Re: Welcome to 12-step-free

October 9, 2000

Dave, you are welcome...it really bothered me to see you trying to be

helpful by providing a synopsis of the ills of *A philosophy, only to

be, in effect, 'slapped in the face'. This is never ok, and you are

right, I think, that the main page of this list does make it clear

that no one here supports 12-step thinking.

If Coolguy sticks around for a while, he might see the support and

camaderie here that I see (mostly from a lurking perspective, I

admit..<grin>). I enjoy reading the posts, and it's like you get to

really know and care for the posters...know what I mean?

Ellen

(> thanks ellen,

> as i m sure ken and tommy, and doug could testify too,

> being insulted and ridiculed for daring to question the steps is par

> for the

> course. i dont know why he was seemingly shocked as to my view

point,

> the

> main page of this list (which he qouted) made it clear he wasnt

going

> to

> hear 12-step pandering on this list.

>

> -- In 12-step-freeegroups, spiriteda1@a... wrote:

> > Dave, Ken, Tommy, and Doug,

> >

> > Thanks for responding to 'Coolguy'. Dave, you used remarkable

self-

> > constraint considering how you were insulted and ridiculed.

> >

> > I was wondering why this character was posting on this list, until

> it

> > hit me: This is an excellent example of cult behavior. Why else

> > would someone venture onto a list whose philosophy speaks for

> itself,

> > and try to 'convert' its members? No one would except someone

who

> > has been cult-brainwashed, and not particularly well, I might

add,

> > judging by the quality of aurguments I heard.

> >

> > Coolguy...I hope you don't think that anyone here is susceptible

to

> > the garbage you are spewing out...unlike you, we are far too

> > intelligent for that.

> >

> > Ellen

> >

> > > i dont know why i bothered to respond to you, you are without

> > > manners, you asked a question and i fairly and without malice

> > > answered it. for this, in your

> > > reply to me, you questioned my sanity, my sobriety, my ability

to

> > > read the word god in steps, and insulted me with 'fuck you " .

just

> > > what i would have expected.

> > >

> > > >

> > > > Hey, sounds good and all, for a sane person. But what about

> > > an active alcoholic? First of all, active alcoholics do not

take

> > > responsibility for themselves,

> > > their actions or their (lack of) sanity.

> > >

> > > they get themselves into AA at some point don't they? they seek

> > > help don't they? they make a choice to stop drinking and so so

at

> > > some point if they are to

> > > get sober don't they? that is taking responsibility. no one ,

> > > absolutely no one get sober without taking responsibility so

> > > themselves.

> > > AA sabotages self responsibility by asking people to turn it

over

> > > to something else.

> > >

> > > >Secondly, they can NOT trust themselves to do what is best for

> > > them.

> > > sez who? you? bill wilson? sounds like what a cult would say to

> > > retain recruits. if i though what you teach, i probably would

go

> > out

> > > and drink. of course

> > > they can trust themselves, assuming they went into AA willingly

> > > or treatment, they obviously were trust worthy enough to do

that

> > > for themselves.

> > > unfortunately once they get there, they are TAUGHT otherwise.

> > > the oxford group, believed anyone who wasn't god controlled

> > > was literally insane and a

> > > public enemy, this is why a god in steps is said to restore us

to

> > > sanity, not because alcoholics ae insane, but because the non

> > > god controlled are insane.

> > >

> > > >Self empowerment is what they need, but they are in no

> > > position to acquire it.

> > > that is AA bullshit. to decide not not to drink and to follow

> thru

> > on

> > > your choice IS self empowerment. only in AA do people like you

> > > teach others they are

> > > incapable of doing that most basic of human actions for

> > > themselves, and thas must strip self responsibly away and

> > > create depend ecny on " higher " forces

> > > to do it for them and take responsibility. AA strips self

> > > empowerment away and self responsibility , and replaces it

> > > worth powerlessness and group/hp

> > > dependency

> > >

> > > It teaches self respect, but it also teaches the required

> > > humility...

> > > and humility is REQUIRED to move from the state of insanity to

> > > the state of sanity that

> > > alcoholics who seek out AA want.

> > > sez who? they seek out AA because they are told its for

> > > alcoholism, hot humility. they often don't seek out aa at all,

> but

> > > are forced into it by courts.

> > >

> > > >f one is not humble but doesn't drink then he is merely dry.

> > > sez who again? everything you say is straight from oxford group

> > > teachings and has NOTHING to do with alcoholism, but more

> > > with they require

> > > suppression of self require for god control. why are you here

> > > again?

> > >

> > > >An active alcoholic doesn't know anything about these things

> > > and is very unlikely to refrain from drinking without the help

of

> > > others, which is the main

> > > focus of AA.

> > >

> > > funny, aa has no more success than no treatment all. there is

no

> > > a single study which can demonstrate aa is more effective than

> > > non treatment. nor do other

> > > sobriety groups share aa's teachings that humility is required,

> or

> > > the fallacy of a dry drunk. these are concepts which are unique

> to

> > > AA dogma.

> > > AA as you have shown, is not self help, its self helplessness.

> > >

> > > >Politics and squabbling aren't what AA, recovery or life is

all

> > > about. Helping others and the self is what its about.

> > > >by teaching them they are powerless, diseased, ego maniacs,

> > > insane and incapable of staying sane with aa's " spirituality

is

> > > help, no thank you.

> > >

> > > >If the tenants of AA are mistranslated, then argue with that,

> and

> > > if those tenants are wrong, then point that out too, but don't

> make

> > > things up.

> > >

> > > what exactly did i make up? what part of this quote did i

> > > mistranslate?

> > >

> > > " Divine Aid was A.A.'s greatest asset... "

> > > An alcoholic is a fellow who is " trying to get his religion out

> of

> > a

> > > bottle, " when what he really wants is unity within himself,

unity

> > > with God. . . . "

> > > " There is a definite religious element here, -Bill :

> > >

> > > " Read religious literature. Resume church attendance, cultivate

> > > the habit of prayer, and transmit the desires and principles of

> > > Alcoholics Anonymous to others. " The paper added: " He

> > > particularly recommended reading the Bible. " -Dr. Bob:

> > >

> > > LIVING CREATOR GOD:

> > > from " There is a Solution "

> > > " it means that all of us, whatever our race, creed, or

> > > color are the children of a living Creator with whom we may

form

> > > a relationship upon simple and understandable terms as soon

> > > as we are willing and

> > > honest enough to try. "

> > >

> > > >Turning it over means giving up control - becoming dependent

> > > on others (and God if you swing that way) until you are capable

> of

> > > being dependent on

> > > >yourself. If you want to place your life in the hands of an

> > active

> > > alcoholic, go for it.

> > >

> > > i don't need to place my life in anyone's hands. you are one

> > > making things up. where does it say anywhere about " becoming

> > > dependent on others " or

> > > turning your will over to an individual and not god, or some

> > > Higher Power or Creator in big book? exactly where?

> > >

> > > > >the steps have nothing, i repeat nothing, to do with

> > > alcoholism.

> > > > >they are formula for religious conversion at the beginning

and

> > > > >they still are 60 years later.

> > > >

> > > > You seem too adamant about all of this. Have you sought

> > > professional help?

> > >

> > > this is not worth responding to, why are you on this list

again.

> > > you asked me a question and answered fairly, and for this you

> > > insult me? i have no

> > > interest in reading anything else you may write to me. of

course

> > > im adamant, im speaking the truth. how many times is alcohol

> > > mentioned in steps? how

> > > many times is god? have you sought a reading comprehension

> > > class?

> > >

> > > >We can just split hairs here if you want.

> > > i have no need to split anything, the steps speak for

themselves.

> > > they are clearly a formula for religious conversion

> > >

> > > >Why say something so absolute, and thus so ridiculous? The

> > > steps have a whole lot to do with alcoholism.

> > > where in steps does it say, we decided to stop drinking? where

> > > does it say " Made a decision to turn our will and our lives

over

> > to

> > > the care of God " ?

> > > your one is is ridiculous. your arguments may work on a fresh

> > > and desperate drunk, but not someone capable of clear thinking.

> > >

> > > >First and foremost, lest you forget, they are merely

suggestions.

> > > they are what they are. suggestions, orders, whatever, they are

a

> > > formula for conversion. calling the " suggestions " doesn't

change

> > > that fact. they aren't

> > > called the " 12 suggestions " . if they are suggestions, then it

> also

> > > must be a suggestion that to not flow them leads to jails,

> > > institutions and death.

> > >

> > > >The first step pertains to almost any person with any

disorder,

> > > addiction etc.

> > > once again, teaching powerlessness is counter productive,

> > > unless of course you need to be powerless in order for god to

> > > take control

> > >

> > > >The following steps are not religious as religion must have

> > > some type of deity.

> > > Buddhism doesn't have a deity. Buddha was a philosopher, not

> > > a god. and they clearly have a deity, God.

> > >

> > > >The steps are a formula for success...

> > > in your opinion. you haven't offered anything from bill

> > > which refutes what i have said or quoted

> > >

> > > not even original thoughts of Dr >Bob or Bill W - these steps

> > > were taken from various forms of what we now call self help (it

> > > was not so common, but it

> > > >was starting out). These were >steps that these guys found to

> > > work, on themselves and a hell of a lot of other people!

> > >

> > > you dont even know your own history of AA. they come from not

> > > various forms of self help, but from the Oxford group and bible.

> > >

> > > " The specific Biblical ideas taken from these sources were

later

> > > embodied in A.A.'s basic text Alcoholics Anonymous, in its

> > > Twelve Steps, and in its

> > > Fellowship. Those six sources were (1) The Bible. (2) Quiet

> > > Time and the daily devotionals. (3) The teachings of the

> > > Reverend M. Shoemaker,

> > > Jr.. (4) The life-changing program of the Oxford Group. (5) The

> > > details recorded by Co-founder Dr. Bob's wife in Anne 's

> > > Journal, 1933-1939. (6)

> > > The Christian literature early AAs read for spiritual growth "

> > > source:http://www.dickb.com/

> > >

> > > they also hurt a hell of allot of people, namley the ones who

> > > couldn't buy into AA's religious teachings, and who were told

> > > they should go back out and

> > > come back in when they were ready.

> > >

> > > >

> > > > >for the formula to work (work ,meaning turning your will over

> to

> > > > >god or other supposed " higher being " ) you have to create the

> > > need.

> > >

> > > >

> > > > Millions of alcoholics who could/can not stop drinking

alone

> > > was/is the need.

> > >

> > > no, they all stopped drinking on their own, unless of course

you

> > > believe god, santa Claus or ashtrays literally stopped them

from

> > > picking up. the need was

> > > bill wilson need to proselytize.

> > >

> > > >

> > > > >if i believe in myself to " restore " my sanity, there is no

need

> > > for

> > > god.

> > > >

> > > > That sounds great, too, but a number of people will tell

you

> > > they were unable to " restore " their sanity without outside

> help...

> > > AA is indeed a good place

> > > to go for that help. Keep believing in yourself, I have no

> reason

> > to

> > > disbelieve that you can do it alone, but I don't see your

purpose

> > > in continuing to

> > > fashion falsehoods about a program that helps people!

> > > >

> > >

> > > what have i said or quoted which is false? i said it was

> religious.

> > > bill wilson said it was religious. was he being false when he

> > > said There is a definite

> > > religious element here, " ?

> > >

> > > >

> > > > >No need

> > > > >for god!? that blasphemy!

> > > >

> > > > In some parts of the world there is " good AA " and other

> parts

> > > just have AA. I have excused myself from anything that I did

not

> > > consider good AA. I

> > > have never heard anyone act that way towards an agnostic at a

> > > good AA group, or even a bad one for that matter.

> > >

> > > i was being dramatic rather than literal, sorry if i was

unclear.

> > but

> > > the truth of what i wrote comes through in your arguments.

> > > perhaps if i said " no need

> > > for steps or higher power!?!? that blasphemy! " you would have

> > > understood.

> > >

> > > >

> > > > >so to create the need, you have to

> > > > believe the you are

> > > > >powerless,

> > > > Are you sober? Are you drinking? If your sober (and an

> > > alcoholic), how can you not admit that, for a time, you were

> > > powerless over alcohol? If you

> > > > are an alcoholic, and if you drink, you are powerless over

it -

> > > thats what an alcoholic is - someone who is powerless over

> > > alcohol! What is your >

> > > definition? If you don't believe you are powerless, then what

do

> > > you believe you are?

> > >

> > > once again, you insult me. every alcoholic who quits drinking,

> > > every alcoholic, choose to stop drinking and does so. nothing

> > > powerless about that fits any

> > > definition of powerless i have ever seen.

> > > every human being has the control of what they put into their

> > > bodies, its matter if they have motivation to change their

> > > behavior.

> > >

> > > the only reason word powerless is even used, is to justify god

> > > control. there is no need for god control is you are not

> powerless.

