I have not made my mind one way or the other. I do think however that there is a way to get these benefits, being that they are facilitated by USDA (at the federal level) but given out at the state level. There has to be a way to state one's objection to fingerprinting solely based on the fact that they are not required in 45 states or so, and have this objection held up. I do need some case law on this though.
I know you cannot be of help, hence I asked for some other people to respond. I understand that it makes you feel good to state things like "You can't get both benefits and rights" and other things commonly used by freedom loving people, but I think it is out of place here. That is not to say that generally speaking that is not true or should be taken into consideration.
Thus, I would appreciate it if you let other people with more substantive information to weigh in.
Or are you just trying to post as much as possible and be involved in almost every thread and be the #1 poster as you were on SJC?
It would help if you'd provide the State in question so that anyone here may search through that State's statutes.
Ahh, my mistake. There was a guy at SJC that used the handle 'nobody'. Your handle here is 'somebody'.
What was your handle at SJC?
Last edited by Rock Anthony; 07-12-11 at 01:47 AM.
Somebody, two words; conditional acceptance
Then if you need case law, you need to go to the law library.
Also if it means that much to ya, take it to court, but make sure to suffer the injury first.
In my opinion, you'll waste your time, but hey I can't fault someone for fighting for their beliefs.
I know you aren't listening. I understand your mind is made up and unable to take in substantive information.Originally Posted by somebody
"You can't get both benefits and rights" is not what I typed. If you are going to cite me, at least cite me verbatim.
If you cite like the above in documents, expect to be shot down quickly.
I'm not blocking anyone from posting.
This hardly qualifies as a proper sentence let alone a substantive inquiry.Originally Posted by somebody
Persons who desire welfare benefits aren't typically sojourners to a board such as this.
Last edited by shikamaru; 07-12-11 at 01:23 PM.
I am not interested in your opinion - that's why I asked for other people to weigh in.
I am not listening to you - on this thread yes, that is why I asked for you not to respond any more. But I am listening to everyone else who responded.
WOW! This is why I cannot listen to anything you say. This is what you stated earlier on this thread:
This concretely proves that you do no know what you are talking about when you post on this thread.
Moreover my cite above was not intended to be a cite as one usually cites in a document prepared for legal purposes. This is a forum - not a legal document. Anyone with even a 6th grade education can see that what I said you said and what you actually said is almost the same and is absolutely the same considering the purpose.
You not seeing this clearly is why I do not want to hear from you anymore. How many more times do I need to say this.
I didn't say you were.
1. Did you do an investigation into this or is this yet another one of your opinions? This is rhetorical - don't bother answering.
2. Hardly anything discussed on this board is "typical" when it comes to dealing with the issues that face truly freedom loving people out there.
3. Food Stamps are not considered welfare benefits.
Finally, please do not post on this thread anymore as you are cluttering it with your unneeded opinions, not paying attention to the essence of what is being posted and asked.
Not opinion. There is case law to support the position I am taking and expressing on this thread.
Since you fail to understand the essence of what is shared, I'll keep it to myself.
Only thing it concretely proves is that you are good at twisting words while failing to consider what was offered.Originally Posted by shikamaru
Don't twist my words. If you attorn what I say, you shall be corrected immediately.Originally Posted by somebody
Well then either clarify your position for me or stop responding to my posts.Originally Posted by somebody
Those are your options.
Yep, I've did enough to know that he who accepts the benefit suffers its burden.Originally Posted by somebody
As to #3, you will need to provide me a evidence where it states, "Food stamps are not considered welfare benefits".
Without proof, it is merely an unsubstantiated claim and your opinion.
I conditionally accept your offer provided you provide my evidence "3. Food Stamps are not considered welfare benefits."Originally Posted by somebody
Did you see what I did there? No twisting of your words either. That was verbatim by the way.
Last edited by shikamaru; 07-13-11 at 12:01 AM.