Objections to Fingerprinting at Governmnet Offices

[EZrhythm]

Somebody, two words; conditional acceptance

[shikamaru]

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.

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 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.

I know you aren't listening. I understand your mind is made up and unable to take in substantive information.
"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.

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?

This hardly qualifies as a proper sentence let alone a substantive inquiry.

Persons who desire welfare benefits aren't typically sojourners to a board such as this.

[somebody]

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 am not interested in your opinion - that's why I asked for other people to weigh in.

I know you aren't listening. I understand your mind is made up and unable to take in substantive information.

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.

"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.

WOW! This is why I cannot listen to anything you say. This is what you stated earlier on this thread:

You need to make a choice: benefits or rights. You can have one or the other, but not both.

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'm not blocking anyone from posting.

I didn't say you were.

Persons who desire welfare benefits aren't typically sojourners to a board such as this.

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.

[somebody]

Somebody, two words; conditional acceptance

EZ, good to see you man. Can you please expound on this.

[shikamaru]

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.

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.

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.

Only thing it concretely proves is that you are good at twisting words while failing to consider what was offered.

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.

Don't twist my words. If you attorn what I say, you shall be corrected immediately.

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.

Well then either clarify your position for me or stop responding to my posts.
Those are your options.

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.

Yep, I've did enough to know that he who accepts the benefit suffers its burden.

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.

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.

I conditionally accept your offer provided you provide my evidence "3. Food Stamps are not considered welfare benefits."
Did you see what I did there? No twisting of your words either. That was verbatim by the way.

[shikamaru]

Refute this if you can:

WELFARE

The welfare system in the United States began in the 1930s, during the Great Depression. After the Great Society legislation of the 1960s, for the first time a person who was not elderly or disabled could receive a living from the American government.[18] Aid could include general welfare payments, health care through Medicaid, food stamps, special payments for pregnant women and young mothers, and federal and state housing benefits.[18] In 1968, 4.1% of families were headed by a woman on welfare; by 1980, the percentage increased to 10%.[18] In the 1970s, California was the U.S. state with the most generous welfare system.[19] Virtually all food stamp costs are paid by the federal government.[20] In 2008, 28.7 percent of the households headed by single women were considered poor.[21]

Welfare Information

Types of Welfare Available

The type and amount of aid available to individuals and dependent children varies from state to state. When the Federal Government gave control back to the states there was no longer one source and one set of requirements. Most states offer basic aid such as health care, food stamps, child care assistance, unemployment, cash aid, and housing assistance.

Welfare - A Brief History of Welfare Reform

During the 1960s President LYNDON B. JOHNSON's administration declared an ostensible "war on poverty" with its GREAT SOCIETY programs: Head Start, the Job Corps, food stamps, and MEDICAID funded education, job training, direct food assistance, and direct medical assistance. Although the poverty rate declined in the 1960s, more than 4 million new recipients signed up for welfare.

2002 Indicators of WELFARE dependence

And what does that government report talk about? Could it be the Food Stamp program?

If you are unable to grasp that food stamps are apart of welfare, you may want to forgo failing to provide fingerprints until you can get to square 1.

While you are on this fingerprint kick why not throw in failing to provide an SSN for good measure?

[somebody]

[shikamaru]

You can't refute my posts.
You can't support your claims.

I can't reason with one lacking reason.

Good luck, son.