peace_pipe Posted November 5, 2007 Posted November 5, 2007 I had a first date Sat. night. We had a pretty good time, she told me how attracted to me she was time and time again. She claims I would make a good "FWB".... I suppose that is a good thing for a first date. So we started talking about political and social views. I am very objective when it comes to these things and I have a good tolerance for others beliefs. Well, we started talking about presidential candidates. I explained to her that Ron Paul is going to get my vote, etc. She questions why and the conversation quickly degrades into a "liberty vs money" conversation. Basically, she was questioning if I would give up financial security over something I view as a civil liberty. The scenario is this - "If my employer approached me with a hair follicle test, what would I do?" I told her that I would probably resign because I feel that it violates my privacy. Now we had this discussion about weed. She smokes recreationally and so do I. Anyway, my feelings on this issue have nothing to do with weed, rather civil liberties. I tried to explain to her that if everyone bends to the will of the masses, we are nothing more than sheep in a herd. I told her it's a matter of principal and any person that consents to such action is to blame. If everyone stood up for their rights, there would be no hair follicle testing. This concept is almost a way of life for me. She believes this as an "immature" outlook and insists I will change as I grow older. I am trying to warn her this will NOT happen. Anyway, we are hanging out again tonight. How would you peeps handle this?
jcster Posted November 5, 2007 Posted November 5, 2007 This concept is almost a way of life for me. She believes this as an "immature" outlook and insists I will change as I grow older. I am trying to warn her this will NOT happen. Anyway, we are hanging out again tonight. How would you peeps handle this? I have been told this by various people over the last couple of decades...nope, never changed my mind. Is this woman a lot older than you? She sounds a little patronizing. If it were me, I'd just ditch the political conversations for now, since you're only thinking about doing the FWB thing. If she were someone that I considered a relationship with, this might be a red flag.
Author peace_pipe Posted November 5, 2007 Author Posted November 5, 2007 I have been told this by various people over the last couple of decades...nope, never changed my mind. Is this woman a lot older than you? She sounds a little patronizing. If it were me, I'd just ditch the political conversations for now, since you're only thinking about doing the FWB thing. If she were someone that I considered a relationship with, this might be a red flag. Ya, patronizing is a very good word for this situation. I plan to just go with it, I am tired of the red flags and I just want sex for now.
oppath Posted November 5, 2007 Posted November 5, 2007 Well, a true libertarian would say that your employer, if it were a private employer, would absolutely be within its rights to ask you for a hair follicle test. Ron Paul would support that. A private employer does not violate your civil liberties at all by asking you to take a drug test. They are not violating your right to privacy. Your employer has the same rights to freedom of association as you do, and that includes the right to disassociate on the grounds that they don't want to employ someone who takes drugs recreationally. So really, you can only say "I support a private employer to give me a drug test, but I believe my body is something I have ownership of, and I believe in recreational drugs and that they do not affect my ability to work or make me a liability, therefore I choose to seek employment from an employer who feels the same as I do." There is no privacy issue here unless the private employer were to share those results with the government. Now, if it were a government mandated drug test...then your right to privacy would be encroached. My rant over, why talk about politics at all on a first date? Yes, she was a bit patronizing, but it is possible you were a bit idealistic. Those are serious conversations for a first date that touch on personal issues that are much more intimate than the rapport you have established to that point. You are only asking for trouble talking about those topics until you have established rapport.
Author peace_pipe Posted November 5, 2007 Author Posted November 5, 2007 A private employer does not violate your civil liberties at all by asking you to take a drug test. They are not violating your right to privacy. Many would disagree. I don't really see it as any less than discrimination. Let's be honest... 99% of employers who require drug tests do so because of FINANCIAL reasons. Their main concern is profit margin - not your human rights. In addition, most of those who do drug screen use a urinalysis. All this really does is catch folks who smoke weed. Cocaine is out of your system in 72 hours, Alcohol in 24 (if they even test for it), they don't test for LSD. Those are just some examples.... Well, what about that spliff you smoked on Sunday afternoon? Guess what? It's gonna be in your urine for 30 - 60 days. It'll be in your hair for years. What does a potential job have to do with my activities of a Sunday afternoon? Invasion of privacy?? Would they fire me if I drank beer all day Sunday? Probably not, but last I checked alcohol has killed thousands and weed has killed 0. At any rate, it is a personal subject for me. Yeah, conversation was a bit heavy for a first date! The whole issue is that she believes my beliefs are tied to weed, thus making them immature. I am trying to convince her that they are not based on weed, rather human rights and less government control. I really feel this country is taking a bad turn AND people need to start voting their conscience.