> > > the oxford group taught

> > > this as a path towards god control and AA 12-steps copied

> > > oxford group teachings

> > >

> > > >

> > > > >you have to believe you are incurable. you have to

> > > >

> > > > Do you believe you differently? I believe alcholism is

> > > terminal. I have been sober enough and alive enough to see

> > > that alcoholic people remain

> > > alcoholic. If you want to be the guinea pig who proves

> > differently,

> > > then by all means, go for it.

> > >

> > > i stopped being alcoholic when i stopped drinking. no doctor on

> > > planet ,if they were to examine me could say, " your an

alcoholic "

> > > because i stopped being

> > > " alcoholic " when i was no longer chemically or emotionally

> > > dependent upon alcohol. AA biggest lie was to convince million

> > > of people they we incurable

> > > to perpetually justify their continued membership and

practicing

> > > of steps. my name is dave, im a sober human being. i WAS an

> > > alcoholic.

> > >

> > > > >believe without the god belief system you will die.

> > > >

> > > > Where do you get this? I am still agnostic, although AA

got

> > > me sober. I don't spout off about how horrible it is. It

helped

> > me

> > > get sober, and fuck

> > > you, I am grateful for it.

> > >

> > > once gain, you viciously insult me. why? i wasn't attacking

your

> > > beliefs, only stating mine, and for this you say " fuck you " to

me?

> > >

> > > >

> > > > >the steps

> > > > >accomplish that fairly well. if

> > > > >its wasn't attended to be about god, why was he put in steps

> > > to

> > > > >begin with?

> > > >

> > > > HE WASN'T - CAN'T YOU READ? MAYBE YOU OUGHT TO GO

> > > TO AN AA MEETING - THEY WILL READ IT TO YOU.

> > >

> > > i can read, but im not sure you can. my question was, if it

> wasn't

> > > about god, why was god in steps to begin with. lets count out

> > > how many times God is

> > > referred to, shall we?

> > >

> > > AA's 12 STEPS

> > > 1.

> > > We admitted we were powerless over alcohol -- that our

lives

> > > had become unmanageable.

> > > 2.

> > > Came to believe that a Power greater than ourselves could

> > > restore us to sanity.

> > > 3.

> > > Made a decision to turn our will and our lives over to the

> care

> > > of

> > > God as we understood Him.

> > > 4.

> > > Made a searching and fearless moral inventory of ourselves.

> > > 5.

> > > Admitted to God, to ourselves, and to another human being

the

> > > exact nature of our wrongs.

> > > 6.

> > > Were entirely ready to have God remove all these defects of

> > > character.

> > > 7.

> > > Humbly asked Him to remove our shortcomings.

> > > 8.

> > > Made a list of all persons we had harmed, and became

willing

> > > to make amends to them all.

> > > 9.

> > > Made direct amends to such people wherever possible, except

> > > when to do so would injure them or others.

> > > 10.

> > > Continued to take personal inventory and when we were

> > > wrong promptly admitted it.

> > > 11.

> > > Sought through prayer and meditation to improve our

> > > conscious contact with God as we understood Him, praying only

> > > for knowledge

> > > of His will for us and the power to carry that out.

> > >

> > > 12.

> > > Having had a spiritual awakening as the result of these

> steps,

> > > we tried to carry this message to alcoholics, and to practice

> > > these principles in all our affairs.

> > >

> > > >

> > > > You can't have it both ways.

> > > > You keep mentioning the steps saying all these things that

> > > they do not say. Yes, Bill W and Dr Bob were both " believers "

> (in

> > > God) but they made a lot

> > > > of allowances for people who did not and would not accept a

> > > God. Your saying that AA forces religion is bullshit, and

unless

> > > you can come up with > >

> > > > some good support for your arguments, I am going to killfile

> > > you.

> > >

> > > killfile me? be my guest and save me trouble doing it to you. i

> > > dont feelliek being atatced for answering questions. my

> > > arguments are clear, yours are a

> > > struggle against the english language.

> > >

> > > > As Bill W is a believer, and a prolific writer, I am not at

all

> > > surprised that you can find lots of examples where he mentions

> > > God.

> > >

> > > i can hardly find any which he DOESN'T

> > >

> > > >But that doesn't have anything to do with your curreent

> > > argument - AA doesn't force God on people... AA doesn't force

> > > anything on people..

> > >

> > > tell that to peopl who are court ordered. tell that to people

who

> > > are told they will destrory themselves with out AA and the

> steps.

> > > AA preys upon people in

> > > the most vulnerable places in their lives in order to use it as

> an

> > > opportunity to inject thier god control belief sytems.

> > >

> > > >indubitably individuals attempt to force all kinds of things

on

> > > others. For example you are trying to force the idea that AA

is

> > this

> > > horrible cult, and I am

> > > >trying to force some reason into your noggin. I wish you

would

> > > calm down and try to say whatever it is you mean to say without

> > > all the anger and

> > > >resentment. And if you mean to say that AA is a horrible

cult,

> > > please tell me why you have such an absurd idea.

> > >

> > > i just did. twice.look up word of cult in dictionary. ah hell,

> here

> > > ya

> > > go

> > > cult (klt)

> > > n.

> > >

> > > 1.

> > > a. A religion or religious sect generally considered to be

> > > extremist or false, with its followers often living in an

> > > unconventional manner under the guidance

> > > of an authoritarian, charismatic leader.

> > > b. The followers of such a religion or sect.

> > > 2. A system or community of religious worship and ritual.

> > > 3. The formal means of expressing religious reverence;

religious

> > > ceremony and ritual.

> > > 4. A usually nonscientific method or regimen claimed by its

> > > originator to have exclusive or exceptional power in curing a

> > > particular disease.

> > > 5.

> > > a. Obsessive, especially faddish, devotion to or veneration for

a

> > > person, principle, or thing.

> > > b. The object of such devotion.

> > > 6. An exclusive group of persons sharing an esoteric, usually

> > > artistic or intellectual interest.

> > >

> > > you wish i would calm down? who are yu kidding? my awnser to

> > > your question was wriiten with the utermost scincerity. i wss

> > > angry. your one who has

> > > been angry and resentful. my word, what a world you live in. yo

> > > insult my intelligence, my sanity, my reading ability and you

> said

> > > fuck you to boot!

> > >

> > > >

> > > > It sounds like you suffered some sort of trauma at the

hands

> > > of some AA people?? Thanks for answering my question, now

> > > that I read your whole

> > > post I guess you were talking to me.

> > >

> > > so did you decide to insult me before or after you read whole

> > > thing?

> > >

> > > > I have thought about going and picking up a 1 year chip but I

> > > haven't yet. I still haven't decided if I am going to. I have

my

> > > own

> > > reasons for not going >

> > > to meetings. I hope you don't think I have been defending AA

in

> > > this reply; I have been defending reality - meaning I believe

you

> > > are making things up -

> > >

> > > nothing i wrote was " making things up " . maybe you should read

> > > up on aa hsitory and oxford group before you claim that. i

> offered

> > > as evidence the

> > > words of bill wilson , dr. bob, the 12-steps and big book to

> > > support my argument. you offered no eviidence, denied the

> > > evident use of god in steps and

> > > were insulting.

October 9, 2000

At 08:30 PM 10/9/00 -0400, you wrote:

> Which would you prefer - being forced to attend AA or going to jail?

Most people given the bogus choice will choose to attend AA. That

is, after all, the point. It's coercing people into exposure to AA, with

its nonstop dogma and brainwashing tactics. Some people aren't

given even the illusion of choice, and are openly forced.

In the long run, such people would generally be better off going

to jail. Jail can be traumatic, but it doesn't damage the psyche

in the same insidious way that brainwashing does.

>Oh I feel lots of pity for people getting sentenced to AA meetings. Sob

>sob. They might be ordered to go to the meetings, but no judge can force

>any thought or belief on anyone.

I feel sympathy and a good deal of concern for such people.

Exposure to AA can be extremely damaging to the young and

impressionable, and even mature adults can find themselves

injured and shaken after sufficient forced exposure.

How many people have the " disease " and " powerlessness "

lies burned into their subconscious, even while consciously

resisting the blandishments to convert to AA? These

people have been deeply harmed by the implanted belief

that they are somehow defective and not able to control

themselves as normal people do. It's no surprise that

so many people start drinking *more* heavily after exposure

to AA.

Brainwashing is very difficult to resist when one is not free to

walk away from it. How many can go through such an experience

entirely unscathed?

Forced or coerced AA is a travesty and a tragedy. It's just

as immoral as forced Methodism, and a lot more harmful.

October 9, 2000

coolguy wrote:

> I don't give a rat's ass. Like I told you AA helped me. And I am

> not nearly as naive as you think I am. I don't know as much about AA

> as you, and I am happy with that ignorance.

> <---snip--->

>

> If you don't get over it I will do it some more. I didn't realize

> you were so sensitive. I should have known since you can really dish

> it out.

Coolguy,

You say you are happy with your ignorance. You say you will insult

listmembers more. This being the case, what in the world are you doing

here?

Did you miss the title of the list? Did you miss the introduction?

What is your purpose?

Do you not gather that your handle, " coolguy " seems a gross misnomer

here?

Ken Ragge

list manager

October 10, 2000

lol

Or a screwdriver at a white sale.

The answer's pretty simple I think. The kind of person that would do that

would be the kind of person that would buy a screwdriver and despite all

evidence to the contrary call it a blanket, sleep with it every night and

claim this obviously proves his/her point as blankets are made for sleeping

with ergo it's a blanket so: " You can say what you want. What I've got here

is a blanket. Who cares if you can screw something with it? If I ain't using

it for that it aint a screwdriver. Sure the salesman may have " called " it a

blanket (wink wink) but we all know he was probably high when he said that.

duh! Get a grip. Hello! I've been sleeping with this blanket for years

over here. Blanket! Hello! "

lol

> Re: Re: Re: Welcome to 12-step-free

> Third... what on earth did you *expect* when you joined a mail list called

> " 12-step free " ? Friends of Bill W.? Who on earth in their right

> mind would

> go shopping for a down comforter in a hardware store?

>

> azure

October 10, 2000

if thats what he thought about my original reply from sunday, he

is sorely, and willfuly mistaken. my post may have been

opinionated, but hardly " hateful " or with " malice " . to suggest that

i would have such feelings for a total stranger who posts a query

in this newsgroup is self serving character assasination.

> >

> > Malice... every inch of your initial reply

> > was coated with malice. Maybe if you weren't so

> > hateful you would know that. I am snipping a lot

> > of this since it just does not matter.

> >

> > I think I will take a reading comprehension class, as you

> > request, before I read any more from you... perhaps it will

> > help me to see the point amongst your hostility. The only

> > point I am getting from you is that you hate AA.

>

> This is hilarious. First of all, *you* are the one who started the

> name-calling and escalation of hostility. The people you are

talking with

> were polite until you started the profanity and ad hominems.

Second, if the

> " only " point you are getting is that someone " hates AA, " you

obviously

> aren't listening. The type of talking we're doing here is called

" debating "

> and you bring up " points " and try to meet the other side's points

with

> opposing points of your own. That's how it's done. You use

things called

> " facts " rather than diatribe and polemics. If you do not use any

" facts, "

> people will suspect that you don't have any " facts " on your side.

>

> Third... what on earth did you *expect* when you joined a mail

list called

> " 12-step free " ? Friends of Bill W.? Who on earth in their right

mind would

> go shopping for a down comforter in a hardware store?

>

> azure

October 10, 2000

that reminds me of that monty python sketch with the dead

parrot.

>

> lol

>

> Or a screwdriver at a white sale.

>

> The answer's pretty simple I think. The kind of person that

would do that

> would be the kind of person that would buy a screwdriver and

despite all

> evidence to the contrary call it a blanket, sleep with it every

night and

> claim this obviously proves his/her point as blankets are made

for sleeping

> with ergo it's a blanket so: " You can say what you want. What

I've got here

> is a blanket. Who cares if you can screw something with it? If I

ain't using

> it for that it aint a screwdriver. Sure the salesman may have

" called " it a

> blanket (wink wink) but we all know he was probably high

when he said that.

> duh! Get a grip. Hello! I've been sleeping with this blanket for

years

> over here. Blanket! Hello! "

>

> lol

>

> > Re: Re: Re: Welcome to 12-step-free

>

> > Third... what on earth did you *expect* when you joined a mail

list called

> > " 12-step free " ? Friends of Bill W.? Who on earth in their right

> > mind would

> > go shopping for a down comforter in a hardware store?

> >

> > azure

October 10, 2000

Glad you got the point even though I ran one to many blankets in there.

> Re: Welcome to 12-step-free

>

> that reminds me of that monty python sketch with the dead

> parrot.

