Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!uiucdcs!mcewan
From: mcewan@uiucdcs.CS.UIUC.EDU
Newsgroups: net.misc
Subject: Re: Drug testing
Message-ID: <10600212@uiucdcs>
Date: Fri, 30-May-86 18:39:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: uiucdcs.10600212
Posted: Fri May 30 18:39:00 1986
Date-Received: Sun, 1-Jun-86 10:12:37 EDT
References: <1929@ihlpg.UUCP>
Lines: 43
Nf-ID: #R:ihlpg.UUCP:1929:uiucdcs:10600212:000:2151
Nf-From: uiucdcs.CS.UIUC.EDU!mcewan    May 30 17:39:00 1986


>>> between you and someone with possibly illegal habits, you probably would
>>> welcome a test.
>> 
>> Absolutely. I would also hope that the employer was racist and sexist so
>> that as a white male I would have a better chance than other, perhaps better
>> qualified, applicants. It's easy to moralize, but let's be practical.
> 
> 
> It is not illegal or unsafe to be black or female in a factory. Besides
> in a union shop better or qualified does not make any difference. The only
> criteria is time at the job. If you had any idea how it must feel to
> work with someone on a plate shear knowing he's just had a lunch of 2 jays
> you might see what I mean.

This is taken out of context. Your original article, which I quoted more
extensively than you included in your response, contained the lines:

> I'm suprised at myself because I was as big an opponent of this drug-
> testing business as anyone until yesterday.
> ...
> list. Part of me is furious about this testing thing and most of me hopes
> a large number fail so that his chances of returning increase. The job market
> for factory work is closed and I think that any advantage my husband's 
> abstinance gives him is great.  
> It is easy to moralize but let's be practical.

The main thrust seemed clear enough to me: you consider drug testing to
be immoral, *but you favor immoral behavior by your husband's employer if
you or your family benifits from it*. That is what my sarcastic reply
was aimed at. This response of yours misses the whole point and takes a
scattershot approach to try to justify your view, without regard to logic
or consistency. If you accept the reasons you state for drug testing, why
did you previously oppose it, and why are you "furious about this testing
thing"? Do you think that its a good thing that hiring is NOT dependent
on competence? If someone on drugs is a potential hazard, isn't an
incompetent also a potential hazard? Did You give any thought to your
viewpoint, or did you just write down what ever popped into your head?

		Scott McEwan
		{ihnp4,pur-ee}!uiucdcs!mcewan

"The entire universe is permeated with the smell of turpentine."