Quote:
Originally Posted by MathGeek
So you've skillfully avoided answering most of my questions, but you are making a case that government power should be exerted to force employers to prove their drug testing requirements and policies are reasonable and needed.
So your vision is for a government bureaucrat or court decide what drug policies and testing practices are reasonable. The employer has the burden of proof that drug use occurred at work or is impacting performance. Drug users get to be a protected class. Private insurers and employers are not at liberty to decide on their employment and insuring policies, but are subject to government control, because drug users are a protected class.
This is not true libertarian government. This is pothead utopia. The government will end up forcing private employers and insurance companies to employ and insure drug users. Insurance companies will have to prove to some government bureaucrat or court that certain behaviors and drug use increases risks rather than relying on their own risk assessment practices and policies.
|
L M A O
Just like employers are forced by government to hire alcoholics?
Where the hell do you get this?
The push is for methods, not requirements. The government does not force drug testing now, but it's done freely just as it would be if pot were legalized.
Since alcohol was legalized prior to your existence, and people developed methods to test for intoxication in that time frame, that makes it ok? But the same road can't be taken for marijuana?
I actually quit reading your regurgitations a long time ago, and just reply based on how predictable you are. Seems my intuition is still on point.
Pothead utopia... LMAO, what a joke.