you people want kids protected? You were a parent of young children at one time yourself. Maybe your kids were brought up to be sensible and never did drugs but not all children are well-protected and well-informed by the parents as to why they should say no, and even when the parents try really hard, it can still happen that the kids get bad influences from someone in school, hence the need for someone other than the parents to look out for them in some cases. To send an email to - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 28, 2002 Report Share Posted June 28, 2002 Hi Lesley > but I still don't think that means the idea of drug testing is wrong. I have two questions.... 1. How would you feel if the police knocked on your door one day and asked you to give a sample for random drug testing, "just in case"? 2. Assuming your answer to question 1. is that it wouldn't bother you, do you think it is acceptable that those of us who do find it an abhorrent abuse of basic human rights to have it forced on us just because one or two people think it's OK? BB Peter ---Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).Version: 6.0.372 / Virus Database: 207 - Release 20/06/02 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 28, 2002 Report Share Posted June 28, 2002 I would not like it if they knocked on my door to ask for a drug test, I would certainly question why, considering that if Big Brother is watching me, they know perfectly well how anti-drugs I am, but if employers or schools feel the need to do it I can see some point, that's all. I understand how you feel, since I did feel very upset once when a social worker knocked on my door with no warning when my son was a toddler, worse still the fact that the health visitor who knew me was with her, and instead of phoning first they just turned up because someone (and we never found out who) had reported concerns about me. My son was quite a difficult toddler and did make a lot of noise, he also used to deliberately bump his head on the floor if he didn't get his own way, not usually very hard though. This was just the start of his behaviour problems Glad to say the social worker was quite satisifed he was not being harmed by me, but the whole thing really upset me, because it was clear to me that someone living close by was either being malicious or hadn't taken the trouble to know anything about me before reporting me to the SS. I would not have objected to the visit if I had been phoned beforehand, I do think it is mostly out of order for the authorities to be turning up on someone's doorstep unannounced, especially in this case since the health visitor knew me and would surely have known that it was not appropriate as there was certainly no evidence of immediate danger to my son. I probably ought to have complained. Lesley Peter [snowbow]28 June 2002 16:02 Subject: Re: random access urine test -- was:RE: Pledge Hi Lesley > but I still don't think that means the idea of drug testing is wrong. I have two questions.... 1. How would you feel if the police knocked on your door one day and asked you to give a sample for random drug testing, "just in case"? 2. Assuming your answer to question 1. is that it wouldn't bother you, do you think it is acceptable that those of us who do find it an abhorrent abuse of basic human rights to have it forced on us just because one or two people think it's OK? BB Peter ---Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).Version: 6.0.372 / Virus Database: 207 - Release 20/06/02To send an email to - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 29, 2002 Report Share Posted June 29, 2002 Hi Lesley > I would not like it if they knocked on my door to ask for a drug test, I would certainly question why, considering that if Big Brother > is watching me, they know perfectly well how anti-drugs I am, but if employers or schools feel the need to do it I can see some > point, that's all. So, what's the difference? Just because the kids are at school, rather than at home, the principal of demanding a random drug test is exactly the same. BB Peter ---Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).Version: 6.0.372 / Virus Database: 207 - Release 20/06/02 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 29, 2002 Report Share Posted June 29, 2002 I think it's because I believe that we should have certain privacy at home which we cannot realistically guarantee in other places. Schools have the right to make certain rules. Lesley Peter [snowbow]29 June 2002 12:14 Subject: Re: random access urine test -- was:RE: Pledge Hi Lesley > I would not like it if they knocked on my door to ask for a drug test, I would certainly question why, considering that if Big Brother > is watching me, they know perfectly well how anti-drugs I am, but if employers or schools feel the need to do it I can see some > point, that's all. So, what's the difference? Just because the kids are at school, rather than at home, the principal of demanding a random drug test is exactly the same. BB Peter ---Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).Version: 6.0.372 / Virus Database: 207 - Release 20/06/02To send an email to - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 29, 2002 Report Share Posted June 29, 2002 Hi Lesley > Schools have the right to make certain rules. School's have absolutely no right to make any rules except those which have a *direct* influence on their abilities to educate children. Random drug testing could only have an adverse effect on their ability to carry out their responsibilities, and is a severe breach of basic human rights! BB Peter ---Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).Version: 6.0.372 / Virus Database: 207 - Release 20/06/02 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 30, 2002 Report Share Posted June 30, 2002 This idea sounds like a step in the right direction. However, like others have said, I still think they shouldn't be forcing drug tests on the children. Unless a child is having specific problems in school, what reason do they have to test? Although I know drug abuse is a " bad thing " , drug use isn't inherently bad. Eating meat does far more long term damage to your body than smoking pot or taking LSD. Are they going to start requiring stool samples now? , " jojo " <tofujojo@q...