Please select the category that most closely reflects your concern about this content,
so that we can review it and determine whether it violates Civility 101 or isn't
appropriate for some other reason.
Abusing this feature is also a violation of Civility 101.
Explanation:
Nearly one-in-five new HIV cases are the result of drug users sharing dirty needles, an extrodinarily high number. Some cities have attempted to combat the epidemic by giving free clean needles to addicts in exchange for used ones. These programs are highly controversial in the U.S., with many insisting such programs encourage drug use and increase crime. Should your community be funding needle exchange programs?
Biweekly updates on new debates and experts
Please check your email to confirm your subscription.
© 2008-2010 Opposing Views, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Opposing Views, Inc. is not responsible for the content posted on this website. Please view full disclaimer under Terms
Health and Taxes
"public purse"
I think you're meshing two separate sources of money . There's taxes which mean everyone and their mother and then there's private business which means either voluntary contributions or people providing services to earn a living.
I don't pay for health insurance for addicts because I won't buy into a plan that covers them. Why should I care about their total cost? Including the cost in taxes only raises the total I pay with no reduction anywhere for me.
If we already had a universal health care system then I would agree that the reduction in cost overall would impact me. But I hope that never happens because the cost overall for me would increase dramatically because I would be helping to fund a million health problems I don't have. Did you know maternal care is covered in the proposed health care bill? Every man in this country will be subsidizing costs that they can't possibly incur. I think that's wrong (and I'm a woman!)
Also, about your point about spreading viruses, it's simple. If someone is dumb and has unprotected sex with a drug addict and gets AIDS , they'll pay the price. Not only does that seriously encourage people to be smart but also encourages condom use and responsibility and it's just simply justice. People get what they deserve.
- sunshiner424
October 2, 2009 12:05PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Let's talk saving money
Far be it from me, Sunshine, to preach compassion; I'm talking about saving money . There is evidence that needle exchange programs result in less HIV and Hepatitis B in the community, and that means a lower rate of death and chronic disease. Result: less public expense. It's one of those situations where helping others results in making it better for everyone, and that's a win-win situation for you as well.
- Michael Glass
October 3, 2009 8:10AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Saving money for whom?
"It's one of those situations where helping others results in making it better for everyone, and that's a win-win situation for you as well."
No, it's not. Let's look at this rationally. Let's say wealth is a curve. Very few are extremely rich and very many are extremely poor. If we redistribute wealth so that the poor get some unearned money (or needles in this case), then someone loses out. That wealth (or needles) doesn't grow on trees. So who is it being taken from? If I'm in the top half of society , I am definitely not benefiting. Actually, I'm being stolen from. You say it's a win win for everybody? I'm sorry, you'll need to explain it a little more clearly. It sounds to me like a lose lose because I'm being stolen from and addicts think it's ok to mooch so they don't have to buy their own needles. And yes, I consider dependency as a serious lose for anyone. Sure, they get free needles woooot. But then they expect free needles. And then when we find out the system really doesn't work, they say but how the hell can I take my heroin??? It's like feeding the ducks. They get dependent and then when you stop feeding them they die. Is that nicer than letting them take care of themselves? NO.
Also, I'm going to argue with the "less public expense" part. If we lower the cost of the whole country, which is as you say less public expense, then we also lower the amount the whole country gets paid. Because maybe you don't know this, but the country pays itself if you want to think in communal terms. Personally, communal terms irritates me because the "public" is invariably referring to a portion of the country. It is so much easier to speak in terms of individuals because not only do individuals actually exist, but every public is made up of those individuals that must be considered. So to say that I would benefit from "less public expense" is a complete lie. I would lose. In individual terms, I would also lose and it's much easier to explain this way: I would be paying for something I'm not getting. NO THANKS.
What confuses me most is why you would want this. You aren't an addict and you would be paying.... do you seriously think that your life would cost less? That life would be easier or better for you? Or do you feel guilty to these addicts and your supporting this out of emotional issues?
