Another example of what I find DU insanity, courtesy of bobbolink:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x3267701Am I the only one who thinks bobbolink is the one who doesn't make sense here? That all some other posters were doing was acknowledging that SOME homeless people DO have drug and alcohol problems, whether those problems caused their homelessness or are a reaction to their homelessness? Is it so wrong to acknowledge this? Does acknowledging this automatically mean that one is tarring ALL homeless people with the brush of drug or alcohol addiction?
I don't think it does. At the same time, I think it's healthy to acknowledge that drug and alcohol problems are part of the issue. Just PART. Not ALL. And for that reason, they need to be addressed. They are not an excuse for dismissing the problem, they are an issue that needs to be addressed to help solve it.
True, the reason people are homeless is because "they don't have homes." Duh. But WHY don't they have homes? The reasons are as varied as the homeless people themselves. Some truly were only a paycheck away from homelessness, and they lost the paycheck. Some of them got kicked out because of drinking or drugs. Some became mentally ill and could no longer hold down a job or pay rent. Some are war veterans who got treated like shit when they came home. Some were victims of natural disasters who got no help when they needed it most, or whose help ran out. Some are people with no family to take them in who are too disabled physically to care for themselves and have no one to pay the bills for their institutionalization. Some, through no fault of their own, can't get jobs that will pay them enough to afford a place to live in.
Is there something so wrong with acknowledging that there are many factors that contribute to homelessness, and yes, with some people alcohol and drugs are an issue? Why does bobbolink find that very idea so personally insulting that he/she got into this lengthy and fruitless argument with people who very patiently tried to explain that they meant no personal insult?
Sometimes my head hurts trying to sort out all the illogic I see before me.