[microgood]

I don't think that all behavior such as polygamy, drug use, and non-murderous cannibalism are constitutionally protected. Thus, I think there is a discussion to be had beyond, "I'm being repressed."

The constitutional part of my original reply was based on drug testing being advocated and my objection based on the Fourth Amendment, which it clearly violates.

On the larger issue, my problem with the drug war is that the cure has been worse than the disease, and no other regulation of vices has spawned the militarization of the police, no-knock searches, widespread abuse of asset forfeiture, corruption of our police, judges, politicians, and erosion of our Fourth Amendment rights. Drugs are truly the gateway issue the government is using to trash the Constitution.

And especially with pot, it is rather hypocritical to leave it illegal when alcohol is not. It really makes no sense from a rational perspective.

[SampleMan]

The constitutional part of my original reply was based on drug testing being advocated and my objection based on the Fourth Amendment, which it clearly violates.

If the government holds a person down and conducts a drug test without a warrant, you have a point, otherwise you don't.

If I'm an employer, private or government, I have a right to set limits on that employment, even if I'm misguided. The prospective employee is in no way forced to undergo a drug test. They can simply go elsewhere.

Employers or any person giving out money, should be able to set their conditions for the voluntary contract. Of course, the drug user can also refuse and go elsewhere.

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

The constitutional part of my original reply was based on drug testing being advocated and my objection based on the Fourth Amendment, which it clearly violates.

You don't think other people have rights in the workplace to be free of dangerous individuals that can cause them injury or death?