- sunshiner424
October 3, 2009 1:09PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
False economy
Sunshine, I see that you identify yourself with the rich and the powerful, and don't want to be burdened with the poor. If providing needles reduces the amount of HIV and hepatitis in the community, not providing them could be false economy . You save a paltry amount in not providing a needle exchange program, but the expenses are likely to come back to bite you as extra taxes to provide for more medical help. It would also mean a smaller tax base, as more people become sick. As one of the wealthy, this could end up costing you more.
- Michael Glass
October 3, 2009 5:48PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
ONLY IF
I had a health insurance plan that covered addicts. Or if they joined one of the evil trio: Welfare, Medicare, Medicaid. All failing, All burdens, All unnecessary.
I'm not rich. I'm in the middle and will forever not get the benefits the poor get but not be able to afford the high taxes that the rich can afford.
- sunshiner424
October 3, 2009 6:29PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Keep well
I wish you good health , Sunshine. Your philosophy works well for the wealthy and healthy, but if your health fails, perhaps you will see more virtue in helping others and being helped in return.
- Michael Glass
October 4, 2009 2:35AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Nope
I'm not afraid of death. I try to take care of myself but if something horrible happens and I can't afford to pay for it then goodbye world.
- sunshiner424
October 4, 2009 9:27AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
coverage
“I don't pay for health insurance for addicts because I won't buy into a plan that covers them. Why should I care about their total cost? Including the cost in taxes only raises the total I pay with no reduction anywhere for me.”
You actually do pay for their health care . A serious drug user is unlikely to be able to hold down a steady job, which means that they will not be able to pay for their own insurance… and thus they will have to rely on public options like the legally mandated care that they will receive from a hospital emergency room. Your tax dollars will also go to their health care if they get arrested and thrown in jail… a cost that will be substantially higher if they have contracted a blood born disease.
“Did you know maternal care is covered in the proposed health care bill? Every man in this country will be subsidizing costs that they can't possibly incur. I think that's wrong (and I'm a woman!)”
That is a rather odd opinion. If female health issues are not covered then health issues specific to makes cannot similarly be covered (such as Prostate Cancer). Does your health insurance cover female medical problems? Mine does… and that seems perfectly fair to me (and I’m a man!)
“People get what they deserve.”
So if a man cheats on his wife and gets an HIV then goes home and spreads it to his wife is she getting what she deserves? If a drug user catches HIV from a dirty needle and then passes it along to their child then that child is getting what they deserve? Let’s not forget the person that gets raped by someone who caught HIV from a dirty needle… did they deserve it?
- MrBook
October 3, 2009 11:49PM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
The whole problem with society today
"You actually do pay for their health care . A serious drug user is unlikely to be able to hold down a steady job, which means that they will not be able to pay for their own insurance… and thus they will have to rely on public options like the legally mandated care that they will receive from a hospital emergency room. Your tax dollars will also go to their health care if they get arrested and thrown in jail… a cost that will be substantially higher if they have contracted a blood born disease."
Because a failure at life causes increased costs for everyone means we should continue in the direction of paying for their life??? No. Addicts are failures because they can't hold down jobs and support themselves. Every person in a society needs to at least support themself before they can even think about contributing back to society. Addicts included. They should not be rewarded with free stuff for being failures.
For health insurance , everyone should have the option of what coverage they want. If a man wants coverage that supports his wife then he should buy that insurance. If a gay man does not want to pay for maternity care, he should have that option. He should not be mandated to pay for maternity care, obesity care, lung cancer coverage, and psychiatrist therapy when he does not have a wife, is not fat, does not smoke and does not need therapy.
For the extreme cases where someone is screwed over because of some other idiots mistake, that's really sad and horrible but it is what it is. They should certainly have the right to sue the person for the medical costs but to base our society on the few people in that situation? No. In the overall view, there are relatively few cases of HIV being spread to somebody not at fault and the money we're wasting handing out free needles could be put to much better use. In the pockets of consumers for example to boost the economy possibly by ensuring that they can afford a flu shot.