> wrote: > Though I am not for this random drug testing thing, I thought of a good compromise: > > If the schools are really concerned that it is purely for the welfare of the children, they could arrange for anonymous drug testing across the board -- the names and SS #'s of the children would not be given and the only people with access to the results of the tests would be the parents/guardians and the children themselves. I know that anon. AIDS tests are conducted similarly with each person being assigned a code. The code is to be provided in order to obtain the results. I guess that the parents need to present in order to insure that they are provided with their child's code. That way, the parents would know if their children were being exposed to drugs and they could deal with it. Just a thought. I know all parents aren't good parents and I'm being an idealist saying that parents will be able to deal with a child's drug abuse in a responsible fashion... What do you guys think? > > --jojo > - > Peter > > Saturday, June 29, 2002 10:53 AM > Re: random access urine test -- was:RE: Pledge > > > Hi Lesley > > > Schools have the right to make certain rules. > > School's have absolutely no right to make any rules except those which have a *direct* influence on their abilities to educate children. Random drug testing could only have an adverse effect on their ability to carry out their responsibilities, and is a severe breach of basic human rights! > > BB > Peter > > > --- > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.372 / Virus Database: 207 - Release 20/06/02 > > To send an email to - > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 30, 2002 Report Share Posted June 30, 2002 Though I am not for this random drug testing thing, I thought of a good compromise: If the schools are really concerned that it is purely for the welfare of the children, they could arrange for anonymous drug testing across the board -- the names and SS #'s of the children would not be given and the only people with access to the results of the tests would be the parents/guardians and the children themselves. I know that anon. AIDS tests are conducted similarly with each person being assigned a code. The code is to be provided in order to obtain the results. I guess that the parents need to present in order to insure that they are provided with their child's code. That way, the parents would know if their children were being exposed to drugs and they could deal with it. Just a thought. I know all parents aren't good parents and I'm being an idealist saying that parents will be able to deal with a child's drug abuse in a responsible fashion... What do you guys think? --jojo - Peter Saturday, June 29, 2002 10:53 AM Re: random access urine test -- was:RE: Pledge Hi Lesley > Schools have the right to make certain rules. School's have absolutely no right to make any rules except those which have a *direct* influence on their abilities to educate children. Random drug testing could only have an adverse effect on their ability to carry out their responsibilities, and is a severe breach of basic human rights! BB Peter ---Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).Version: 6.0.372 / Virus Database: 207 - Release 20/06/02To send an email to - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 1, 2002 Report Share Posted July 1, 2002 I'm actually more worried about the poor kids whose PARENTS are drug abusers, on another vegan is a man who smokes marijuana and he has two young children, and yet he has no remorse about his habit whatsoever, what kind of an example is that? I worry the kids will get affected by it in the air just as with second-hand tobacco smoke. I'm shocked that a vegan parent would be so irresponsible, but his wife is even worse as she smoked in pregnancy (tobacco mostly I think). They do both smoke ordinary cigarettes as well. They have dabbled in all sorts of drugs. That is one vegan family I would have no problem seeing confronted by the authorities, but I won't report them only because I fear their veganism would make them more harshly treated than was reasonable. I would not want them to suffer any anti-vegan prejudice. If I knew the kids were in immediate danger of serious harm (say if they were asthmatic), I'd definitely report the parents though. I think the tobacco smoke in the air is probably worse than the marijuana smoke for asthmatics. It's really worrying, I know some parents will definitely not be at all responsible in dealing with their kids if they are on drugs, because I know this couple would actually be completely OK with their kids experimenting (not sure from what age though). When my mum took me to the doctors for my recurrent chest problems as a child, and she was a smoker, I believe that the doctor failed in his duty to have me protected. At least my mum although she was a nicotine addict, she cared enough to go for help for my poor health and the stupid idiot doctor didn't even tell her that her smoking was most likely the main cause of my health problems! I guess she was too stupid to realise it herself, she still is quite a bit in denial about it. The doctor was so vague and useless, he said lots of kids had catarrh and nothing much could be done! This was long after smoke was known to be harmful. I was so much better after leaving home. Parents are not always the best people for their kids. Lesley jojo [tofujojo]01 July 2002 15:40 Subject: Re: random access urine test -- was:RE: Pledge-"freeky_foodog" <freeky_foodogSunday, June 30, 2002 1:37 PMRe: random access urine test -- was:RE: Pledge> <snip>> Are they going to start requiring stool samples now?Blenh! Eeeeeeeeeewww! jojo>> , "jojo" <tofujojo@q...