brothermartin Posted November 6, 2007 Posted November 6, 2007 I had a first date Sat. night. We had a pretty good time, she told me how attracted to me she was time and time again. She claims I would make a good "FWB".... I suppose that is a good thing for a first date. So we started talking about political and social views. I am very objective when it comes to these things and I have a good tolerance for others beliefs. Well, we started talking about presidential candidates. I explained to her that Ron Paul is going to get my vote, etc. She questions why and the conversation quickly degrades into a "liberty vs money" conversation. Basically, she was questioning if I would give up financial security over something I view as a civil liberty. The scenario is this - "If my employer approached me with a hair follicle test, what would I do?" I told her that I would probably resign because I feel that it violates my privacy. Now we had this discussion about weed. She smokes recreationally and so do I. Anyway, my feelings on this issue have nothing to do with weed, rather civil liberties. I tried to explain to her that if everyone bends to the will of the masses, we are nothing more than sheep in a herd. I told her it's a matter of principal and any person that consents to such action is to blame. If everyone stood up for their rights, there would be no hair follicle testing. This concept is almost a way of life for me. She believes this as an "immature" outlook and insists I will change as I grow older. I am trying to warn her this will NOT happen. Anyway, we are hanging out again tonight. How would you peeps handle this? Three things you should NEVER discuss with a girl that wants to hook-up with you: RELIGION, CHILDREN, and POLITICS. Talk about something else. Like movies or personal interest.
Timberlane Posted November 6, 2007 Posted November 6, 2007 Ya, patronizing is a very good word for this situation. I plan to just go with it, I am tired of the red flags and I just want sex for now. I think Ron Paul would want you to have that, too. Who knows, maybe you can convert her to the Libertarian cause? Always good when we get another hottie, too. Hmmmm. In fact, this should be your mission. Have at it, then!
oppath Posted November 6, 2007 Posted November 6, 2007 Many would disagree. I don't really see it as any less than discrimination. Let's be honest... 99% of employers who require drug tests do so because of FINANCIAL reasons. Their main concern is profit margin - not your human rights. Except that a private employer also has the right to freedom of association. Do you have the right to put whatever substance you want into your body? Yes. Does an employer have a right not to hire you if they feel you engage in risky behavior? Yes. Most libertarian philosophy believes that discrimination is fine, as people have the right to disassociate. The problem is when discrimination is forced by the hand of a government gun. The notion of a free market is that employers who discriminate racially or sexually, for example, are less likely to be competitive. Some say that did not work, the counter argument is that most discrimination in the competitive environment was enforced by the government gun, and a true market has never really existed, it has always been distorted by the government gun. Regardless, your employer has the right to disassociate with you if you engage in behaviors they feel are risky or could potentially affect your work performance. Do I have to be friends with someone who takes drugs? No. Do I have to be friends with a black person? No. I have the right to disassociate even if my reasons are ignorant and racist. Libertarian philosophy believes that private employers have that same right, even if the reason for disassociation is immoral, because the philosophy ultimately believes that such employers will not be competitive in the free market, a real free market , not the statist government distorted crap that is claimed to be one. I am not saying that your employer should disassociate with you on the grounds of drugs, because I don't believe it is rational to conclude that drugs = risky employee, though in some individual cases, that would be a valid conclusion based on performance and character traits. Sure, some libertarians would disagree, but libertarian philosphy asserts that private entitites, whether it is people or a company, have the right to determine the terms of the contract, and they are allowed to discriminate as a private entity, because you do not have the right to a job. If a company wants you to be drug free as part of it's contract with you, they have the right to ask that. You have the right to say "no" the terms of that contract aren't acceptable to me. The downside is that you have no claim to that job. It's all voluntary association. Regardless, yes, avoid serious topics on the first date. It is too intimate for the rapport you have. It is impossible to be comfortable with someone that quickly and differing opinions will almost always lead to small fights.
Recommended Posts