- sunshiner424
October 4, 2009 9:46AM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
compassionate
"No. Addicts are failures because they can't hold down jobs and support themselves."
Addicts are not failures, they are suffering from a disease. Some addicts because of a genetic predisposition, other are because of their life situation.
"For health insurance , everyone should have the option of what coverage they want. If a man wants coverage that supports his wife then he should buy that insurance. If a gay man does not want to pay for maternity care, he should have that option. He should not be mandated to pay for maternity care, obesity care, lung cancer coverage, and psychiatrist therapy when he does not have a wife, is not fat, does not smoke and does not need therapy"
You do realize that that would lead to a rather rapid increase in cost among rarer diseases... being virtually a death sentience to many who cannot afford such care. Would someone who had never paid for cancer care be able to jump directly into cancer care when they are diagnosed with it?
- MrBook
October 4, 2009 11:14AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Nope
Every person has a choice when confronted with using drugs . The first time it is presented to them it is a choice. Disease??? Only after they gave it to themself. Life situation??? Duh, they chose wrong.
You don't seem to understand true compassion. It is wanting someone to be self supporting, independent and happy. Ever heard the expression: "Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day but teach a man to fish he'll eat forever" ? Giving them needles is treating the result of the true problem. Teach them to solve their own problem. AKA privately funded rehab. If you care so much, donate. (And many people do care enough to donate, if they can afford their mortgage first.)
Oh wait, death sentence to people who are dying?? Oh my god , we can't let that happen, death doesn't happen!!!
More important than saving lives is making life better for the people living. If we can save everyone's life until their 120 what do you think the quality of life for everyone would be? IMO, sucky. 20 years ago, if someone got cancer , that's it. They're dead. Now, if someone gets cancer, we can save them with expensive technology . But that's not enough. Use of that technology should be free??? It wasn't free to make and it's not free to use.... People should be glad that we can save as many people as we can but cost matters and the people who can't afford it, well it's just like it was 20 years ago isn't it? And don't tell me I'll change my mind if I get cancer and can't afford it. I've heard it often and I'm not afraid of death. It happens. I will die someday and that's normal. So obviously it would result in higher costs for more expensive treatments... they cost more.
- sunshiner424
October 5, 2009 11:28AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
combination
“Every person has a choice when confronted with using drugs . The first time it is presented to them it is a choice. Disease??? Only after they gave it to themself. Life situation??? Duh, they chose wrong.”
And people do not make mistakes?
“You don't seem to understand true compassion. It is wanting someone to be self supporting, independent and happy.”
It is also recognizing that sometimes individuals need assistance from others.
“Ever heard the expression: "Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day but teach a man to fish he'll eat forever"?”
Yes, it is one I’m rather fond of saying myself… however it does not apply if the guy is nearly dead from starvation. Also your position seems more to be along the lines of saying ‘well you should have learned how to fish then’.
“Giving them needles is treating the result of the true problem. Teach them to solve their own problem.”
We are talking about drug users… If not having clean needles were going to stop them from using drugs then there would be no need for clean needle programs.
“AKA privately funded rehab.”
Well funded and run rehab is effective… the source of said funding is not a qualifier for success.
“Oh wait, death sentence to people who are dying?? Oh my god , we can't let that happen, death doesn't happen!!!”
I’m not sure where you are getting that bit?
“More important than saving lives is making life better for the people living.”
And clean needle programs are a step towards that goal.
“If we can save everyone's life until their 120 what do you think the quality of life for everyone would be? IMO, sucky.”
I’m not sure of you assertion… The type of care used to extend peoples lifespan to 120 would also determine the quality of their life in their last twenty years.
“20 years ago, if someone got cancer , that's it. They're dead. Now, if someone gets cancer, we can save them with expensive technology .”