> wrote:> > Though I am not for this random drug testing thing, I thought of a> good compromise:> >> > If the schools are really concerned that it is purely for the> welfare of the children, they could arrange for anonymous drug testing> across the board -- the names and SS #'s of the children would not be> given and the only people with access to the results of the tests> would be the parents/guardians and the children themselves. I know> that anon. AIDS tests are conducted similarly with each person being> assigned a code. The code is to be provided in order to obtain the> results. I guess that the parents need to present in order to insure> that they are provided with their child's code. That way, the parents> would know if their children were being exposed to drugs and they> could deal with it. Just a thought. I know all parents aren't good> parents and I'm being an idealist saying that parents will be able to> deal with a child's drug abuse in a responsible fashion... What do> you guys think?> >> > --jojo> > -> > Peter> > > > Saturday, June 29, 2002 10:53 AM> > Re: random access urine test -- was:RE: Pledge> >> >> > Hi Lesley> >> > > Schools have the right to make certain rules.> >> > School's have absolutely no right to make any rules except those> which have a *direct* influence on their abilities to educate> children. Random drug testing could only have an adverse effect on> their ability to carry out their responsibilities, and is a severe> breach of basic human rights!> >> > BB> > Peter> >> >> > ---> > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.> > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).> > Version: 6.0.372 / Virus Database: 207 - Release 20/06/02> >> > To send an email to -> >> > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 1, 2002 Report Share Posted July 1, 2002 - " freeky_foodog " <freeky_foodog Sunday, June 30, 2002 1:37 PM Re: random access urine test -- was:RE: Pledge > <snip>> Are they going to start requiring stool samples now? Blenh! Eeeeeeeeeewww! jojo > > , " jojo " <tofujojo@q...> wrote: > > Though I am not for this random drug testing thing, I thought of a > good compromise: > > > > If the schools are really concerned that it is purely for the > welfare of the children, they could arrange for anonymous drug testing > across the board -- the names and SS #'s of the children would not be > given and the only people with access to the results of the tests > would be the parents/guardians and the children themselves. I know > that anon. AIDS tests are conducted similarly with each person being > assigned a code. The code is to be provided in order to obtain the > results. I guess that the parents need to present in order to insure > that they are provided with their child's code. That way, the parents > would know if their children were being exposed to drugs and they > could deal with it. Just a thought. I know all parents aren't good > parents and I'm being an idealist saying that parents will be able to > deal with a child's drug abuse in a responsible fashion... What do > you guys think? > > > > --jojo > > - > > Peter > > > > Saturday, June 29, 2002 10:53 AM > > Re: random access urine test -- was:RE: Pledge > > > > > > Hi Lesley > > > > > Schools have the right to make certain rules. > > > > School's have absolutely no right to make any rules except those > which have a *direct* influence on their abilities to educate > children. Random drug testing could only have an adverse effect on > their ability to carry out their responsibilities, and is a severe > breach of basic human rights! > > > > BB > > Peter > > > > > > --- > > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > > Version: 6.0.372 / Virus Database: 207 - Release 20/06/02 > > > > To send an email to - > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 1, 2002 Report Share Posted July 1, 2002 Lesley Most people I know who smoke funny cigarettes don't do it while there children are around. I think the dangers of some of these drugs are exagerated. I don't feel the need to use them, and never have, but I think in the overall scheme of things, if people feel the need, and they do not do it in front of their kids, then the harm is minimal. I believe that most of these funny cigarettes just make you feel happy and peaceful - which is a lot better than the effects of alcohol on a lot of people. Jo I'm actually more worried about the poor kids whose PARENTS are drug abusers, on another vegan is a man who smokes marijuana and he has two young children, and yet he has no remorse about his habit whatsoever, what kind of an example is that? I worry the kids will get affected by it in the air just as with second-hand tobacco smoke. I'm shocked that a vegan parent would be so irresponsible, but his wife is even worse as she smoked in pregnancy (tobacco mostly I think). They do both smoke ordinary cigarettes as well. They have dabbled in all sorts of drugs. That is one vegan family I would have no problem seeing confronted by the authorities, but I won't report them only because I fear their veganism would make them more harshly treated than was reasonable. I would not want them to suffer any anti-vegan prejudice. If I knew the kids were in immediate danger of serious harm (say if