>

October 10, 2000

-COOLGUY>>........ Please do get a life before they take what very

little is left of your ability to find your own truth!!!!I sounded

just like you about 2 years ago. I am still 16 1/2 years sober and I

am so happy that I finally got my life back!!!! You must be a new

convert and still walking in fear. I am sorry for you if you cant

follow your inner voice that steers you away from people who are

trying to make you a sheep.

Braiden

-- In 12-step-freeegroups, " coolguy " <fanniecat@h...> wrote:

> My apologies Doug

>

> Re: Welcome to 12-step-free

> >

> > for the formula to work (work ,meaning turning your will over

to

> > god or other supposed " higher being " ) you have to create the

> > need. if i believe in

> > myself to " restore " my sanity, there is no need for god. No

need

> > for god!? that blasphemy! so to create the need, you have to

> > believe the you are

> > powerless, you have to believe you are incurable. you have to

> > believe without the god belief system you will die. the steps

> > accomplish that fairly well. if

> > its wasn't attended to be about god, why was he put in steps

to

> > begin with?

> >

> > AA likes to claim its " spiritual not religious " because you

can

> > " make anything your hp " , as if this alone make sit a non

religious

> > belief system they are proposing.

> >

> > these quote from bill seem to cast doubt on that

> > revisionist history of AA:

> >

> > Bill and Dr. Bob

> > Shrine Auditorium in Los Angeles in March, 1943

> >

> > Bill :

> > " Divine Aid was A.A.'s greatest asset... "

> > An alcoholic is a fellow who is " trying to get his religion

out of a

> > bottle, " when what he really wants is unity within himself,

unity

> > with God. . . . "

> > " There is a definite religious element here,

> >

> > Dr. Bob:

> > " Read religious literature. Resume church attendance,

cultivate

> > the habit of prayer, and transmit the desires and principles

of

> > Alcoholics Anonymous to others. " The paper added: " He

> > particularly recommended reading the Bible. "

> >

> > LIVING CREATOR GOD:

> > from " There is a Solution "

> > " it means that all of us, whatever our race, creed, or

> > color are the children of a living Creator with whom we may

form

> > a relationship upon simple and understandable terms as soon

> > as we are willing and honest enough to try. "

> > ------

> >

> > hmmm. seems no mater how willing and honest i am, a door

> > knob and ash tray aren't my " living creator "

> >

> > suppose we were talking about a religious sect of snake

> > handlers, and they claimed by handling the snake, you would

> > have the power of the snake god to

> > " restore your sanity " . but i tell them don't like snake

handling,

> > its

> > a religious belief and has nothing to do with my alcoholism.

they

> > tell me to pretend the

> > snake is anything i want, just as long as i continue to

handle the

> > snake and belief it will restore my sanity. if i do so, is it

any

> > less a

> > religious act on my

> > part? am i not being told to make a leap of faith in the

snake, and

> > to believe my " restored " sanity is creditable to the snake?

> >

> > if i fail to remain sober, i will be told the " program is

perfect'

> > and

> > that i must not have been handling the snake right. im also

told

> > that to stray away from

> > the snake , would mean facing institutions, jails or death.

that the

> > only way i could keep what i got, to keep my sanity was to

> > continue to cary the message

> > of the snake.

> >

> > do you think many people would think that what i just

described

> > wasnt a religious cult, but a " spiritual " fellowship? do you

think

> > the supreme court

> > would let that be taught in public schools? do you think the

> > christian coalition would like that? why wouldnt they if it

was only

> > " spirtual " and not

> > relgious?

> >

> > to answer your question, what comes after AA is to start

thinking

> > for yourself agian, as opposed to being fed what to think.

> >

>

______________________________________________________________________

___

> Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at

http://www.hotmail.com.

>

> Share information about yourself, create your own public profile

at

> http://profiles.msn.com.

October 10, 2000

Dear Pete

Yes. I forgot that -- the old electric soup in the dark blue can. Always

preferred Carlsberg Special myself, though rarely exceeded one can.

As it is unlikely that coolguy was alluding to this beverage, we'll just

have to take him at face value as testimony to the need among many XAs to

include a degree of illitarecay among their defects of character,

Yours,

D.

>From: watts_pete@...

>Reply-To: 12-step-freeegroups

>To: 12-step-freeegroups

>Subject: Re: Welcome to 12-step-free

>Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 00:20:17 -0000

>

> > Hey -- you must be one of them " tenants of AA " . Haven't paid any

>rent there myself for 13 years -- don't like bent landlords. Tenets,

>schmenets ...

>

>Hey

>

>Our friends abroad may not know that over here we have an extra strong

>lager called " Tenants Extra " . Brewed specifically for diseased

>AAs, perhaps?

>

>P.

>

_________________________________________________________________________

Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at

http://profiles.msn.com.

October 10, 2000

Yes -- " tenement of AA " = a conceptual structure densely inhabited by hordes

of erroneous beliefs, half-truths, lies, distortions of fact, and similar

members of the tribe of XA " ideas "

D.

>

>Reply-To: 12-step-freeegroups

>To: <12-step-freeegroups>

>Subject: Re: Re: Welcome to 12-step-free

>Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 00:31:21 -0500

>

> >

> > > Hey -- you must be one of them " tenants of AA " .

>

>Tenements of AA?

>

>azure

>

_________________________________________________________________________

Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at

http://profiles.msn.com.

October 10, 2000

In a message dated 10/10/00 9:16:14 AM, " coolguy "

writes:

(snipped)

>

And then you say... " the real world is not so narrow, so black and white. "

> Well nothing is, but you paint AA with an absolute brush... there were

>only four absolutes that I can remember...

hmmm...

coolguy, who claims less than a year of AA involvement and presents with a

blank as far as knowledge of Oxford group history, lets slip that he is

familiar with the four absolutes.

very interesting.

best wishes,

-A

adgagne@...

" if they give you lined paper, write the other way "

- juan ramon jimenez

October 10, 2000

Azure, you totally hit the nail on the head. Coolguy's initial

question was, if you don't do the steps, what do you do? People

started responding (me among them) as though it was a sincere

question. Then coolguy responded with defensive hostility, and THEN

started the " poor little me, everyone is arguing with me but I didn't

do anything wrong " two-step. It happens over and over.

Personally, I think people question *A but they are also afraid that

there is nothing there without the 12 steps. There IS life after *A!

You CAN be 12 step free and it's a good way to be. But you have to

make up your mind: do you buy the 12 steps or not?

judith

> This is hilarious. First of all, *you* are the one who started the

> name-calling and escalation of hostility. The people you are

talking with

> were polite until you started the profanity and ad hominems.

Second, if the

> " only " point you are getting is that someone " hates AA, " you

obviously

> aren't listening. The type of talking we're doing here is called

" debating "

> and you bring up " points " and try to meet the other side's points

with

> opposing points of your own. That's how it's done. You use things

called

> " facts " rather than diatribe and polemics. If you do not use any

" facts, "

> people will suspect that you don't have any " facts " on your side.

>

> Third... what on earth did you *expect* when you joined a mail list

called

> " 12-step free " ? Friends of Bill W.? Who on earth in their right

mind would

> go shopping for a down comforter in a hardware store?

>

> azure

October 10, 2000

" He's not dead, he's pinin' for the fjords. "

judith

> that reminds me of that monty python sketch with the dead

> parrot.

October 10, 2000

Nice catch A...!!!

Ellen

>

> In a message dated 10/10/00 9:16:14 AM, " coolguy " <fanniecat@h...>

> writes:

>

> (snipped)

> >

> And then you say... " the real world is not so narrow, so black and

white. "

> > Well nothing is, but you paint AA with an absolute brush... there

were

> >only four absolutes that I can remember...

>

> hmmm...

> coolguy, who claims less than a year of AA involvement and presents

with a

> blank as far as knowledge of Oxford group history, lets slip that

he is

> familiar with the four absolutes.

> very interesting.

>

> best wishes,

> -A

> adgagne@a...

>

> " if they give you lined paper, write the other way "

> - juan ramon jimenez

October 10, 2000

> -----Original Message-----

> From: Ken

>> From Cool Guy.

>> 1 - they are only aiding in the destruction of millions - you can lead

>> a horse to water; you can't make it drink... in the same way they

>> aren't forcing people to drink their poison - people are choosing to. I

>> believe more people have left the Catholic church after coming to AA

>> than have joined the Catholic church thanks to AA.

>

> When I've said similar things about AA supplanting other religions (I

> think you are correct) I've been called a liar by the groupers. But

> then the truth for groupers seems to be whatever suits their argument at

> the moment.

It's funny he's personally been witness to the conversion of Catholics but

still prefers to think of AA as compatible with any religious faith.

That last sentence is what drew me back to this message to make a response.

Not so long ago I was grasping for a way to to say what you put so well

there.

Is it me or have I noted a tendency, lately, for AA's to cast off the

rantings of Bill W by saying that he wasn't really representative of AA or

that he was just one man and that the organization has grown larger and

beyond that position and immediately, on the flip side, argue that AA should

not be held accountable because some people don't follow it's tenants?

These being the very tenants Bill W went to such great lengths to publish

and expound endlessly upon in speeches. Apparently they don't see the

duplicity in their position.

The real point I'm attempting to make here. I have a real problem with

allowing people on this list who say they're questioning the dogma or the

program of AA and yet with almost every other word their defending it

vigorously. It's not my desire that this list turns into a stepper training

ground where steppers go to learn how to debate " the anti-step people " I

don't wish to imply, by any means, that this is or should be some super

secret list but at the same time tolerating pro 12 step discussion from

someone who in all probability will not be leaving the steps serves what

purpose? As far as I can see, from a quick comparison of posting on Usenet

and this list they stay abreast of the current arguments being used here and

spread them to other steppers and we see the stepper counters for them

throughout the various lists like that discard everything Bill W has to say

argument I made mention of before. The thought that I'm doing something to

help train step nazis to counter arguments against AA in the rewms to hurt

other people truly questioning the program really disturbs me.

At what point is enough enough? I personally don't care if they're as

pleasant as a peach when they're spouting 12 step bs because when it comes

down to it they're still spouting 12 step shit. To expand on a sentiment of

someone's post yesterday. What kind of a person comes to a list like this

because they're seriously questioning the program and then promptly proceeds

to spout stepisms and defend AA?

> You wouldn't be the Satanist Nate/Thotahut that was banned from this list

by

> any chance, would you?

Interesting observation here. Let me know if you'd like to compare notes. I

think we might be able to surprise each other.

October 11, 2000

--- In 12-step-freeegroups, " Arroyo " <arroyoh@h...>

quoted:

> > You wouldn't be the Satanist Nate/Thotahut that was banned from

this list by any chance, would you?

I think this very unlikely, unless he has undergone a complete

transformation. Thothahut hated AA. It's interesting this guy has a

thing abt the Catholic church - not that Im complaining mind you, but

it hardly seems to go with the religious tolerance he claims for AA.

P.

October 11, 2000

Ok I am guilty of insulting you, and so its OK for you to call me a

liar. I got sober 10.4.99. My last meeting was in June and my last

meeting before that was in March. I had exposure to the program in

my teens; that lasted for a whole three months... I'd say the

hospital I was in at that time did a lot more forcing and attempted

brainwashing than AA ever did (to me). Like I said, I read a lot in

the past year, and I did go to a lot of meetings at first. You say

its impossible for me to know what AA is about in such a short time;

I think its just because I have a brain that works better than yours

and I am a better listener (absorber) than you :-P

>

> > Do you believe you differently? I believe alcoholism is

> terminal. I have been sober enough and alive enough to see

> that alcoholic people remain

> alcholic. If you want to be the guinea pig who proves differently,

> then by all means, go for it.

>

> > Where do you get this? I am still agnostic, although AA got

> me sober. I don't spout off about how horrible it is. It helped

me

> get sober, and fuck you, I

> am grateful for it.

>

> >I have a year sober, not much really, and I have attended one AA

> meeting in the past six months, not bragging not feeling guilt,

> just telling you a fact. I have

> thought about going and picking up a 1 year chip but I haven't

yet.

> I still haven't decided if I am going to.

>

> i have a hard time believing you were in AA for only a year. sober

> yes, in AA no. its hard to believe that given the defensive and

> angry nature of your tone to my

> questioning of the AA belief system. also, the sheer number of

> AA standard slogans and arguments you made were far to

> numerous to be from someone

> who has been to " one AA meeting in the past six months " and

> perhaps less than year in Program. so, how long have you been

> in AA? i would guess would

> be alot of time to be, as you said of me, " too adament about all of

> this " .

October 11, 2000

Enjoy yourself pal. I don't think I am in the wrong newsgroup. It

says 12-step-free. It doesn't say bash-AA-at-every-opportunity. I

think you should leave.

> Coolguy: You are in the wrong newsgroup. I dont like your language.

Work out

> where you're at, clean up your act, then maybe come back, if what

we have

> here is what you want. I think you belong in AA by the sound of it.

Enjoy

October 11, 2000

it says 12-step free for a reason

> > Coolguy: You are in the wrong newsgroup. I dont like your

language.