Technology developed through a combination of public and private funds, created by researchers taught in public and private schools .
“But that's not enough. Use of that technology should be free??? It wasn't free to make and it's not free to use....”
And who has implied that it should be free?
“So obviously it would result in higher costs for more expensive treatments... they cost more.”
How does this relate to needle sharing programs?
- MrBook
October 6, 2009 6:26AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
That's a really obnoxious way to argue.
If you don't mind, I would appreciate a cohesive relay of your arguments in response to mine. Breaking up my entire argument causes contextual issues and I really can't find an actual argument from you. However, I will do my best to formulate a logical response to this mess.
1. If people don't pay for their mistakes, how do they learn? Yes, people make mistakes but there are different levels of mistakes: fatal, non-fatal, really not important. If someone makes a fatal mistake at least they get a Darwin award, right? If they make the mistake of trying a substance that ruins the rest of their life... well that's their problem. I didn't make the mistake, I shouldn't pay for it.
2. When people want assistance, they will seek it out. They will also be willing to pay someone back for it. Start a "work for needles" program or something; anything at all funded by VOLUNTARY contributions. Yes, success is important but funding matters. I'm not at all saying that people should teach themselves to fish. I fully support the idea of needle programs; not funded by government.
3. “Oh wait, death sentence to people who are dying?? Oh my god , we can't let that happen, death doesn't happen!!!” That was sarcasm. If someone is dying, it's really ok to let them die. The only reason the medical profession popped up (including witch doctors way back when) is because people would PAY for expertise and treatment. And this was in response to your comment about pronouncing a death sentence upon people. (Not really the same to let someone die and to kill them. Totally different.)
4. Yes, clean needle programs are getting toward that goal at the expense of innocent people. True morality is every individual has complete freedom up until it is at the expense of another individual. I am free to punch until my fist reaches your nose. Then I have no right.
5. "Technology developed through a combination of public and private funds, created by researchers taught in public and private schools " That's not an argument. The research had to be paid for, the equipment to produce the technology has to be paid for, the technology itself has to be bought by the hospital, the electricity supplying the technology has to be paid for, the training of employees to use the technology has to be paid for, etc. It's expensive. Every use is expensive. Not just the development. You implied that the needles should be free. Needles are technology (not the most expensive but in large quantities...). That comment was also rebound anger from everyone preaching universal health care and how co-pays are too high.
6. Needles have a price. Either the people receiving them should pay for them or else they should be paid for by soft hearted people like yourself through donations. I can't afford to buy needles for addicts, sorry. I would rather spend my money on keeping up with my mortgage so I don't contribute to the economy collapse. I would rather spend my money on my own health care so I'm not also stealing yours. I would rather spend my money saving up for my retirement so I don't help drain the social security fund. After I can afford all of that plus every day needs plus some personal rewards for my hard work, then I will gladly donate to organizations I support.
- sunshiner424
October 6, 2009 12:39PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Opinions are like...jt
Dear Mr. Book:
Your answers are sensible, well-researched, accurate and balanced. Sounds like you've been doing this for a while. I probably know you from somewhere. Anyway, I admire your clarity and your patience. I'm loosing mine. I have been dealing with these same uninformed objections for 25 years. It seems to me that people would do a little research before they expressed thoroughly discredited opinions that are responsible for failing to prevent the spread of ghastly epidemics.
Maybe these people are simply advocating for the sort of degenerate, dog-eat-dog society that America deserves. Maybe they deserve to be draged into debt and disease by their selfish, irresponsible and short-sighted choices. As Candidate Obama said in a moment of impolitic honesty; They are in love with their guns and religion ... They are proud of their ignorance... In the end, people do get the society they deserve...
What did Mark Twain say? "He's got the fools in town on his side. That's a majority in any town."