they were asthmatic), I'd definitely report the parents though. I think the tobacco smoke in the air is probably worse than the marijuana smoke for asthmatics. It's really worrying, I know some parents will definitely not be at all responsible in dealing with their kids if they are on drugs, because I know this couple would actually be completely OK with their kids experimenting (not sure from what age though). When my mum took me to the doctors for my recurrent chest problems as a child, and she was a smoker, I believe that the doctor failed in his duty to have me protected. At least my mum although she was a nicotine addict, she cared enough to go for help for my poor health and the stupid idiot doctor didn't even tell her that her smoking was most likely the main cause of my health problems! I guess she was too stupid to realise it herself, she still is quite a bit in denial about it. The doctor was so vague and useless, he said lots of kids had catarrh and nothing much could be done! This was long after smoke was known to be harmful. I was so much better after leaving home. Parents are not always the best people for their kids. Lesley jojo [tofujojo]01 July 2002 15:40 Subject: Re: random access urine test -- was:RE: Pledge-"freeky_foodog" <freeky_foodogSunday, June 30, 2002 1:37 PMRe: random access urine test -- was:RE: Pledge> <snip>> Are they going to start requiring stool samples now?Blenh! Eeeeeeeeeewww! jojo>> , "jojo" <tofujojo@q...> wrote:> > Though I am not for this random drug testing thing, I thought of a> good compromise:> >> > If the schools are really concerned that it is purely for the> welfare of the children, they could arrange for anonymous drug testing> across the board -- the names and SS #'s of the children would not be> given and the only people with access to the results of the tests> would be the parents/guardians and the children themselves. I know> that anon. AIDS tests are conducted similarly with each person being> assigned a code. The code is to be provided in order to obtain the> results. I guess that the parents need to present in order to insure> that they are provided with their child's code. That way, the parents> would know if their children were being exposed to drugs and they> could deal with it. Just a thought. I know all parents aren't good> parents and I'm being an idealist saying that parents will be able to> deal with a child's drug abuse in a responsible fashion... What do> you guys think?> >> > --jojo> > -> > Peter> > > > Saturday, June 29, 2002 10:53 AM> > Re: random access urine test -- was:RE: Pledge> >> >> > Hi Lesley> >> > > Schools have the right to make certain rules.> >> > School's have absolutely no right to make any rules except those> which have a *direct* influence on their abilities to educate> children. Random drug testing could only have an adverse effect on> their ability to carry out their responsibilities, and is a severe> breach of basic human rights!> >> > BB> > Peter> >> >> > ---> > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.> > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).> > Version: 6.0.372 / Virus Database: 207 - Release 20/06/02> >> > To send an email to -> >> > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 1, 2002 Report Share Posted July 1, 2002 and wot effect are you saying alcohol has on meeeeeee *taps foot* fraggle " Heartwork " <Heartwork wrote: >Lesley > >Most people I know who smoke funny cigarettes don't do it while there children are around. I think the dangers of some of these drugs are exagerated. I don't feel the need to use them, and never have, but I think in the overall scheme of things, if people feel the need, and they do not do it in front of their kids, then the harm is minimal. I believe that most of these funny cigarettes just make you feel happy and peaceful - which is a lot better than the effects of alcohol on a lot of people. > >Jo > > I'm actually more worried about the poor kids whose PARENTS are drug abusers, on another vegan is a man who smokes marijuana and he has two young children, and yet he has no remorse about his habit whatsoever, what kind of an example is that? I worry the kids will get affected by it in the air just as with second-hand tobacco smoke. I'm shocked that a vegan parent would be so irresponsible, but his wife is even worse as she smoked in pregnancy (tobacco mostly I think). They do both smoke ordinary cigarettes as well. They have dabbled in all sorts of drugs. > > That is one vegan family I would have no problem seeing confronted by the authorities, but I won't report them only because I fear their veganism would make them more harshly treated than was reasonable. I would not want them to suffer any anti-vegan prejudice. If I knew the kids were in immediate danger of serious harm (say if they were asthmatic), I'd definitely report the parents though. I think the tobacco smoke in the air is probably worse than the marijuana smoke for asthmatics. > > It's really worrying, I know some parents will definitely not be at all responsible in dealing with their kids if they are on drugs, because I know this couple would actually be completely OK with their kids experimenting (not sure from what age though). > > When my mum took me to the doctors for my recurrent chest problems as a child, and she was a smoker, I believe that the doctor failed in his duty to have me protected. At least my mum although she was a nicotine addict, she cared enough to go for help for my poor health and the stupid idiot doctor didn't even tell her that her smoking was most likely the main cause of my health problems! I guess she was too stupid to realise it herself, she still is quite a bit in denial about it. The doctor was so vague and useless, he said lots of kids had catarrh and nothing much could be done! This was long after smoke was known to be harmful. I was so much better after leaving home. > > Parents are not always the best people for their kids. > > Lesley > > > jojo [tofujojo] > 01 July 2002 15:40 > > Re: random access urine test -- was:RE: Pledge > > > > - > " freeky_foodog " <freeky_foodog > > Sunday, June 30, 2002 1:37 PM > Re: random access urine test -- was:RE: Pledge > > > > <snip>> Are they going to start requiring stool samples now? > > Blenh! Eeeeeeeeeewww! > > jojo > > > > > > , " jojo " <tofujojo@q...