> Work out

> > where you're at, clean up your act, then maybe come back, if

what

> we have

> > here is what you want. I think you belong in AA by the sound

of it.

> Enjoy

October 11, 2000

My oh so intelligent friend Ellen,

NOT!

In my first post to this lovely group I ask what do people do

instead of the 12 steps. I got one answer - a reply with

alternatives to stepwork/AA meetings. I got a couple sideways

replies about how I must be a fucking moron to ever have went to an

AA meeting and I got a 5 page ramble-bash on AA from ol' Davey. Now,

I didn't ask for a ramble-bash on AA, I know where plenty of websites

are that I can read that unproductive useless crap for centuries.

So, I tell the guy " thanks for not answering my question and here is

how I feel about all that, and at the same time I do think you have a

lot of misplaced hostility towards AA " and I took about 5 pages to

say that, and I matched his tone, which did no good at all for my

arguement. I insulted and ridiculed Davey just as much as he

insulted and ridiculed anyone else. I made no attempt to convert a

single person... I just said I didn't want to hear his bullshit, that

it had nothing to do with my question. So I get accused of being a

zealot, of being cult like, and not having an open mind. I am glad I

am not susceptible to your attempted guilt-trip Ellen.

Where is this socalled selfconstraint? Was it in the 5 or so

quotes of Bill W that had nothing at all to do with my initial

inquiry? Was it in his calling me repeatedly a stepper - I did one

step so I am a steppper.... Or was it when he called me a liar that

he used such marvelous self constraint? From what I have read on

this group so far it is too much like AA for me... too many people

with misdirected animosity acting like children and blaming others,

instead of working on themselves and helping others. Of course I

have only read a few words of a few of the members, and so I don't

have much to go by, and I don't want to offend those whom I have not

read, perhaps they are better at refraining from acting childish.

> > > i dont know why i bothered to respond to you, you are without

> > > manners, you asked a question and i fairly and without malice

> > > answered it. for this, in your

> > > reply to me, you questioned my sanity, my sobriety, my ability

to

> > > read the word god in steps, and insulted me with 'fuck you " .

just

> > > what i would have expected.

> > >

> > > >

> > > > Hey, sounds good and all, for a sane person. But what about

> > > an active alcoholic? First of all, active alcoholics do not

take

> > > responsibility for themselves,

> > > their actions or their (lack of) sanity.

> > >

> > > they get themselves into AA at some point don't they? they seek

> > > help don't they? they make a choice to stop drinking and so so

at

> > > some point if they are to

> > > get sober don't they? that is taking responsibility. no one ,

> > > absolutely no one get sober without taking responsibility so

> > > themselves.

> > > AA sabotages self responsibility by asking people to turn it

over

> > > to something else.

> > >

> > > >Secondly, they can NOT trust themselves to do what is best for

> > > them.

> > > sez who? you? bill wilson? sounds like what a cult would say to

> > > retain recruits. if i though what you teach, i probably would

go

> > out

> > > and drink. of course

> > > they can trust themselves, assuming they went into AA willingly

> > > or treatment, they obviously were trust worthy enough to do

that

> > > for themselves.

> > > unfortunately once they get there, they are TAUGHT otherwise.

> > > the oxford group, believed anyone who wasn't god controlled

> > > was literally insane and a

> > > public enemy, this is why a god in steps is said to restore us

to

> > > sanity, not because alcoholics ae insane, but because the non

> > > god controlled are insane.

> > >

> > > >Self empowerment is what they need, but they are in no

> > > position to acquire it.

> > > that is AA bullshit. to decide not not to drink and to follow

> thru

> > on

> > > your choice IS self empowerment. only in AA do people like you

> > > teach others they are

> > > incapable of doing that most basic of human actions for

> > > themselves, and thas must strip self responsibly away and

> > > create depend ecny on " higher " forces

> > > to do it for them and take responsibility. AA strips self

> > > empowerment away and self responsibility , and replaces it

> > > worth powerlessness and group/hp

> > > dependency

> > >

> > > It teaches self respect, but it also teaches the required

> > > humility...

> > > and humility is REQUIRED to move from the state of insanity to

> > > the state of sanity that

> > > alcoholics who seek out AA want.

> > > sez who? they seek out AA because they are told its for

> > > alcoholism, hot humility. they often don't seek out aa at all,

> but

> > > are forced into it by courts.

> > >

> > > >f one is not humble but doesn't drink then he is merely dry.

> > > sez who again? everything you say is straight from oxford group

> > > teachings and has NOTHING to do with alcoholism, but more

> > > with they require

> > > suppression of self require for god control. why are you here

> > > again?

> > >

> > > >An active alcoholic doesn't know anything about these things

> > > and is very unlikely to refrain from drinking without the help

of

> > > others, which is the main

> > > focus of AA.

> > >

> > > funny, aa has no more success than no treatment all. there is

no

> > > a single study which can demonstrate aa is more effective than

> > > non treatment. nor do other

> > > sobriety groups share aa's teachings that humility is required,

> or

> > > the fallacy of a dry drunk. these are concepts which are unique

> to

> > > AA dogma.

> > > AA as you have shown, is not self help, its self helplessness.

> > >

> > > >Politics and squabbling aren't what AA, recovery or life is

all

> > > about. Helping others and the self is what its about.

> > > >by teaching them they are powerless, diseased, ego maniacs,

> > > insane and incapable of staying sane with aa's " spirituality

is

> > > help, no thank you.

> > >

> > > >If the tenants of AA are mistranslated, then argue with that,

> and

> > > if those tenants are wrong, then point that out too, but don't

> make

> > > things up.

> > >

> > > what exactly did i make up? what part of this quote did i

> > > mistranslate?

> > >

> > > " Divine Aid was A.A.'s greatest asset... "

> > > An alcoholic is a fellow who is " trying to get his religion out

> of

> > a

> > > bottle, " when what he really wants is unity within himself,

unity

> > > with God. . . . "

> > > " There is a definite religious element here, -Bill :

> > >

> > > " Read religious literature. Resume church attendance, cultivate

> > > the habit of prayer, and transmit the desires and principles of

> > > Alcoholics Anonymous to others. " The paper added: " He

> > > particularly recommended reading the Bible. " -Dr. Bob:

> > >

> > > LIVING CREATOR GOD:

> > > from " There is a Solution "

> > > " it means that all of us, whatever our race, creed, or

> > > color are the children of a living Creator with whom we may

form

> > > a relationship upon simple and understandable terms as soon

> > > as we are willing and

> > > honest enough to try. "

> > >

> > > >Turning it over means giving up control - becoming dependent

> > > on others (and God if you swing that way) until you are capable

> of

> > > being dependent on

> > > >yourself. If you want to place your life in the hands of an

> > active

> > > alcoholic, go for it.

> > >

> > > i don't need to place my life in anyone's hands. you are one

> > > making things up. where does it say anywhere about " becoming

> > > dependent on others " or

> > > turning your will over to an individual and not god, or some

> > > Higher Power or Creator in big book? exactly where?

> > >

> > > > >the steps have nothing, i repeat nothing, to do with

> > > alcoholism.

> > > > >they are formula for religious conversion at the beginning

and

> > > > >they still are 60 years later.

> > > >

> > > > You seem too adamant about all of this. Have you sought

> > > professional help?

> > >

> > > this is not worth responding to, why are you on this list

again.

> > > you asked me a question and answered fairly, and for this you

> > > insult me? i have no

> > > interest in reading anything else you may write to me. of

course

> > > im adamant, im speaking the truth. how many times is alcohol

> > > mentioned in steps? how

> > > many times is god? have you sought a reading comprehension

> > > class?

> > >

> > > >We can just split hairs here if you want.

> > > i have no need to split anything, the steps speak for

themselves.

> > > they are clearly a formula for religious conversion

> > >

> > > >Why say something so absolute, and thus so ridiculous? The

> > > steps have a whole lot to do with alcoholism.

> > > where in steps does it say, we decided to stop drinking? where

> > > does it say " Made a decision to turn our will and our lives

over

> > to

> > > the care of God " ?

> > > your one is is ridiculous. your arguments may work on a fresh

> > > and desperate drunk, but not someone capable of clear thinking.

> > >

> > > >First and foremost, lest you forget, they are merely

suggestions.

> > > they are what they are. suggestions, orders, whatever, they are

a

> > > formula for conversion. calling the " suggestions " doesn't

change

> > > that fact. they aren't

> > > called the " 12 suggestions " . if they are suggestions, then it

> also

> > > must be a suggestion that to not flow them leads to jails,

> > > institutions and death.

> > >

> > > >The first step pertains to almost any person with any

disorder,

> > > addiction etc.

> > > once again, teaching powerlessness is counter productive,

> > > unless of course you need to be powerless in order for god to

> > > take control

> > >

> > > >The following steps are not religious as religion must have

> > > some type of deity.

> > > Buddhism doesn't have a deity. Buddha was a philosopher, not

> > > a god. and they clearly have a deity, God.

> > >

> > > >The steps are a formula for success...

> > > in your opinion. you haven't offered anything from bill

> > > which refutes what i have said or quoted

> > >

> > > not even original thoughts of Dr >Bob or Bill W - these steps

> > > were taken from various forms of what we now call self help (it

> > > was not so common, but it

> > > >was starting out). These were >steps that these guys found to

> > > work, on themselves and a hell of a lot of other people!

> > >

> > > you dont even know your own history of AA. they come from not

> > > various forms of self help, but from the Oxford group and bible.

> > >

> > > " The specific Biblical ideas taken from these sources were

later

> > > embodied in A.A.'s basic text Alcoholics Anonymous, in its

> > > Twelve Steps, and in its

> > > Fellowship. Those six sources were (1) The Bible. (2) Quiet

> > > Time and the daily devotionals. (3) The teachings of the

> > > Reverend M. Shoemaker,

> > > Jr.. (4) The life-changing program of the Oxford Group. (5) The

> > > details recorded by Co-founder Dr. Bob's wife in Anne 's

> > > Journal, 1933-1939. (6)

> > > The Christian literature early AAs read for spiritual growth "

> > > source:http://www.dickb.com/

> > >

> > > they also hurt a hell of allot of people, namley the ones who

> > > couldn't buy into AA's religious teachings, and who were told

> > > they should go back out and

> > > come back in when they were ready.

> > >

> > > >

> > > > >for the formula to work (work ,meaning turning your will over

> to

> > > > >god or other supposed " higher being " ) you have to create the

> > > need.

> > >

> > > >

> > > > Millions of alcoholics who could/can not stop drinking

alone

> > > was/is the need.

> > >

> > > no, they all stopped drinking on their own, unless of course

you

> > > believe god, santa Claus or ashtrays literally stopped them

from

> > > picking up. the need was

> > > bill wilson need to proselytize.

> > >

> > > >

> > > > >if i believe in myself to " restore " my sanity, there is no

need

> > > for

> > > god.

> > > >

> > > > That sounds great, too, but a number of people will tell

you

> > > they were unable to " restore " their sanity without outside

> help...

> > > AA is indeed a good place

> > > to go for that help. Keep believing in yourself, I have no

> reason

> > to

> > > disbelieve that you can do it alone, but I don't see your

purpose

> > > in continuing to

> > > fashion falsehoods about a program that helps people!

> > > >

> > >

> > > what have i said or quoted which is false? i said it was

> religious.

> > > bill wilson said it was religious. was he being false when he

> > > said There is a definite

> > > religious element here, " ?

> > >

> > > >

> > > > >No need

> > > > >for god!? that blasphemy!

> > > >

> > > > In some parts of the world there is " good AA " and other

> parts

> > > just have AA. I have excused myself from anything that I did

not

> > > consider good AA. I

> > > have never heard anyone act that way towards an agnostic at a

> > > good AA group, or even a bad one for that matter.

> > >

> > > i was being dramatic rather than literal, sorry if i was

unclear.

> > but

> > > the truth of what i wrote comes through in your arguments.

> > > perhaps if i said " no need

> > > for steps or higher power!?!? that blasphemy! " you would have

> > > understood.

> > >

> > > >

> > > > >so to create the need, you have to

> > > > believe the you are

> > > > >powerless,

> > > > Are you sober? Are you drinking? If your sober (and an

> > > alcoholic), how can you not admit that, for a time, you were

> > > powerless over alcohol? If you

> > > > are an alcoholic, and if you drink, you are powerless over

it -

> > > thats what an alcoholic is - someone who is powerless over

> > > alcohol! What is your >

> > > definition? If you don't believe you are powerless, then what

do

> > > you believe you are?

> > >

> > > once again, you insult me. every alcoholic who quits drinking,

> > > every alcoholic, choose to stop drinking and does so. nothing

> > > powerless about that fits any

> > > definition of powerless i have ever seen.

> > > every human being has the control of what they put into their

> > > bodies, its matter if they have motivation to change their

> > > behavior.