Anyway, it's late; I'm tired and I'm done for tonight. Keep up the good work... Joey
- Joey Tranchina
January 11, 2010 3:07AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
public purse
I find it interesting that you say you dont buy into plans that cover addicts. Im glad that not every one thinks like you. And I mean no disrespect when I say that. Because a person does drugs , does that make them less deserving of health care ? Life is not as black and white as people like to make it. I am 33 years old. I have been an addict since I was 8. First with pot...and as we all know how easy it is to get into other things, let me tell you that at the age of 30 I found myself in a bad place. I not going to preach about being a victim because certainly i was not. And I'll make my point as quickly as I can. 3 years ago my 8 yr relationship with my son's mom ended, I was fired from the best job I ever had, I was evicted from my apt and living out of my car. All due to my drug use . My daughter who usually lived with me had to go to her moms. But her mom and step-dad are addicts too. Something happened one night with her mom and step-dad that put my daughter in very serious danger. Finally realized my life was falling apart so I confessed everything to my mom who I rarely spoke to and was not at all close with. But being afraid for me, she allowed me and my daughter to come live with her. I immediately went into detox/rehab for 3 months. I really was not happy about giving up the drugs but my daughter needed to be saved. I know I'm rambling but I have point. I had been smoking pot since 8 but at 15 i ran away from home. I didn't live with my mom again until i was 30. The years in between were spent doing meth, cocaine , heroine, and anything else I could get my hands on. I should have been dead a hundred times. Its a miracle that I'm alive today and not in prison. So now I'm 33. In the last 3 years I managed to overcome a 15 year addiction to meth, cocaine, heroine. I also put myself back in school . 2 months ago I graduated with a 2 yr degree in health care that I passed with a 3.9 grade point average. Now I'm working again for the first time in about 4 years making more money than I ever have. If it weren't for the health care I received while struggling to get clean, I would be dead. My mother who had never even heard of meth amphetamines until i confessed to being addicted to it, got me help through countless gov't assisted programs, etc. 3 weeks ago I was in the parking lot of a shopping center and I saw a woman probably 30 or 40 years old collapse. I called 911 and gave the woman cpr, which I learned in school, until the paramedics got there. Later I was told that had I not given her cpr, she would have died. Now to my point. That woman could have been anyone. My mom, your mom, you. If it werent for the health care I received, much of which was govt assisted (as in your taxes ), I would more than likely be dead, my daughter in foster care, and the woman in the parking lot may have died. And I respect your lack of concern and sympathy for those of us who have chosen to ruin our lives with the evils of drugs. And you certainly aren't alone in you views. I just wonder if your views would still be as harsh if you had been the woman in the parking lot.
- caeleb
October 15, 2009 2:10AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Nobody "deserves" health care
Whatever the media has you believing, people don't have a "right" to health care . Your health care should be more expensive for you because it is more expensive to keep you healthy.
Next, to address the story you have shared with me, congratulations on pulling your life together. That is seriously one of the greatest things about humans is that when faced with the worst, they will do their best to prevail. I believe this to the utmost. I have not been addicted to drugs but in my own way, I also saw my world falling apart and worked hard to fix it. That is what people do and it is as close to a miracle as anything I've ever seen.
You may call me selfish and careless because of the nature of this debate. I believe this debate is about two things. One is the innocent hard working people who are funding your health care. Two is about how far government will go to "save" the citizens. The more government will do for people, the less the people have to do for themselves. Just curious, please don't take offense to my questions, if you knew that government could not help your situation and rehab cost a lot of money out of your own pocket, do you think you would have let the drugs get you to the point you did? If so then all I can say is that you may either be lacking meaning in life or a sense of responsibility. It appears as though your daughter is your meaning in life because that is what made you want to change your habits. It also appears as though your sense of responsibility was seriously lacking because you did not pursue self and life improvement until recently.
As horrible as your story is, and I'm sorry for you, you admit that it's nobody else's fault. (you're not a victim) So why do you ask that everyone else pay for your health care? You do not have a right to it, nor did you earn it. It is lucky that you lived but it cost our society far more than you have given back. Saving one woman's life does not pay everyone back for what you took for granted.