> wrote: > > > Though I am not for this random drug testing thing, I thought of a > > good compromise: > > > > > > If the schools are really concerned that it is purely for the > > welfare of the children, they could arrange for anonymous drug testing > > across the board -- the names and SS #'s of the children would not be > > given and the only people with access to the results of the tests > > would be the parents/guardians and the children themselves. I know > > that anon. AIDS tests are conducted similarly with each person being > > assigned a code. The code is to be provided in order to obtain the > > results. I guess that the parents need to present in order to insure > > that they are provided with their child's code. That way, the parents > > would know if their children were being exposed to drugs and they > > could deal with it. Just a thought. I know all parents aren't good > > parents and I'm being an idealist saying that parents will be able to > > deal with a child's drug abuse in a responsible fashion... What do > > you guys think? > > > > > > --jojo > > > - > > > Peter > > > > > > Saturday, June 29, 2002 10:53 AM > > > Re: random access urine test -- was:RE: Pledge > > > > > > > > > Hi Lesley > > > > > > > Schools have the right to make certain rules. > > > > > > School's have absolutely no right to make any rules except those > > which have a *direct* influence on their abilities to educate > > children. Random drug testing could only have an adverse effect on > > their ability to carry out their responsibilities, and is a severe > > breach of basic human rights! > > > > > > BB > > > Peter > > > > > > > > > --- > > > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > > > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > > > Version: 6.0.372 / Virus Database: 207 - Release 20/06/02 > > > > > > To send an email to - > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 1, 2002 Report Share Posted July 1, 2002 LOL, I like the way you call them funny cigarettes, but I'm actually more worried that these people are also tobacco smoking parents, and we know that hurts kids. Also those funny cigarettes apparently make some people paranoid, so they can be nasty too, and not only because of the actual smoke clogging up people's lungs. I've met people who say that is how it affects them, so even apart from finding I can't breathe around any sort of smoke, I was never tempted to try them. I agree with you about alcohol, people who know it affects them by making them violent really should know better than to drink. I get really depressed so I do perhaps understand something of why people use these things, but I know the cure is not drugs, I know exactly which things in my life I need to be able to change, it's just very difficult for me while the children are young. Lesley Heartwork [Heartwork]01 July 2002 17:11 Subject: Re: random access urine test -- was:RE: Pledge Lesley Most people I know who smoke funny cigarettes don't do it while there children are around. I think the dangers of some of these drugs are exagerated. I don't feel the need to use them, and never have, but I think in the overall scheme of things, if people feel the need, and they do not do it in front of their kids, then the harm is minimal. I believe that most of these funny cigarettes just make you feel happy and peaceful - which is a lot better than the effects of alcohol on a lot of people. Jo I'm actually more worried about the poor kids whose PARENTS are drug abusers, on another vegan is a man who smokes marijuana and he has two young children, and yet he has no remorse about his habit whatsoever, what kind of an example is that? I worry the kids will get affected by it in the air just as with second-hand tobacco smoke. I'm shocked that a vegan parent would be so irresponsible, but his wife is even worse as she smoked in pregnancy (tobacco mostly I think). They do both smoke ordinary cigarettes as well. They have dabbled in all sorts of drugs. That is one vegan family I would have no problem seeing confronted by the authorities, but I won't report them only because I fear their veganism would make them more harshly treated than was reasonable. I would not want them to suffer any anti-vegan prejudice. If I knew the kids were in immediate danger of serious harm (say if they were asthmatic), I'd definitely report the parents though. I think the tobacco smoke in the air is probably worse than the marijuana smoke for asthmatics. It's really worrying, I know some parents will definitely not be at all responsible in dealing with their kids if they are on drugs, because I know this couple would actually be completely OK with their kids experimenting (not sure from what age though). When my mum took me to the doctors for my recurrent chest problems as a child, and she was a smoker, I believe that the doctor failed in his duty to have me protected. At least my mum although she was a nicotine addict, she cared enough to go for help for my poor health and the stupid idiot doctor didn't even tell her that her smoking was most likely the main cause of my health problems! I guess she was too stupid to realise it herself, she still is quite a bit in denial about it. The doctor was so vague and useless, he said lots of kids had catarrh and nothing much could be done! This was long after smoke was known to be harmful. I was so much better after leaving home. Parents are not always the best people for their kids. Lesley jojo [tofujojo]01 July 2002 15:40 Subject: Re: random access urine test -- was:RE: Pledge-"freeky_foodog" <freeky_foodogSunday, June 30, 2002 1:37 PMRe: random access urine test -- was:RE: Pledge> <snip>> Are they going to start requiring stool samples now?Blenh! Eeeeeeeeeewww! jojo>> , "jojo" <tofujojo@q...