> > >

> > > the only reason word powerless is even used, is to justify god

> > > control. there is no need for god control is you are not

> powerless.

> > > the oxford group taught

> > > this as a path towards god control and AA 12-steps copied

> > > oxford group teachings

> > >

> > > >

> > > > >you have to believe you are incurable. you have to

> > > >

> > > > Do you believe you differently? I believe alcholism is

> > > terminal. I have been sober enough and alive enough to see

> > > that alcoholic people remain

> > > alcoholic. If you want to be the guinea pig who proves

> > differently,

> > > then by all means, go for it.

> > >

> > > i stopped being alcoholic when i stopped drinking. no doctor on

> > > planet ,if they were to examine me could say, " your an

alcoholic "

> > > because i stopped being

> > > " alcoholic " when i was no longer chemically or emotionally

> > > dependent upon alcohol. AA biggest lie was to convince million

> > > of people they we incurable

> > > to perpetually justify their continued membership and

practicing

> > > of steps. my name is dave, im a sober human being. i WAS an

> > > alcoholic.

> > >

> > > > >believe without the god belief system you will die.

> > > >

> > > > Where do you get this? I am still agnostic, although AA

got

> > > me sober. I don't spout off about how horrible it is. It

helped

> > me

> > > get sober, and fuck

> > > you, I am grateful for it.

> > >

> > > once gain, you viciously insult me. why? i wasn't attacking

your

> > > beliefs, only stating mine, and for this you say " fuck you " to

me?

> > >

> > > >

> > > > >the steps

> > > > >accomplish that fairly well. if

> > > > >its wasn't attended to be about god, why was he put in steps

> > > to

> > > > >begin with?

> > > >

> > > > HE WASN'T - CAN'T YOU READ? MAYBE YOU OUGHT TO GO

> > > TO AN AA MEETING - THEY WILL READ IT TO YOU.

> > >

> > > i can read, but im not sure you can. my question was, if it

> wasn't

> > > about god, why was god in steps to begin with. lets count out

> > > how many times God is

> > > referred to, shall we?

> > >

> > > AA's 12 STEPS

> > > 1.

> > > We admitted we were powerless over alcohol -- that our

lives

> > > had become unmanageable.

> > > 2.

> > > Came to believe that a Power greater than ourselves could

> > > restore us to sanity.

> > > 3.

> > > Made a decision to turn our will and our lives over to the

> care

> > > of

> > > God as we understood Him.

> > > 4.

> > > Made a searching and fearless moral inventory of ourselves.

> > > 5.

> > > Admitted to God, to ourselves, and to another human being

the

> > > exact nature of our wrongs.

> > > 6.

> > > Were entirely ready to have God remove all these defects of

> > > character.

> > > 7.

> > > Humbly asked Him to remove our shortcomings.

> > > 8.

> > > Made a list of all persons we had harmed, and became

willing

> > > to make amends to them all.

> > > 9.

> > > Made direct amends to such people wherever possible, except

> > > when to do so would injure them or others.

> > > 10.

> > > Continued to take personal inventory and when we were

> > > wrong promptly admitted it.

> > > 11.

> > > Sought through prayer and meditation to improve our

> > > conscious contact with God as we understood Him, praying only

> > > for knowledge

> > > of His will for us and the power to carry that out.

> > >

> > > 12.

> > > Having had a spiritual awakening as the result of these

> steps,

> > > we tried to carry this message to alcoholics, and to practice

> > > these principles in all our affairs.

> > >

> > > >

> > > > You can't have it both ways.

> > > > You keep mentioning the steps saying all these things that

> > > they do not say. Yes, Bill W and Dr Bob were both " believers "

> (in

> > > God) but they made a lot

> > > > of allowances for people who did not and would not accept a

> > > God. Your saying that AA forces religion is bullshit, and

unless

> > > you can come up with > >

> > > > some good support for your arguments, I am going to killfile

> > > you.

> > >

> > > killfile me? be my guest and save me trouble doing it to you. i

> > > dont feelliek being atatced for answering questions. my

> > > arguments are clear, yours are a

> > > struggle against the english language.

> > >

> > > > As Bill W is a believer, and a prolific writer, I am not at

all

> > > surprised that you can find lots of examples where he mentions

> > > God.

> > >

> > > i can hardly find any which he DOESN'T

> > >

> > > >But that doesn't have anything to do with your curreent

> > > argument - AA doesn't force God on people... AA doesn't force

> > > anything on people..

> > >

> > > tell that to peopl who are court ordered. tell that to people

who

> > > are told they will destrory themselves with out AA and the

> steps.

> > > AA preys upon people in

> > > the most vulnerable places in their lives in order to use it as

> an

> > > opportunity to inject thier god control belief sytems.

> > >

> > > >indubitably individuals attempt to force all kinds of things

on

> > > others. For example you are trying to force the idea that AA

is

> > this

> > > horrible cult, and I am

> > > >trying to force some reason into your noggin. I wish you

would

> > > calm down and try to say whatever it is you mean to say without

> > > all the anger and

> > > >resentment. And if you mean to say that AA is a horrible

cult,

> > > please tell me why you have such an absurd idea.

> > >

> > > i just did. twice.look up word of cult in dictionary. ah hell,

> here

> > > ya

> > > go

> > > cult (klt)

> > > n.

> > >

> > > 1.

> > > a. A religion or religious sect generally considered to be

> > > extremist or false, with its followers often living in an

> > > unconventional manner under the guidance

> > > of an authoritarian, charismatic leader.

> > > b. The followers of such a religion or sect.

> > > 2. A system or community of religious worship and ritual.

> > > 3. The formal means of expressing religious reverence;

religious

> > > ceremony and ritual.

> > > 4. A usually nonscientific method or regimen claimed by its

> > > originator to have exclusive or exceptional power in curing a

> > > particular disease.

> > > 5.

> > > a. Obsessive, especially faddish, devotion to or veneration for

a

> > > person, principle, or thing.

> > > b. The object of such devotion.

> > > 6. An exclusive group of persons sharing an esoteric, usually

> > > artistic or intellectual interest.

> > >

> > > you wish i would calm down? who are yu kidding? my awnser to

> > > your question was wriiten with the utermost scincerity. i wss

> > > angry. your one who has

> > > been angry and resentful. my word, what a world you live in. yo

> > > insult my intelligence, my sanity, my reading ability and you

> said

> > > fuck you to boot!

> > >

> > > >

> > > > It sounds like you suffered some sort of trauma at the

hands

> > > of some AA people?? Thanks for answering my question, now

> > > that I read your whole

> > > post I guess you were talking to me.

> > >

> > > so did you decide to insult me before or after you read whole

> > > thing?

> > >

> > > > I have thought about going and picking up a 1 year chip but I

> > > haven't yet. I still haven't decided if I am going to. I have

my

> > > own

> > > reasons for not going >

> > > to meetings. I hope you don't think I have been defending AA

in

> > > this reply; I have been defending reality - meaning I believe

you

> > > are making things up -

> > >

> > > nothing i wrote was " making things up " . maybe you should read

> > > up on aa hsitory and oxford group before you claim that. i

> offered

> > > as evidence the

> > > words of bill wilson , dr. bob, the 12-steps and big book to

> > > support my argument. you offered no eviidence, denied the

> > > evident use of god in steps and

> > > were insulting.

October 11, 2000

Using " block sender " button on this. Dont need it. It's not why I'm here.

Ignore him, he'll go away.

October 11, 2000

Thanks for taking the time to reply Ken. I did manage to reply to

this whole huge letter, and clicked send (from the web thing) and it

got lost. I don't have time to do it again. If there was any one

thing I wanted you to know above all the other things I wrote, it

would be this... You have this attitude like you know what I am

thinking. You don't know what I am thinking. You've categorized me

as a stepper, which is wrong, you have assumed on four occasions in

this huge letter incorrectly. I pointed that out well in my lost

reply. Near the bottom of this thing you wrote that many years ago

you thought the way I do. I laugh at that, Ken. I guess you mean

many years ago you don't know what you thought, since you don't know

what I think. Many years from now, maybe you will be able to grasp

my concepts. Maybe in a few days. We'll see. I applaud the person

who clicked block sender, as thats what I wanted to do. Now I am

wading through several mails that were as childish as mine or Dave's,

while what I was hoping to find (alternatives) is nowhere to be found.

>

> What do you mean what about what?

>

> >What about " Relieve me of the bondage of self that I can better do

thy

> >will? " and " Of myself I am nothing " ? What about " fear, that evil

and

> >corroding thread, " " Anger shuts out the Sunlight of the Spirit " ?

What

>

> >about " When I'm alone with myself I'm behind enemy lines " ? What

about

>

> > " alcoholic thinking " ?

>

> What do you mean what what what about what? So are you trying to

> construe these ideas as destroyers of self respect? Nice try.

There is

>

> a difference between losing all self respect and examining the self

to

> remove those parts of the self that are really shitty. I think you

have

>

> been behind enemy lines too long. The first quote is from a

prayer, if

> you are not a praying person then what does that matter to you?

>

> Coolguy,

>

> > What is the self when feeling and thoughts are removed? You

are

> then talking > about an empty abstraction, something from off in

some

> sort of intellectual or > spiritual abstraction. Even talking about

> " parts of the self that are really shitty " you > are disrespecting

> yourself.

>

> What is the relevance if the quote if from a prayer or not?

What

> does that matter?

>

> >When one has been convinced that their feelings are wrong, their

> >thoughts are wrong and they should _get rid of the self_, and the

self

> >is compared to _nothing_, what is that if not destroying _self_

> >respect? Certainly, when feeling impulsed to engage in

> self-destructive

> >behaviors, feelings and thoughts may not make sense but that is

merely

> a

> >matter of not knowing their origins, their meaning and learning

better

> >ways to " deal with " them (learning to have them and not try to

destroy

> >them).

>

> > How could one become convinced of such if it is not true?

>

> How could people become convinced that the Communist system would

> supplant Capitalism? How could people become convinced that

throwing

> virgins in a volcano would appease the Volcano God? How could

people

> become convinced that Hitler was good for Germany?

>

> > I would say that person deceived himself; it was not AA that

deceived

> him.

>

> Of course you would.

>

> > Still you have this anger towards AA (in particular) that I don't

> get. People deceive > themselves with the words and ideals

spoonfed to

> them by all

> > types of people - why don't you get mad at Hollywood, or the

Catholic

> church (or > any other) - these are actively participating in the

> destruciton

> > of (1) the self respect of millions while AA occasionally

destroys the

> self respect of > an otherwise unsalvagable person. None of your

> > examples are from the twelve steps (notice I didn't say twelve

> commandments) and > I didn't lose my self respect from AA or the 12

> steps.

>

> Your comparing AA with other religions is rather a poor tact here.

Most

> everyone one this list I would think knows that one of the major

> differences between a religion and a religious cult is that

relgions are

> honest about their beliefs, are straightforward with potential

> recruits. If you ask a Catholic if they believe in the Virgin

Birth,

> they will not hesitate to tell you. If you ask a Moslem, or a

Bhuddist,

> or a Hindu what the groups' beliefs are, they will tell you.

Groupers

> can't even be honest, more often that not even with themselves that

they

> are a religious group.

>

> > I

> > think one who does manage to lose his self respect to some

individuals

> (or group) > within AA is already so far lost that it is an actual

> > improvement... meaning that he becomes capable of functioning

(living

> life on life's > terms). Eventually (maybe after years) he will

> probably find

> > himself (question his sprirtual/emotional captors), if he has

really

> lost himself to AA > or otherwise. If he is locked up in jail or

dies

> of overdose

> > or accident, there is less chance of him living life on life's

terms,

> eh? So are you > saying he is better off dead? I'd say he is

better

> off alive and

> > on nearly the right path (with always the possibility of finding

the

> right track) than > dead and on no path OR alive and on the entirely

> wrong

> > path.

>

> What is your source of the above? Pronouncements of " recovery " in

AA

> are no more valid than the testimonials at Wednesday-night prayer

> meetings and in TV infomercials. I believe I cited Harvard

psychiatrist

> and AA board member Vaillant as a source for the failure of

AA

> over _nothing_ whatsoever.

>

> > 1 - they are only aiding in the destruction of millions - you can

lead

> a horse to > water; you can't make it drink... in the same way they

> aren't

> > forcing people to drink their poison - people are choosing to. I

> believe more > people have left the Catholic church after coming to

AA

> than have

> > joined the Catholic church thanks to AA.

>

> When I've said similar things about AA supplanting other religions

(I

> think you are correct) I've been called a liar by the groupers. But

> then the truth for groupers seems to be whatever suits their

argument at

> the moment.

>

> >If people choose to believe some bullshit > that is presented to

them

> in an AA > meeting or by an AA

> > member, is it right to blame the entire organization? Hell no.

Leave

> blame where > blame is due, and don't blame the whole world (or the

> whole

> > institution) because something is not right.

