When Employers Say Piss, Americans ask 'How much?'
How Drug Testing Trashed the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution
by Brian Ballard Quass, the Drug War Philosopher
November 8, 2025
Americans roll over and play dead when it comes to drug testing. Not that I can blame them, of course. Drug warriors have blackmailed them into compliance by denying them the right to work in America should they stand up for their Fourth Amendment rights. That said, however, I am disheartened by the lack of pushback against this flagrant violation of American freedoms. Drug testing gives employers the right to trample the Bill of Rights, and most Americans take this in stride.
It's a good job that I am a senior citizen, because I would starve if I were starting out now. I would never urinate for an employer in order to satisfy his or her morbid curiosity about the plant medicines of which I might choose to partake. The only drug test with which I would comply would be one that was limited by law to flagging impairment only. I would literally rather be poor than to give up my right as an American citizen to my freedom from unreasonable search -- and nothing could be more unreasonable than a biochemical fishing expedition inside my very body, as undertaken by a private enterprise, no less!
I think everyone who urinates under such conditions should have the right to see a breakdown of the biochemistry of their employer's urine -- as well as that of the lab techs who are testing the applicant samples, in blithe ignorance of the fact that they are thereby trashing the most basic of American freedoms -- the right to privacy, not just in one's home, for God's sake, but inside one's very body! Drug testing of this kind screams out the words "Unreasonable Search" -- and our courts' failure to recognize this fact shows how far the right wing has taken over American government. These courts do not even seem to know what the word "principle" means.
These are the courts that say, in regard to peyote use, that we do not have a right to religious liberty if we are practicing a religion that was not practiced by our ancestors! See? These guys are just making it up as they go along. They simply use their creative writing skills to invent literally unheard-of "rationales" for ruling against drug use: the more arbitrary the better, because they thereby signal to Americans that the right-wing is in control and doing as it pleases. "Principles?" they cry. "We don't need no stinkin' principles"!
Unfortunately, our thoroughly cowed population seems to agree, otherwise there would be organized pushback against drug testing.
Occasionally, I overhear a conversation that sounds hopeful. Some friends and family members are actually discussing drug testing. But then I realize that their concern is limited to their fear that the ingestion of poppy seeds, as for instance from crackers, might return a false positive for opiate use in some upcoming test. That is a merely selfish concern. Their real concern should be that they are being tested in the first place. (I want to tell them: "That's not YOUR problem! Sue the ---- if they deny you work because you eat crackers! They have no business making hiring decisions based on equivocal data like that!")
But let me do my best to see this from the Drug Warrior's point of view. Let's suppose then that safety does indeed make it necessary for private enterprise to trash our Fourth Amendment rights. Okay. Let's assume that the Founding Fathers really didn't mean it when it came to the Bill of Rights. Fine.
In that case, let us begin searching for alcohol in our tests, a drug which kills 178,000 Americans a year, far more than are killed by so-called "drugs." 1 If we find so much as a trace of liquor, let us deny the culprit the ability to work in America. Indeed, let's really crack down, because we need to be SAFE, don't we?! We owe this to our KIDS!! Let us confiscate mansions and estates whenever so much as a beer bottle is found on the premises -- and who cares where it came from! (Don't you hate these topers that hide behind technicalities! Well, no more!) Instead of throwing mothers out of public housing for using a drug that Freud considered to be a godsend for depression, let us start throwing CEOs out of boardrooms if they test positive for having consumed deadly alcohol -- now or at any time in the past, it does not matter when! We're doing this for our children, remember? Tough love, folks! Tough love! 2
But somehow I fear that our Drug Warriors are not quite THAT interested in safety. They are thinking of policies that would serve to rough up their political opposition, not policies whose consequences would hit home for them personally.
And so I conclude as follows:
Until acne-scarred lab techs start testing the urine of Drug Warriors for liquor consumption (that may have taken place at any time in the past, I don't care when), I'll keep my zipper up, thank you very much. And that goes for you Lowe's... and you, Amazon... and you, Costco, etc.
Someday a free people are going to rise up and shame such drug-testing companies for helping to trash the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
The DEA has done everything it can to keep Americans clueless about opium and poppies. The agency is a disgrace to a country that claims to value knowledge and freedom of information.
Check out the 2021 article in Forbes in which a materialist doctor professes to doubt whether laughing gas could help the depressed. Materialists are committed to seeing the world from the POV of Spock from Star Trek.
There are neither "drugs" nor "meds" as those terms are used today. All substances have potential good uses and bad uses. The terms as used today carry value judgements, as in meds good, drugs bad.
What bothers me about AI is that everyone's so excited to see what computers can do, while no one's excited to see what the human mind can do, since we refuse to improve it with mind-enhancing drugs.
Drugs that sharpen the mind should be thoroughly investigated for their potential to help dementia victims. Instead, we prefer to demonize these drugs as useless. That's anti-scientific and anti-patient.
Americans heap hypocritical praise on Walt Whitman. What they don't realize is that many of us could be "Walt Whitman for a Day" with the wise use of psychoactive drugs. To the properly predisposed, morphine gives a DEEP appreciation of Mother Nature.
It's "convenient" for scientists that their "REAL" cures happen to be the ones that racist politicians will allow. Scientists thus normalize prohibition by pretending that outlawed substances have no therapeutic value. It's materialism collaborating with the drug war.
The Partnership for a Drug Free America should be put on trial for having blatantly lied to Americans in the 1980s about drugs, and using our taxpayer money to do so!
That's the problem with prohibition. It is not ultimately a health question but a question about priorities and sensibilities -- and those topics are open to lively debate and should not be the province of science, especially when natural law itself says mother nature is ours.
Healthline posted an article in 2021 about the benefits of getting off of antidepressants. They did not even mention the biggest benefit: NO LONGER BEING AN ETERNAL PATIENT -- no longer being a child in the eyes of an all-knowing healthcare system.
But let me do my best to see this from the Drug Warrior's point of view. Let's suppose then that safety does indeed make it necessary for private enterprise to trash our Fourth Amendment rights. Okay. Let's assume that the Founding Fathers really didn't mean it when it came to the Bill of Rights. Fine.
The DEA has done everything it can to keep Americans clueless about opium and poppies. The agency is a disgrace to a country that claims to value knowledge and freedom of information.