> wrote:> > Though I am not for this random drug testing thing, I thought of a> good compromise:> >> > If the schools are really concerned that it is purely for the> welfare of the children, they could arrange for anonymous drug testing> across the board -- the names and SS #'s of the children would not be> given and the only people with access to the results of the tests> would be the parents/guardians and the children themselves. I know> that anon. AIDS tests are conducted similarly with each person being> assigned a code. The code is to be provided in order to obtain the> results. I guess that the parents need to present in order to insure> that they are provided with their child's code. That way, the parents> would know if their children were being exposed to drugs and they> could deal with it. Just a thought. I know all parents aren't good> parents and I'm being an idealist saying that parents will be able to> deal with a child's drug abuse in a responsible fashion... What do> you guys think?> >> > --jojo> > -> > Peter> > > > Saturday, June 29, 2002 10:53 AM> > Re: random access urine test -- was:RE: Pledge> >> >> > Hi Lesley> >> > > Schools have the right to make certain rules.> >> > School's have absolutely no right to make any rules except those> which have a *direct* influence on their abilities to educate> children. Random drug testing could only have an adverse effect on> their ability to carry out their responsibilities, and is a severe> breach of basic human rights!> >> > BB> > Peter> >> >> > ---> > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.> > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).> > Version: 6.0.372 / Virus Database: 207 - Release 20/06/02> >> > To send an email to -> >> > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 1, 2002 Report Share Posted July 1, 2002 For once we’re in agreement… Viv -----Original Message----- Lesley Dove [Lesley] Monday, July 01, 2002 1:26 PM RE: random access urine test -- was:RE: Pledge …… Parents are not always the best people for their kids. Lesley -----Original Message----- jojo [tofujojo] 01 July 2002 15:40 Re: random access urine test -- was:RE: Pledge ----- Original Message ----- " freeky_foodog " <freeky_foodog To: Sunday, June 30, 2002 1:37 PM Re: random access urine test -- was:RE: Pledge > <snip>> Are they going to start requiring stool samples now? Blenh! Eeeeeeeeeewww! jojo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 1, 2002 Report Share Posted July 1, 2002 Fraggle From what I know of your temperament on here, I would reckon you either get very jolly, or very sleepy. I don't think you would get aggressive :-) Jo - <EBbrewpunx Monday, July 01, 2002 5:22 PM Re: random access urine test -- was:RE: Pledge > > and wot effect are you saying alcohol has on meeeeeee > > *taps foot* > fraggle > > " Heartwork " <Heartwork wrote: > > >Lesley > > > >Most people I know who smoke funny cigarettes don't do it while there children are around. I think the dangers of some of these drugs are exagerated. I don't feel the need to use them, and never have, but I think in the overall scheme of things, if people feel the need, and they do not do it in front of their kids, then the harm is minimal. I believe that most of these funny cigarettes just make you feel happy and peaceful - which is a lot better than the effects of alcohol on a lot of people. > > > >Jo > > > > I'm actually more worried about the poor kids whose PARENTS are drug abusers, on another vegan is a man who smokes marijuana and he has two young children, and yet he has no remorse about his habit whatsoever, what kind of an example is that? I worry the kids will get affected by it in the air just as with second-hand tobacco smoke. I'm shocked that a vegan parent would be so irresponsible, but his wife is even worse as she smoked in pregnancy (tobacco mostly I think). They do both smoke ordinary cigarettes as well. They have dabbled in all sorts of drugs. > > > > That is one vegan family I would have no problem seeing confronted by the authorities, but I won't report them only because I fear their veganism would make them more harshly treated than was reasonable. I would not want them to suffer any anti-vegan prejudice. If I knew the kids were in immediate danger of serious harm (say if they were asthmatic), I'd definitely report the parents though. I think the tobacco smoke in the air is probably worse than the marijuana smoke for asthmatics. > > > > It's really worrying, I know some parents will definitely not be at all responsible in dealing with their kids if they are on drugs, because I know this couple would actually be completely OK with their kids experimenting (not sure from what age though). > > > > When my mum took me to the doctors for my recurrent chest problems as a child, and she was a smoker, I believe that the doctor failed in his duty to have me protected. At least my mum although she was a nicotine addict, she cared enough to go for help for my poor health and the stupid idiot doctor didn't even tell her that her smoking was most likely the main cause of my health problems! I guess she was too stupid to realise it herself, she still is quite a bit in denial about it. The doctor was so vague and useless, he said lots of kids had catarrh and nothing much could be done! This was long after smoke was known to be harmful. I was so much better after leaving home. > > > > Parents are not always the best people for their kids. > > > > Lesley > > > > > > jojo [tofujojo] > > 01 July 2002 15:40 > > > > Re: random access urine test -- was:RE: Pledge > > > > > > > > - > > " freeky_foodog " <freeky_foodog > > > > Sunday, June 30, 2002 1:37 PM > > Re: random access urine test -- was:RE: Pledge > > > > > > > <snip>> Are they going to start requiring stool samples now? > > > > Blenh! Eeeeeeeeeewww! > > > > jojo > > > > > > > > > > , " jojo " <tofujojo@q...