>

> That could go for any group then, even the ones you like to

criticize

> like the Catholic Church.

>

> When AA members present AA doctrine at AA meetings to potential AA

> recruits, AA is responsible.

>

> > I am still not convinced that AA as intended tries to destroy

self

> respect.

>

> Did you read the chapter on AA history, on its origins at:

> http://www.aakills.com/books/revealed.htm ?

>

> I'll bet you'll find a lot of history of AA from AA and Oxford Group

> sources that they never told you about.

>

> > I think AA does a good job of letting folks rest on their

laurels...

> > on letting folks believe they have done enough work, that they do

not

> need to try > anymore. So does any church or government in the

world,

> > and many other clubs as well. Groups of any kind grow because

they

> attract > people - people are attracted to things that make them

feel

> > good. - if people are lazy and don't wish to change or grow, they

are

> going to seek > (or be attracted to) things that make them feel

> comfortable

> > staying the wayt hey are.

>

> Well, " attraction not promotion " is an oft repeated slogan.

However,

> one to two million people a year are coerced into step groups every

> year.

>

> > While I believe that recovery (growth, if you prefer) is a life

long

> process, AA in > general tends to tell people they are

> > OK, they don't need to grow anymore. But, if they will buy that,

then

> they didn't > have self respect in the first place, did they - they

just

> wanted

> > to be comforted and feel accepted and be told they were doing what

> they " should > do " ? I can't blame AA for not making people seek to

grow

>

> > more; not many institutions do (or can)... its the responsibility

of

> individuals to grow > and to promote growth within others. And I

can't

> even tell

> > if you are trying to grow or promote growth in others, or if you

are

> merely trying to > sabotage something that is more good than bad (of

> course

> > its not perfect). The fact that AA does promote growth at all is

a

> good thing - > every cloud has a silver lining.

>

> Take a good look next time you go to a meeting and if there are any

> people with a lot of Time (10 or 20 years) take a good look at what

they

> are like away from meetings and tell me about " recovery " in AA.

>

> > We disagree about humility... only through submission may you

> conquer. Better > believe that.

>

> Yes, and " War is peace. "

>

> >>Actually, about 70% of people stop or moderate their drinking on

their

>

> >>own. The only way anyone could possibly " recover " alone is on a

> >>deserted island with no one present. A much healthier way to

recover

> is

> >>to adopt the attitudes of those to whom alcohol is irrelevant to

their

>

> >>lives, not those who continuously obsess about it.

>

> How do you know? Theoretically, 100% of people stop or moderate

on

> their own. Its impossible for someone else to stop for you. So

> what. If the (only) 30% (that is several million) are helped to

quit

> drinking through AA, then why bash it? Are you going to go out and

help

>

> that many people yourself? Are there that many people reading this?

>

> You are forgetting the people that are harmed, that buy into the

> " Powerless " nonsense. If 100 people are given drug A for the flu

and

> 100 people are given nothing for the flu, if 95 people given drug A

stay

> sick and only 30 people who are given nothing stay sick, would you

ask,

> " What is wrong with drug A if 5 people recover? "

>

> The five percent figure comes from AA internal documents.

>

> >> The choices, no matter what you have been led to believe, are not

> >> " active alcoholic " or good grouper. The real world is not so

narrow,

> so

> >> black and white. As a matter of fact, according to AA board

member

> >> Vaillant's research, those who go to AA not only have no

> better

> >> success at remaining abstinent than those who refuse to go, but

AA

> seems

> >> to almost totally wipe out the moderation-recovery category. So

with

>

> >> AA, people do worse overall.

>

> > Okay so you are pulling some more shit out of your ass.

>

> Vaillant's research, which is in his book " The Natural

History of

> Alcoholism " may be shit. However, it clearly shows the failure of

AA.

> Can you cite better authority, better research than that by an AA

board

> member? Or are you just going to insist that black is white?

>

> > Since thats what you want to believe go ahead.

>

> I believe AA does far worse. I was citing a self-serving AA source.

>

> > I do believe in alcholism, and that

> > some people are alcoholics. You seem to be in denial. Do you

also

> deny > cancer?

>

> Can some people get the disease of cancer from drinking too much?

> Certainly. Why is the behavior of drinking too much a disease? Is

> smoking a disease too? Is eating fatty foods a disease? Is walking

> into a hospital ward with patients with active TB a disease too?

>

> > Perhaps they don't know every fact about alcoholism...

> > same with cancer. Perhaps there is or is not a cure... as yet I

have

> not seen it. I > did not say one must choose active alcoholism or

good

> > grouper. I think you have moved beyond making up things about AA

to

> making up > things I've said too! I won't stand for that.

>

> I'll tell you something I won't stand for. And that is coming into

> someone else's living room and going into attack mode in a private

> discussion as I've seen you do in other posts.

>

> >>They are " merely suggestions " which if one doesn't follow, they

are

> >>supposedly condemning themselves to " jails, institutions and

death. "

> >>Of course AA is a religious program even if one of their most

> fervently

> >>held religious beliefs (and clichés) is that they are

" spiritual,

not

> >>religious. " That is obvious to most anyone who is not a member,

> >>including several state Supreme Court rulings.

>

> > No actually, you don't have to follow the suggestions. You very

well

> could end up > in jail, looney bin or dead if YOU *resume*

_drinking_...

> it

> > doesn't say that if you don't follow _their_ suggestions you will

be

> condemned. > For as literal as you take all of this you certainly

> misquote

> > enough. And then you say... " the real world is not so narrow, so

> black and white. " > Well nothing is, but you paint AA with an

absolute

> > brush... there were only four absolutes that I can remember...

Why

> don't you take > your absolute BS brush and start painting the

> government

> > or something... that ought to keep you busy. Oh wait, we already

have

> enough > people working on that.

>

> Why don't you offer some documentation that my position is wrong?

From

> the AA literature is fine instead of your spirtual bursts of

obscenity.

> Is that God speaking through you?

>

> >Does that mean that the Moonies, who probably have millions of

members

> >but members who moderate alcohol/drug use rather than abstain works

> >better than AA or is somehow more powerful because alcoholics and

> >addicts in the Moonies manage to abstain?

>

> Umm what?

>

> When God rescues Moonies into their group, the alcoholics and drug

> addicts don't have to stop. God helps them moderate their use.

Isn't

> AA's Higher Power as strong as Jesus Incarnate (Reverend Moon)?

>

> >And at every Wednesday-night prayer meeting one will hear

testimonials

> >about how they've been saved only by the Grace of God and it only

could

>

> >have happened in that particular religious sect.

>

> Which is their " unalienable " (so far) right.

>

> Sure it is their right. But that does not make that good evidence,

> which was the point. Or are you going to argue that what one hears

in

> infomercials is " The Truth. "

>

> >>The reason why we have an FDA is because people have been very

easily

> >>fooled by snake oil salesmen.

>

> >> No, that is the reason you have the FDA - because you (and too

many

> socialist >> pigs like you) believe people are too stupid to think

for

> >> themselves and that you - their protector - must do the thinking

for

> them.

>

> You don't even know if I am a socialist or not or in favor of the

FDA.

>

> If people weren't so easily fooled by snake oil salesmen, those who

> pushed for the FDA would have had no argument and hence, there'd be

no

> FDA.

>

> Socialist pig? Is your name calling because you want to distract

from

> your pathetic, weak arguments?

>

> > Well, their security comes at the price of their freedom, and you

are

> > the one who gets paid for it. If you would go out and get a life

> instead of sitting >on your pedestal trying to protect the world

from

> its own

> > mindlessness the world would be a much better place - actually it

> would not

> > make much difference as you are making no difference to

> > anything, except spreading bullshit and lies about the ability of

> human beings to

> > think for themselves. Let a person feel the consequences of

> > making bad choices and perhaps he will think a little harder, and

> choose more

> > cautiously, correctly next time... then maybe you would have

> > fewer false prophets (in the guise of organizations that help

people)

> that people

> > cling to.

>

> I see. You believe that warning people that AA lies to the public

and

> objecting to coerced AA indoctrination is wrong. Nice guy you

are. You

> wouldn't be the Satanist Nate/Thotahut that was banned from this

list by

> any chance, would you?

>

> > AA does a very good job of emphasizing the

> >importance of taking responsibility for one's own actions... more

than

> any other >institution (besides Judaism) that I have come in contact

> with.

> >Maybe thats what you don't like about it???

>

> >>How is God _not_ there?

>

> >(as we understood him) - you can understand yourself to be god can

you

> not? You >do, don't you? Tis entirely in the eyes of the

beholder...

> if

> >those eyes have no imagination and decide to believe in something

they

> don't >believe, who's to blame? Not me.

>

> I ask again,

>

> Step 2: Came to believe that a Power greater than

ourselves . .

> .

> Why is Power capitalized? Could they be talking about Him?

> Step 3: . . . turn our will and lives over to the care of

God . .

>

> There's God.

> Step 5: Admitted to God . . .

> And again.

> Step 6: Were entirely ready to have God . . .

> Step 7: Humbly asked Him . . .

> Anywhere else that Him even uncapitalized is referring to

> doorknob or

> bedpan?

> Step 11: Him, God and His

>

> How is God _not_ there?

>

> >There are many reasons to not go. It is just a terrible shame that

> >people are led to believe they'll die if they don't go.

>

> > That has never happened to me. No one told me you better go to a

> meeting or >you will die. I have been warned not to drink, thats a

> different

> >thing, and I heed that warning. People are also led to believe

that

> they will burn in >hell if they don't worship one of a

million " gods "

> and they

> >are also led to believe a government can solve all their

problems... I

> see much >bigger things to bitch about than AA, which by and large

does

> >more good than harm (whether you can find facts that support or

demerit

> that claim, >I know the truth), and more good than most

organzitions,

> >instutitions or other types of groups of people. By and large it

is a

> good group of >people, which is something of a rarity in this world.

> And you

> >condemn it. Fine, I condemn you because you are imperfect. I

won't

> rest until the >world knows what a terrible imperfect being you are.

> >Actually its not worth my effort or time, and maybe someday you

will

> see that your >crusade against AA is a waste of your time too.

> > I know we can't be too far apart on everything - there must be

some

> reason we >subscribed to the same list, and it wasn't because I

want to

> >talk all of you into going back to AA! I didn't ask you to spout

off

> everything you >thought was wrong with AA, but you did, so I tried

to

> set you

> >straight where I think you are misthinking. I did ask what you do

in

> place of >working the steps. I don't know about you, but the steps

> don't

> >seem right for me anymore, however I do want to continue with some

sort

> of >discipline that promotes the growth of my soul. I have thought

a

> >lot of times of a replacement for the steps of AA... I don't get

the

> impression you >have thought in this vein, as most of our

conversation

> so far

> >has been about the problems, without any solutions. ly I

don't

> want to argue >with you anymore. You have as much right to post

here as

>

> >anyone, but if you don't put forth anything useful (to me), I

won't be

> reading what >you have to say.

>

> The list was started to get away from the groupers who swamped and

> disrupted in other ways the newsgroup alt.recovery.from-12-steps.

>

> One of the reasons why the discussion has been about " the problem

rather

> than the solution " is that the ideas that you brought here from AA

are

> part of the problem. I'm not trying to attack in saying that, but

here,

> that is the way things are seen. This is a different world from the

> world of AA.

>

> Of the hundreds of people on this list, few if any give the idea of

a

> disease which requires prayer, meditation, confession, proseletyzing

> ( " carrying the message " ) and etc. as a cure any creedence. When AA

> platitudes and slogans are offered as the foundation of an argument,

> when we hear Programese, we categorically reject it because we've

been

> there.

>

> There was a time many years ago when if there had been a list such

as

> this, I myself would have responded very much as you have.

>

> The point is, take a look at some of the non-grouper websites and

> scientific literature. I've given you one url on the origins of

AA.

> Here is one where you can read a great deal about " the disease "

from a

> non-AA perspective:

>

> http://www.peele.net

>

> Ken Ragge

October 11, 2000

speak for yourself when you say " childish " , i lost track of how

many times you have insulted me.

> >

> > What do you mean what about what?

> >

> > >What about " Relieve me of the bondage of self that I can

better do

> thy

> > >will? " and " Of myself I am nothing " ? What about " fear, that

evil

> and

> > >corroding thread, " " Anger shuts out the Sunlight of the

Spirit " ?

> What

> >

> > >about " When I'm alone with myself I'm behind enemy

lines " ? What

> about

> >

> > > " alcoholic thinking " ?

> >

> > What do you mean what what what about what? So are you

trying to

> > construe these ideas as destroyers of self respect? Nice try.

> There is

> >

> > a difference between losing all self respect and examining

the self

> to

> > remove those parts of the self that are really shitty. I think

you

> have

> >

> > been behind enemy lines too long. The first quote is from a

> prayer, if

> > you are not a praying person then what does that matter to

you?