I am really sorry for sounding so cold but seriously, shit happens in this world but it happens because someone didn't prevent it. We can all cry over it but that doesn't make it better. Education and foresight prevent tragedies, and I would rather prevent them than cry later. I don't know if it's your fault you ran away at 15 or your mother 's fault for not teaching you responsibility but it's not my fault.
As for my opinion on death, I have no fear of it. If I had died in that parking lot, or if I die tomorrow at work, whatever. I won't care, I'll be dead. I will obviously try to prevent it by taking care of my health and driving carefully and wearing a seatbelt but I won't live my life with the idea that nobody should ever die. That's ridiculous.
- sunshiner424
October 18, 2009 4:19PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
reply to "NOBODY DESERVES"
Why do you think that i don't have a right to it, or that I earned it? I worked the majority of the time i was on drugs . I paid taxes just like everyone else. So, really i did earn it. And I understand why you would think that you shouldn't be forced to pay for someone else's self-induced med problems. But the fact is that when someone who is in need and is unable to get that help is going to continue the life of addiction, and in turn a life of crime . Did you know that almost 80% of people in prison are there due to non-violent, drug related crimes? And those same people get out and do it all over again. Your money is paying to keep these guys locked up. Wouldn't you rather your money go to helping these people get clean, and in turn stay out of jail, and hopefully become a productive member of society that will eventually be able to help himself. The longer these people stay down, the more we're going to have to keep them jailed. I'd rather help them now so that i won't have to help them later. I don't know if you have kids or not. But if you were to have a child in that kind of situation, and lets say you weren't able to afford help for them. Wouldn't you like to know that there are programs out there that could help before your child became a statistic either in prison or dead. One last point, while you might not think your money is going to these kind of people, but it is. Just not the way you think.
- caeleb
October 25, 2009 10:11PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
that's right, NOBODY DESERVES
You misunderstood my point entirely. I should have made this point clearer perhaps. Paying taxes does not mean you have a right to health insurance . Paying taxes means you are paying just like the rest of us for military services, firemen, libraries, education , postal services, research, etc. Everything that is currently collectively paid for. Health insurance is not paid for by taxes yet.
Therefore, nobody has a right to health care . NOBODY has a RIGHT to HEALTH CARE.
Everyone in society as it stands today must pay for their own insurance or be liable for the costs they incur. If an individual does not pay for themself, the hospital sucks up the cost and raises prices just as economics 101 teaches you. Therefore, if someone does not pay either through insurance or not, the cost of it is placed on those who already pay what they owe and then they end up paying way more. Does that sound fair to you? Do you think you still have a right to it? Did you earn it and pay for it yourself?
"I paid taxes just like everyone else. So, really i did earn it." NO. WRONG. INCORRECT.
You seem to not feel guilty for using hundreds of dollars that weren't yours but really, you should feel guilty. I feel a little bad about being so harsh, but those two sentences just piss me off.
Do you think I expect to have health care provided to me because I pay taxes? Should I expect car insurance too?
And yes, you're right that my taxes are raised because of drug addicts committing crimes and being put in jail. In the grand scheme of things I pay for through the missing 50% of my paycheck, that total cost does not worry me in the slightest. It would worry me less if all drugs were legalized and taxed and we weren't wasting money on imprisoning people for possession or distribution. If my neighbor wants to do drugs, that's his liberty. I only hope his parents taught him responsibility (although it is also their liberty not to teach it).
Point is, if this country truly represented the Life, Liberty, and Pursuit of Happiness that it is supposed to, then doing drugs is your freedom but it is also entirely your responsibility. Citizens rights in this country were meant to be that each individual is free until they impede on someone else's freedom. When you start using other peoples' money, that's trampling their rights.
- sunshiner424
October 25, 2009 10:49PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.