> wrote: > > > > Though I am not for this random drug testing thing, I thought of a > > > good compromise: > > > > > > > > If the schools are really concerned that it is purely for the > > > welfare of the children, they could arrange for anonymous drug testing > > > across the board -- the names and SS #'s of the children would not be > > > given and the only people with access to the results of the tests > > > would be the parents/guardians and the children themselves. I know > > > that anon. AIDS tests are conducted similarly with each person being > > > assigned a code. The code is to be provided in order to obtain the > > > results. I guess that the parents need to present in order to insure > > > that they are provided with their child's code. That way, the parents > > > would know if their children were being exposed to drugs and they > > > could deal with it. Just a thought. I know all parents aren't good > > > parents and I'm being an idealist saying that parents will be able to > > > deal with a child's drug abuse in a responsible fashion... What do > > > you guys think? > > > > > > > > --jojo > > > > - > > > > Peter > > > > > > > > Saturday, June 29, 2002 10:53 AM > > > > Re: random access urine test -- was:RE: Pledge > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Lesley > > > > > > > > > Schools have the right to make certain rules. > > > > > > > > School's have absolutely no right to make any rules except those > > > which have a *direct* influence on their abilities to educate > > > children. Random drug testing could only have an adverse effect on > > > their ability to carry out their responsibilities, and is a severe > > > breach of basic human rights! > > > > > > > > BB > > > > Peter > > > > > > > > > > > > --- > > > > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > > > > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > > > > Version: 6.0.372 / Virus Database: 207 - Release 20/06/02 > > > > > > > > To send an email to - > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 1, 2002 Report Share Posted July 1, 2002 probably a bit of both..depending on how much and how long i drink.. damn happy drunks fraggle " Peter " <Snowbow wrote: >Fraggle > >From what I know of your temperament on here, I would reckon you either get >very jolly, or very sleepy. I don't think you would get aggressive :-) > >Jo > >- ><EBbrewpunx > >Monday, July 01, 2002 5:22 PM >Re: random access urine test -- was:RE: Pledge > > >> >> and wot effect are you saying alcohol has on meeeeeee >> >> *taps foot* >> fraggle >> >> " Heartwork " <Heartwork wrote: >> >> >Lesley >> > >> >Most people I know who smoke funny cigarettes don't do it while there >children are around. I think the dangers of some of these drugs are >exagerated. I don't feel the need to use them, and never have, but I think >in the overall scheme of things, if people feel the need, and they do not do >it in front of their kids, then the harm is minimal. I believe that most of >these funny cigarettes just make you feel happy and peaceful - which is a >lot better than the effects of alcohol on a lot of people. >> > >> >Jo >> > >> > I'm actually more worried about the poor kids whose PARENTS are drug >abusers, on another vegan is a man who smokes marijuana and he >has two young children, and yet he has no remorse about his habit >whatsoever, what kind of an example is that? I worry the kids will get >affected by it in the air just as with second-hand tobacco smoke. I'm >shocked that a vegan parent would be so irresponsible, but his wife is even >worse as she smoked in pregnancy (tobacco mostly I think). They do both >smoke ordinary cigarettes as well. They have dabbled in all sorts of drugs. >> > >> > That is one vegan family I would have no problem seeing confronted by >the authorities, but I won't report them only because I fear their veganism >would make them more harshly treated than was reasonable. I would not want >them to suffer any anti-vegan prejudice. If I knew the kids were in >immediate danger of serious harm (say if they were asthmatic), I'd >definitely report the parents though. I think the tobacco smoke in the air >is probably worse than the marijuana smoke for asthmatics. >> > >> > It's really worrying, I know some parents will definitely not be at all >responsible in dealing with their kids if they are on drugs, because I know >this couple would actually be completely OK with their kids experimenting >(not sure from what age though). >> > >> > When my mum took me to the doctors for my recurrent chest problems as a >child, and she was a smoker, I believe that the doctor failed in his duty to >have me protected. At least my mum although she was a nicotine addict, she >cared enough to go for help for my poor health and the stupid idiot doctor >didn't even tell her that her smoking was most likely the main cause of my >health problems! I guess she was too stupid to realise it herself, she still >is quite a bit in denial about it. The doctor was so vague and useless, he >said lots of kids had catarrh and nothing much could be done! This was long >after smoke was known to be harmful. I was so much better after leaving >home. >> > >> > Parents are not always the best people for their kids. >> > >> > Lesley >> > >> > >> > jojo [tofujojo] >> > 01 July 2002 15:40 >> > >> > Re: random access urine test -- was:RE: Pledge >> > >> > >> > >> > - >> > " freeky_foodog " <freeky_foodog >> > >> > Sunday, June 30, 2002 1:37 PM >> > Re: random access urine test -- was:RE: Pledge >> > >> > >> > > <snip>> Are they going to start requiring stool samples now? >> > >> > Blenh! Eeeeeeeeeewww! >> > >> > jojo >> > >> > >> > > >> > > , " jojo " <tofujojo@q...