> >

> > Coolguy,

> >

> > > What is the self when feeling and thoughts are removed?

You

> are

> > then talking > about an empty abstraction, something from off

in

> some

> > sort of intellectual or > spiritual abstraction. Even talking

about

> > " parts of the self that are really shitty " you > are disrespecting

> > yourself.

> >

> > What is the relevance if the quote if from a prayer or not?

> What

> > does that matter?

> >

> > >When one has been convinced that their feelings are

wrong, their

> > >thoughts are wrong and they should _get rid of the self_,

and the

> self

> > >is compared to _nothing_, what is that if not destroying

_self_

> > >respect? Certainly, when feeling impulsed to engage in

> > self-destructive

> > >behaviors, feelings and thoughts may not make sense but

that is

> merely

> > a

> > >matter of not knowing their origins, their meaning and

learning

> better

> > >ways to " deal with " them (learning to have them and not try

to

> destroy

> > >them).

> >

> > > How could one become convinced of such if it is not true?

> >

> > How could people become convinced that the Communist

system would

> > supplant Capitalism? How could people become convinced

that

> throwing

> > virgins in a volcano would appease the Volcano God? How

could

> people

> > become convinced that Hitler was good for Germany?

> >

> > > I would say that person deceived himself; it was not AA that

> deceived

> > him.

> >

> > Of course you would.

> >

> > > Still you have this anger towards AA (in particular) that I

don't

> > get. People deceive > themselves with the words and ideals

> spoonfed to

> > them by all

> > > types of people - why don't you get mad at Hollywood, or the

> Catholic

> > church (or > any other) - these are actively participating in the

> > destruciton

> > > of (1) the self respect of millions while AA occasionally

> destroys the

> > self respect of > an otherwise unsalvagable person. None of

your

> > > examples are from the twelve steps (notice I didn't say

twelve

> > commandments) and > I didn't lose my self respect from AA

or the 12

> > steps.

> >

> > Your comparing AA with other religions is rather a poor tact

here.

> Most

> > everyone one this list I would think knows that one of the

major

> > differences between a religion and a religious cult is that

> relgions are

> > honest about their beliefs, are straightforward with potential

> > recruits. If you ask a Catholic if they believe in the Virgin

> Birth,

> > they will not hesitate to tell you. If you ask a Moslem, or a

> Bhuddist,

> > or a Hindu what the groups' beliefs are, they will tell you.

> Groupers

> > can't even be honest, more often that not even with

themselves that

> they

> > are a religious group.

> >

> > > I

> > > think one who does manage to lose his self respect to

some

> individuals

> > (or group) > within AA is already so far lost that it is an actual

> > > improvement... meaning that he becomes capable of

functioning

> (living

> > life on life's > terms). Eventually (maybe after years) he will

> > probably find

> > > himself (question his sprirtual/emotional captors), if he has

> really

> > lost himself to AA > or otherwise. If he is locked up in jail or

> dies

> > of overdose

> > > or accident, there is less chance of him living life on life's

> terms,

> > eh? So are you > saying he is better off dead? I'd say he is

> better

> > off alive and

> > > on nearly the right path (with always the possibility of

finding

> the

> > right track) than > dead and on no path OR alive and on the

entirely

> > wrong

> > > path.

> >

> > What is your source of the above? Pronouncements of

" recovery " in

> AA

> > are no more valid than the testimonials at Wednesday-night

prayer

> > meetings and in TV infomercials. I believe I cited Harvard

> psychiatrist

> > and AA board member Vaillant as a source for the

failure of

> AA

> > over _nothing_ whatsoever.

> >

> > > 1 - they are only aiding in the destruction of millions - you

can

> lead

> > a horse to > water; you can't make it drink... in the same way

they

> > aren't

> > > forcing people to drink their poison - people are choosing

to. I

> > believe more > people have left the Catholic church after

coming to

> AA

> > than have

> > > joined the Catholic church thanks to AA.

> >

> > When I've said similar things about AA supplanting other

religions

> (I

> > think you are correct) I've been called a liar by the groupers.

But

> > then the truth for groupers seems to be whatever suits their

> argument at

> > the moment.

> >

> > >If people choose to believe some bullshit > that is

presented to

> them

> > in an AA > meeting or by an AA

> > > member, is it right to blame the entire organization? Hell

no.

> Leave

> > blame where > blame is due, and don't blame the whole

world (or the

> > whole

> > > institution) because something is not right.

> >

> > That could go for any group then, even the ones you like to

> criticize

> > like the Catholic Church.

> >

> > When AA members present AA doctrine at AA meetings to

potential AA

> > recruits, AA is responsible.

> >

> > > I am still not convinced that AA as intended tries to destroy

> self

> > respect.

> >

> > Did you read the chapter on AA history, on its origins at:

> > http://www.aakills.com/books/revealed.htm ?

> >

> > I'll bet you'll find a lot of history of AA from AA and Oxford

Group

> > sources that they never told you about.

> >

> > > I think AA does a good job of letting folks rest on their

> laurels...

> > > on letting folks believe they have done enough work, that

they do

> not

> > need to try > anymore. So does any church or government in

the

> world,

> > > and many other clubs as well. Groups of any kind grow

because

> they

> > attract > people - people are attracted to things that make

them

> feel

> > > good. - if people are lazy and don't wish to change or grow,

they

> are

> > going to seek > (or be attracted to) things that make them

feel

> > comfortable

> > > staying the wayt hey are.

> >

> > Well, " attraction not promotion " is an oft repeated slogan.

> However,

> > one to two million people a year are coerced into step groups

every

> > year.

> >

> > > While I believe that recovery (growth, if you prefer) is a life

> long

> > process, AA in > general tends to tell people they are

> > > OK, they don't need to grow anymore. But, if they will buy

that,

> then

> > they didn't > have self respect in the first place, did they -

they

> just

> > wanted

> > > to be comforted and feel accepted and be told they were

doing what

> > they " should > do " ? I can't blame AA for not making people

seek to

> grow

> >

> > > more; not many institutions do (or can)... its the

responsibility

> of

> > individuals to grow > and to promote growth within others.

And I

> can't

> > even tell

> > > if you are trying to grow or promote growth in others, or if

you

> are

> > merely trying to > sabotage something that is more good

than bad (of

> > course

> > > its not perfect). The fact that AA does promote growth at all

is

> a

> > good thing - > every cloud has a silver lining.

> >

> > Take a good look next time you go to a meeting and if there

are any

> > people with a lot of Time (10 or 20 years) take a good look at

what

> they

> > are like away from meetings and tell me about " recovery " in

AA.

> >

> > > We disagree about humility... only through submission

may you

> > conquer. Better > believe that.

> >

> > Yes, and " War is peace. "

> >

> > >>Actually, about 70% of people stop or moderate their

drinking on

> their

> >

> > >>own. The only way anyone could possibly " recover " alone

is on a

> > >>deserted island with no one present. A much healthier

way to

> recover

> > is

> > >>to adopt the attitudes of those to whom alcohol is

irrelevant to

> their

> >

> > >>lives, not those who continuously obsess about it.

> >

> > How do you know? Theoretically, 100% of people stop or

moderate

> on

> > their own. Its impossible for someone else to stop for you.

So

> > what. If the (only) 30% (that is several million) are helped to

> quit

> > drinking through AA, then why bash it? Are you going to go

out and

> help

> >

> > that many people yourself? Are there that many people

reading this?

> >

> > You are forgetting the people that are harmed, that buy into

the

> > " Powerless " nonsense. If 100 people are given drug A for

the flu

> and

> > 100 people are given nothing for the flu, if 95 people given

drug A

> stay

> > sick and only 30 people who are given nothing stay sick,

would you

> ask,

> > " What is wrong with drug A if 5 people recover? "

> >

> > The five percent figure comes from AA internal documents.

> >

> > >> The choices, no matter what you have been led to believe,

are not

> > >> " active alcoholic " or good grouper. The real world is not

so

> narrow,

> > so

> > >> black and white. As a matter of fact, according to AA board

> member

> > >> Vaillant's research, those who go to AA not only

have no

> > better

> > >> success at remaining abstinent than those who refuse to

go, but

> AA

> > seems

> > >> to almost totally wipe out the moderation-recovery

category. So

> with

> >

> > >> AA, people do worse overall.

> >

> > > Okay so you are pulling some more shit out of your ass.

> >

> > Vaillant's research, which is in his book " The Natural

> History of

> > Alcoholism " may be shit. However, it clearly shows the

failure of

> AA.

> > Can you cite better authority, better research than that by an

AA

> board

> > member? Or are you just going to insist that black is white?

> >

> > > Since thats what you want to believe go ahead.

> >

> > I believe AA does far worse. I was citing a self-serving AA

source.

> >

> > > I do believe in alcholism, and that

> > > some people are alcoholics. You seem to be in denial. Do

you

> also

> > deny > cancer?

> >

> > Can some people get the disease of cancer from drinking

too much?

> > Certainly. Why is the behavior of drinking too much a

disease? Is

> > smoking a disease too? Is eating fatty foods a disease? Is

walking

> > into a hospital ward with patients with active TB a disease

too?

> >

> > > Perhaps they don't know every fact about alcoholism...

> > > same with cancer. Perhaps there is or is not a cure... as

yet I

> have

> > not seen it. I > did not say one must choose active

alcoholism or

> good

> > > grouper. I think you have moved beyond making up things

about AA

> to

> > making up > things I've said too! I won't stand for that.

> >

> > I'll tell you something I won't stand for. And that is coming

into

> > someone else's living room and going into attack mode in a

private

> > discussion as I've seen you do in other posts.

> >

> > >>They are " merely suggestions " which if one doesn't follow,

they

> are

> > >>supposedly condemning themselves to " jails, institutions

and

> death. "

> > >>Of course AA is a religious program even if one of their

most

> > fervently

> > >>held religious beliefs (and clichés) is that they are

> " spiritual,

> not

> > >>religious. " That is obvious to most anyone who is not a

member,

> > >>including several state Supreme Court rulings.

> >

> > > No actually, you don't have to follow the suggestions. You

very

> well

> > could end up > in jail, looney bin or dead if YOU *resume*

> _drinking_...

> > it

> > > doesn't say that if you don't follow _their_ suggestions you

will

> be

> > condemned. > For as literal as you take all of this you

certainly

> > misquote

> > > enough. And then you say... " the real world is not so

narrow, so

> > black and white. " > Well nothing is, but you paint AA with an

> absolute

> > > brush... there were only four absolutes that I can

remember...

> Why

> > don't you take > your absolute BS brush and start painting the

> > government

> > > or something... that ought to keep you busy. Oh wait, we

already

> have

> > enough > people working on that.

> >

> > Why don't you offer some documentation that my position is

wrong?

> From

> > the AA literature is fine instead of your spirtual bursts of

> obscenity.

> > Is that God speaking through you?

> >

> > >Does that mean that the Moonies, who probably have

millions of

> members

> > >but members who moderate alcohol/drug use rather than

abstain works

> > >better than AA or is somehow more powerful because

alcoholics and

> > >addicts in the Moonies manage to abstain?

> >

> > Umm what?

> >

> > When God rescues Moonies into their group, the alcoholics

and drug

> > addicts don't have to stop. God helps them moderate their

use.

> Isn't

> > AA's Higher Power as strong as Jesus Incarnate (Reverend

Moon)?

> >

> > >And at every Wednesday-night prayer meeting one will hear

> testimonials

> > >about how they've been saved only by the Grace of God and

it only

> could

> >

> > >have happened in that particular religious sect.

> >

> > Which is their " unalienable " (so far) right.

> >

> > Sure it is their right. But that does not make that good

evidence,

> > which was the point. Or are you going to argue that what one

hears

> in

> > infomercials is " The Truth. "

> >

> > >>The reason why we have an FDA is because people have

been very

> easily

> > >>fooled by snake oil salesmen.

> >

> > >> No, that is the reason you have the FDA - because you

(and too

> many

> > socialist >> pigs like you) believe people are too stupid to

think

> for

> > >> themselves and that you - their protector - must do the

thinking

> for

> > them.

> >

> > You don't even know if I am a socialist or not or in favor of the

> FDA.

> >

> > If people weren't so easily fooled by snake oil salesmen,

those who

> > pushed for the FDA would have had no argument and hence,

there'd be

> no

> > FDA.

> >

> > Socialist pig? Is your name calling because you want to

distract

> from

> > your pathetic, weak arguments?

> >

> > > Well, their security comes at the price of their freedom, and

you

> are

> > > the one who gets paid for it. If you would go out and get a

life

> > instead of sitting >on your pedestal trying to protect the world

> from

> > its own

> > > mindlessness the world would be a much better place -

actually it

> > would not

> > > make much difference as you are making no difference to

> > > anything, except spreading bullshit and lies about the

ability of

> > human beings to

> > > think for themselves. Let a person feel the consequences

of

> > > making bad choices and perhaps he will think a little

harder, and

> > choose more

> > > cautiously, correctly next time... then maybe you would have

> > > fewer false prophets (in the guise of organizations that help

> people)

> > that people

> > > cling to.