> wrote: >> > > > Though I am not for this random drug testing thing, I thought of a >> > > good compromise: >> > > > >> > > > If the schools are really concerned that it is purely for the >> > > welfare of the children, they could arrange for anonymous drug testing >> > > across the board -- the names and SS #'s of the children would not be >> > > given and the only people with access to the results of the tests >> > > would be the parents/guardians and the children themselves. I know >> > > that anon. AIDS tests are conducted similarly with each person being >> > > assigned a code. The code is to be provided in order to obtain the >> > > results. I guess that the parents need to present in order to insure >> > > that they are provided with their child's code. That way, the parents >> > > would know if their children were being exposed to drugs and they >> > > could deal with it. Just a thought. I know all parents aren't good >> > > parents and I'm being an idealist saying that parents will be able to >> > > deal with a child's drug abuse in a responsible fashion... What do >> > > you guys think? >> > > > >> > > > --jojo >> > > > - >> > > > Peter >> > > > >> > > > Saturday, June 29, 2002 10:53 AM >> > > > Re: random access urine test -- was:RE: Pledge >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > Hi Lesley >> > > > >> > > > > Schools have the right to make certain rules. >> > > > >> > > > School's have absolutely no right to make any rules except those >> > > which have a *direct* influence on their abilities to educate >> > > children. Random drug testing could only have an adverse effect on >> > > their ability to carry out their responsibilities, and is a severe >> > > breach of basic human rights! >> > > > >> > > > BB >> > > > Peter >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > --- >> > > > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. >> > > > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). >> > > > Version: 6.0.372 / Virus Database: 207 - Release 20/06/02 >> > > > >> > > > To send an email to - >> > > > >> > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 2, 2002 Report Share Posted July 2, 2002 eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeew! i am not like any of those muppets!! promise!!!!! that movie is not fer the faint of heart!! fraggle " jojo " <tofujojo wrote: >> and wot effect are you saying alcohol has on meeeeeee >> >> *taps foot* >> fraggle > >I am now picturing particularly bad scenes from Meet the Feebles... For >those who are fortunate enough to not have seen this flick, picture a Sodom >and Gomorrah version of Fraggle Rock. > >Sorry, fraggle -- couldn't help myself... > >--jojo > > >To send an email to - > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 2, 2002 Report Share Posted July 2, 2002 > and wot effect are you saying alcohol has on meeeeeee > > *taps foot* > fraggle I am now picturing particularly bad scenes from Meet the Feebles... For those who are fortunate enough to not have seen this flick, picture a Sodom and Gomorrah version of Fraggle Rock. Sorry, fraggle -- couldn't help myself... --jojo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 2, 2002 Report Share Posted July 2, 2002 Hi Lesley > Also those funny cigarettes apparently make some people paranoid I am no expert on drugs, so what I am saying is purely from personal experience of seeing other people after they have smoked / consumed certain drugs: I have never seen anyone behave in a paranoid or violent way after taking any "soft" drugs (i.e. cannabis). I understand that things like LSD, Ecstasy etc can make people paranoid, but have fortunately never known anyone who has taken these. Now, caffeine, on the other hand, does tend to make people more aggressive.... BB Peter ---Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).Version: 6.0.372 / Virus Database: 207 - Release 20/06/02 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 2, 2002 Report Share Posted July 2, 2002 Well I know someone on another vegan who said it had that effect on him when he tried it. Not sure if he got violent but he felt paranoid and he is not that way this person usually as far as I know, he comes across as a very well-balanced individual. I don't get aggressive after drinking coca cola, I'll slap you if you say that! Only kidding. Lesley Peter [snowbow]02 July 2002 17:24 Subject: Re: random access urine test -- was:RE: Pledge Hi Lesley > Also those funny cigarettes apparently make some people paranoid I am no expert on drugs, so what I am saying is purely from personal experience of seeing other people after they have smoked / consumed certain drugs: I have never seen anyone behave in a paranoid or violent way after taking any "soft" drugs (i.e. cannabis). I understand that things like LSD, Ecstasy etc can make people paranoid, but have fortunately never known anyone who has taken these. Now, caffeine, on the other hand, does tend to make people more aggressive.... BB Peter ---Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).Version: 6.0.372 / Virus Database: 207 - Release 20/06/02To send an email to - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.