> >

> > I see. You believe that warning people that AA lies to the

public

> and

> > objecting to coerced AA indoctrination is wrong. Nice guy you

> are. You

> > wouldn't be the Satanist Nate/Thotahut that was banned from

this

> list by

> > any chance, would you?

> >

> > > AA does a very good job of emphasizing the

> > >importance of taking responsibility for one's own actions...

more

> than

> > any other >institution (besides Judaism) that I have come in

contact

> > with.

> > >Maybe thats what you don't like about it???

> >

> > >>How is God _not_ there?

> >

> > >(as we understood him) - you can understand yourself to be

god can

> you

> > not? You >do, don't you? Tis entirely in the eyes of the

> beholder...

> > if

> > >those eyes have no imagination and decide to believe in

something

> they

> > don't >believe, who's to blame? Not me.

> >

> > I ask again,

> >

> > Step 2: Came to believe that a Power greater than

> ourselves . .

> > .

> > Why is Power capitalized? Could they be talking about

Him?

> > Step 3: . . . turn our will and lives over to the care of

> God . .

> >

> > There's God.

> > Step 5: Admitted to God . . .

> > And again.

> > Step 6: Were entirely ready to have God . . .

> > Step 7: Humbly asked Him . . .

> > Anywhere else that Him even uncapitalized is referring to

> > doorknob or

> > bedpan?

> > Step 11: Him, God and His

> >

> > How is God _not_ there?

> >

> > >There are many reasons to not go. It is just a terrible

shame that

> > >people are led to believe they'll die if they don't go.

> >

> > > That has never happened to me. No one told me you better

go to a

> > meeting or >you will die. I have been warned not to drink,

thats a

> > different

> > >thing, and I heed that warning. People are also led to

believe

> that

> > they will burn in >hell if they don't worship one of a

> million " gods "

> > and they

> > >are also led to believe a government can solve all their

> problems... I

> > see much >bigger things to bitch about than AA, which by

and large

> does

> > >more good than harm (whether you can find facts that

support or

> demerit

> > that claim, >I know the truth), and more good than most

> organzitions,

> > >instutitions or other types of groups of people. By and large

it

> is a

> > good group of >people, which is something of a rarity in this

world.

> > And you

> > >condemn it. Fine, I condemn you because you are

imperfect. I

> won't

> > rest until the >world knows what a terrible imperfect being

you are.

> > >Actually its not worth my effort or time, and maybe someday

you

> will

> > see that your >crusade against AA is a waste of your time

too.

> > > I know we can't be too far apart on everything - there must

be

> some

> > reason we >subscribed to the same list, and it wasn't

because I

> want to

> > >talk all of you into going back to AA! I didn't ask you to

spout

> off

> > everything you >thought was wrong with AA, but you did, so I

tried

> to

> > set you

> > >straight where I think you are misthinking. I did ask what

you do

> in

> > place of >working the steps. I don't know about you, but the

steps

> > don't

> > >seem right for me anymore, however I do want to continue

with some

> sort

> > of >discipline that promotes the growth of my soul. I have

thought

> a

> > >lot of times of a replacement for the steps of AA... I don't get

> the

> > impression you >have thought in this vein, as most of our

> conversation

> > so far

> > >has been about the problems, without any solutions.

ly I

> don't

> > want to argue >with you anymore. You have as much right to

post

> here as

> >

> > >anyone, but if you don't put forth anything useful (to me), I

> won't be

> > reading what >you have to say.

> >

> > The list was started to get away from the groupers who

swamped and

> > disrupted in other ways the newsgroup

alt.recovery.from-12-steps.

> >

> > One of the reasons why the discussion has been about " the

problem

> rather

> > than the solution " is that the ideas that you brought here from

AA

> are

> > part of the problem. I'm not trying to attack in saying that,

but

> here,

> > that is the way things are seen. This is a different world from

the

> > world of AA.

> >

> > Of the hundreds of people on this list, few if any give the idea

of

> a

> > disease which requires prayer, meditation, confession,

proseletyzing

> > ( " carrying the message " ) and etc. as a cure any creedence.

When AA

> > platitudes and slogans are offered as the foundation of an

argument,

> > when we hear Programese, we categorically reject it

because we've

> been

> > there.

> >

> > There was a time many years ago when if there had been a

list such

> as

> > this, I myself would have responded very much as you have.

> >

> > The point is, take a look at some of the non-grouper

websites and

> > scientific literature. I've given you one url on the origins of

> AA.

> > Here is one where you can read a great deal about " the

disease "

> from a

> > non-AA perspective:

> >

> > http://www.peele.net

> >

> > Ken Ragge

October 11, 2000

Sorry again I disagree with someone.

> In the long run, such people would generally be better off going

> to jail. Jail can be traumatic, but it doesn't damage the psyche

> in the same insidious way that brainwashing does.

I am sorry but this is a ridiculous thing to say. Has there ever

been a study that confirmed that going to jail is a positive form of

rehabilitation? They say people end up in AA because they belong

there, and I guess people end up in jail because they belong there,

too, eh? For some reason you think imprisoning people is OK. 200

years ago, it was considered OK to enslave people. How long will it

take to realize that imprisonment is an equal evil? (1) But it

serves a purpose.... its cheap, you don't have to train the people in

charge of rehabilitating. Unless you mean weight training and

practicing on the shooting range. Psychologists couldn't hand me all

the answers, but they gave me a lot more to work with than a barbell

or ESPN in jail. Even unqualified people whose desire was to help me

were better than that. I don't have any numbers to support myself,

its like comparing apples and oranges... which taste better to you?

Somehow you just don't know what jail, or imprisoning (and sometimes

enslaving) people tastes like.

1 - " Oh Coolguy, you are so unrealistic... " Yeah but so are you

guys - trying to stamp out AA; if you are going after something that

is wrong... why not go after something that is REALLY

wrong? " Because we aren't smart enough nor do we trust ourselves

enough to KNOW its wrong, Coolguy! "

And if you want to attack brainwashing, go after some SERIOUS

brainwashing. You guys are small potatoes. I have bigger fish to

fry.

> >Oh I feel lots of pity for people getting sentenced to AA

meetings. Sob

> >sob. They might be ordered to go to the meetings, but no judge

can force

> >any thought or belief on anyone.

>

> I feel sympathy and a good deal of concern for such people.

> Exposure to AA can be extremely damaging to the young and

> impressionable, and even mature adults can find themselves

> injured and shaken after sufficient forced exposure.

The correct adjective to use in that sentence is " weak " not

mature. They are almost opposites, and you used the wrong one.

Physical maturity is too often assumed to accompany metal maturity.

Many people have yet to discover that a mind can mature!

> How many people have the " disease " and " powerlessness "

> lies burned into their subconscious, even while consciously

> resisting the blandishments to convert to AA? These

> people have been deeply harmed by the implanted belief

> that they are somehow defective and not able to control

> themselves as normal people do. It's no surprise that

> so many people start drinking *more* heavily after exposure

> to AA.

The powerless over alcohol (ie - the terrible first drink and its

all over) is the only powerlessness I was ever taught in AA. Maybe

thats because I am smarter than you and refused to accept these other

powerlessness concepts you are accusing AA of, or maybe its because

nobody tried to force it on me. I think I distanced myself from

anyone who tried to get " too out there " for me. I do that whether I

am at a meeting, a class, work, or a party, ya know. If someone

hasn't learned to distance himself from whackos, maybe he needs to

learn to do that... the hard way.

> Brainwashing is very difficult to resist when one is not free to

> walk away from it. How many can go through such an experience

> entirely unscathed?

What doesn't kill you makes you stronger, and you sound like a

wimp.

Oh I see you're a female. How sad. Females are trained to be

weak, trained to depend on men, why don't you bitch about THAT?

Bigger fish.... something worthwhile, at least. Fix what NEEDS

fixing.

> Forced or coerced AA is a travesty and a tragedy. It's just

> as immoral as forced Methodism, and a lot more harmful.

Lots of tragedies in this world, if you open your eyes. Go on

with your rhetoric. Is forced Methodism worse than jail??? THE

answer is NO! While it is possible for one's body to be held

captive, it is impossible to imprison his soul. I guess we all still

have some things to learn.

>

October 11, 2000

At 11:25 PM 10/11/00 +0000, you wrote:

> Sorry again I disagree with someone.

> > In the long run, such people would generally be better off going

> > to jail. Jail can be traumatic, but it doesn't damage the psyche

> > in the same insidious way that brainwashing does.

>

> I am sorry but this is a ridiculous thing to say. Has there ever

>been a study that confirmed that going to jail is a positive form of

>rehabilitation?

There have been several which confirmed that recidivism is

lower for DWI with traditional jail than with the new treatment-

oriented first-offender programs.

>They say people end up in AA because they belong

>there, and I guess people end up in jail because they belong there,

>too, eh?

Of course I never said that.

> For some reason you think imprisoning people is OK.

Of course I never said that either.

>200

>years ago, it was considered OK to enslave people. How long will it

>take to realize that imprisonment is an equal evil? (1) But it

>serves a purpose.... its cheap, you don't have to train the people in

>charge of rehabilitating. Unless you mean weight training and

>practicing on the shooting range. Psychologists couldn't hand me all

>the answers, but they gave me a lot more to work with than a barbell

>or ESPN in jail. Even unqualified people whose desire was to help me

>were better than that. I don't have any numbers to support myself,

>its like comparing apples and oranges... which taste better to you?

>Somehow you just don't know what jail, or imprisoning (and sometimes

>enslaving) people tastes like.

You are of course completely wrong. In fact I've done both.

Traditional jail, with no brainwashing, is less harmful in the long

run. I know this from my own experience as well as from the

studies.

The forced labor can be pretty nasty. Still, it's easier to recover

from that than from the brainwashing.

[snip of some other random stuff that he put in here for some reason

.. . . not related to any quotes of mine]

> I feel sympathy and a good deal of concern for such people.

> > Exposure to AA can be extremely damaging to the young and

> > impressionable, and even mature adults can find themselves

> > injured and shaken after sufficient forced exposure.

>

> The correct adjective to use in that sentence is " weak " not

>mature. They are almost opposites, and you used the wrong one.

>Physical maturity is too often assumed to accompany metal maturity.

>Many people have yet to discover that a mind can mature!

Too bad that the process is so often aborted by forced AA,

isn't it?

> > How many people have the " disease " and " powerlessness "

> > lies burned into their subconscious, even while consciously

> > resisting the blandishments to convert to AA? These

> > people have been deeply harmed by the implanted belief

> > that they are somehow defective and not able to control

> > themselves as normal people do. It's no surprise that

> > so many people start drinking *more* heavily after exposure

> > to AA.

>

> The powerless over alcohol (ie - the terrible first drink and its

>all over) is the only powerlessness I was ever taught in AA. Maybe

>thats because I am smarter than you and refused to accept these other

>powerlessness concepts you are accusing AA of,

Actually, that's the only one I ever referred to.

You're certainly not smarter than me. Your inability to distinguish

different people is proof enough of that, as is your silly attempt

to claim that I must looooooove jail simply because I'm aware

that other things are worse.

>or maybe its because

>nobody tried to force it on me. I think I distanced myself from

>anyone who tried to get " too out there " for me. I do that whether I

>am at a meeting, a class, work, or a party, ya know. If someone

>hasn't learned to distance himself from whackos, maybe he needs to

>learn to do that... the hard way.

Even while being forced into their company 24/7? Yeah, right.

> > Brainwashing is very difficult to resist when one is not free to

> > walk away from it. How many can go through such an experience

> > entirely unscathed?

>

> What doesn't kill you makes you stronger, and you sound like a

>wimp.

> Oh I see you're a female. How sad. Females are trained to be

>weak, trained to depend on men, why don't you bitch about THAT?

>Bigger fish.... something worthwhile, at least. Fix what NEEDS

>fixing.

What a silly and stupid attempt to provoke me. It's particularly

amusing since you just finished boasting about how mature you

think you are.

> > Forced or coerced AA is a travesty and a tragedy. It's just

> > as immoral as forced Methodism, and a lot more harmful.

>

> Lots of tragedies in this world, if you open your eyes. Go on

>with your rhetoric. Is forced Methodism worse than jail??? THE

>answer is NO! While it is possible for one's body to be held

>captive, it is impossible to imprison his soul. I guess we all still

>have some things to learn.

That is precisely what forced " treatment " attempts to do -- imprison

the soul. Yes, imprisonment plus brainwashing is worse than

simple imprisonment. Two bad things don't somehow become

less bad because they're done together.

Sign In

Re: Welcome to 12-step-free

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Popular Days

Popular Days

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites