Hi..new member here!

[Guest guest]

Dear Carl.

I'm not talking about anything other than taking personal responsibility

for picking up a drink when in doing so one knows that personal

behavior can be anthing from foolishness to murder.

Who's to blame? " Disease " . society, poor upbringing, genes, life?

Who cares? It's my life that I'm concerned about and if I'm doing

something that could destroy whatever life I have and maybe hurt a lot

of innocent peopl along the way, I " d better think of it as a moral

question.

[Guest guest]

Oh, yes....I was aware of my chidren when they were born. Slowly

watching their awakening to their world. It left me knowing I was a

caregiver, not a law-giver and for that reason I was always in a

position of enjoying them for who they were and not for who I thought

they should be. They are all adults now and I still feel the same way.

I'm happyto hear about your son. Successful living is always to be

commended and it sounds like he is finding his way in this world of

ours.

My youngest is 28 and he's quite a maverick. Living in Alaska and

thinks a cabin in the mountains is heaven on earth....can't wait to see

him again.

Tell me more about yourself.

[Guest guest]

Yes!!!! Personal empowerment and responsiblity for one's actions.

[Guest guest]

Tinqu,

By " XA " I mean any of the anonymous groups, ie any and all 12step outfits,

who may fairly be bundled together as XA because they all place the steps at

the centre. Others in this group use XA too -- indeed I picked it up in

here, and I assume they mean the same as I do.

In UK, where I was pretty regular XA (ie NA and AA) in 1985 -- 1987 there is

little or no explicit Christian stuff -- I never heard the Lord's Prayer

used at meetings, but ALWAYS the serenity prayer. The closest XAs come to

Church is using Church rooms etc for their meetings. I confess myself a

Christian, though I have radical and non-conformist views and experience of

God's Will, and detach myself utterly from right-wing Bible-bashing

fascists. I privately regard XA as un-Christian in essence and would even

argue it's evil in as absolute or theological a sense of the word as you

like. I agree with your outrage at the terrible disempowerment of the

individual, the acceptance of humiliation of which the reverse is XA sadism.

As far as theology goes, I recall Christ's challenging question " Can Satan

cast out Satan? " -- I guess no, but he may give you a better billet in hell

with XA, so long as you swallow a big lie or two from the " father of lies " .

Best wishes

.

>From: Tinquerbelle@...

>Reply-To: 12-step-freeegroups

>To: 12-step-freeegroups

>Subject: Re: Hi..new member here!

>Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 19:30:41 -0400 (EDT)

>

>Dear Doug,

>

>I notice in my local paper (deep south, as deep as you can get without

>hitting Pueto Rico) that there is a Chrisian AA group in town. Is this

>what you are referring to as XA?

>

>If so, I'm temptd to go to one of their meetings.

>As a stealth heathen, of course. In this town, it wouldn't surprise me

>to see the confederate flag and a few KKK emblems hung over the coffee

>pot.

>

>As an ex-AAer. I have no compulsion to anonymity and would love to

>expose these fanatics for what they are.

>

>I'm torn in a minor way because I have cared and been cared for by many

>decent AA;'s over the years. But even in the most stable of groups,

>and I'm talking 20, 30+ years of sobriety, I still see abuses of the

>newcomer, mistreatment of those really suffering with problems in living

>that left me non-plussed as to the heartlessness of the rigors of AA

>demands.

>

>AA denies people of free-thinking. It's sad but true.....

>

>All those who are angry at mistreatment and injustice in their lives are

>denied the right to be angry and the right to fight foir their civil

>rights because they may jeopardize their sobriety.

>

>I was disgusted. To deny another the right to his civil rights because

>he is an " alcoholic " and dare not become engaged in controversy because

>he can't afford the " dubvious luxery of anger " is horrifying in it's

>implications.

>

>If I wanted to take over the world and be Queen of Earth, I would have

>all people go to Step Meetings and spend their time working the steps

>and discussing their personal " issues " while I raped them of their

>individuality and tld them I accepted their amends for my criminal

>behavior.

>

>But alas. I can't, because the treatment industry in this country beat

>me to it!

>

>

>

________________________________________________________________________

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

[Guest guest]

Carl, you write of

" certain personality who thrive of absolutistism and providing a rationale

for keeping whole classes of people in subjugation " -- in defining this

class of person you sum up what is wrong at the heart of XA and the social

tendencies that have encouraged the growth of " the wonderful fellowships " in

recent decades. This is a truth about XA that is above and beyond the

" disease or not " stuff -- but the disease gambit is the absolute on which

the stepNazis base their cult practices of control and subjugation.

good luck out there,

.

>

>Reply-To: 12-step-freeegroups

>To: 12-step-freeegroups

>Subject: Re: Hi..new member here!

>Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 20:06:12 -0500

>

>I can see we're never going to come to a consensus on this.

>

>First of all I never look at moral questions in terms of absolutes. Very

>few things in life are absolute.

>

>I think that there are degrees of responsibility for our actions. There

>have to be punishments for actions and I accept that. Seldom are

>punishments inflicted on citizens, however, done with true justice. If you

>doubt that, I invite you to visit the American South. You pick the state.

>

>Punishment can be used as a deterrent for drinking. But reducing drinking

>to simple minded moral question not only ignores the scientific literature,

>it is not an effectual means to assure sobriety. Quite frankly I don't

>agree that alcoholism that could simply vanish if a bunch of contrary

>drunks would just make the simple decision to stay sober. It just isn't

>that simple.

>

>Those who make the laws are those in power. They need to justify their

>right to rule and it is quite simple to do that using classes of citizens

>like drug addicts and drunks who generally lack political power and

>influence. Thus we are spending enormous sums to imprison millions of

>people in systems which do little discourage the incidence of addiction.

>The facts are quite clear. As a matter of fact, this system has every

>indication of aggravating the problem since it reduces its victims to a

>lifetime low level employment at best and impoverishment. Is that

> " moral? "

>

>Of course the individual addict needs to be encouraged to make rational

>decisions regarding addiction. The problem is what that methodology

>should. A harsh, simplistic, " moral " (read religious) based approach we

>know does not work and is opposed to what is know scientifically about the

>nature of addiction. Why then insist upon an approach to the problem which

>patently false and a failure? It may be pleasing to certain personality

>who thrive of absolutistism and providing a rationale for keeping whole

>classes of people in subjugation. It does little to address the real

>problem.

________________________________________________________________________

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

[Guest guest]

Is anyone familiar with Clancy Illismund according to many in the Omaha,

Nebraska area he is infallible and holds the authority of the pope. He has a

disciple in Bellevue, Nebraska who makes his living off AA named Dick .

He runs a large rally like group of meetings. His wife does too. They

believe you should never question your sponsor and do exactly what your

sponsor says. I fired my sponsor from this group immediately. One time I

was reading a Rational Recovery Book and my Landlord who was in AA confronted

me about this. I told him this was the United States and I was free to read

anything I wanted. I dropped out of AA over 7 years ago. THe first night I

did I got really drunk and puked. The next morning I thought of going back

to AA but decided I would rather die. I then decided I really didn't have to

get drunk just because I didn't go to AA. I discovered I really wasn't an

alcoholic. I just smoked a lot of pot and drank too much in my late teens

and very early twenties. I haven't been in any trouble since I dropped out

of AA. I realized what I originally thought before I went to 12 step

treatment was true. That I smoked pot because alcohol didn't agree with me.

I was addicted to pot not alcohol. I no longer hang out with drug users so I

have no opportunity to smoke pot. I don't drink anymore either. I am very

very anti-AA.

[Guest guest]

Re: Hi..new member here!

> I'm torn in a minor way because I have cared and been cared for by many

> decent AA;'s over the years. But even in the most stable of groups,

> and I'm talking 20, 30+ years of sobriety, I still see abuses of the

> newcomer, mistreatment of those really suffering with problems in living

> that left me non-plussed as to the heartlessness of the rigors of AA

> demands.

>

> AA denies people of free-thinking. It's sad but true.....

>

> All those who are angry at mistreatment and injustice in their lives are

> denied the right to be angry and the right to fight foir their civil

> rights because they may jeopardize their sobriety.

>

> I was disgusted. To deny another the right to his civil rights because

> he is an " alcoholic " and dare not become engaged in controversy because

> he can't afford the " dubvious luxery of anger " is horrifying in it's

> implications.

Wow! I really like reading your posts. Here is an exchange on another

list that I think illustrates exactly what you wrote about. It breaks my

heart to read this acount of AA abuse. I did my best to respond and tell

her to trust her own instincts and feelings but I know that the AA vultures

will likely have their way with her.

From a new AA member:

> Hi group. I am in need of some feedback. Im having bad feelings about my

sponsor, And I am not sure >if it is me or if the feelings are legitimate.

I went with her and her husband to the International

> Convention and it was there that I started to know her personally. I find

her very opinionated, >argumentive and over bearing. There were times I just

wanted to yell at her and tell that my

> feelings count too and her way is not always the only way. I never did,

but I can tell you

> by the last day I could hardly stand her. Then she insisted that I comitt

to reading the big Book with her >once a week, to which I said I would,

because I know I needed to do something that

> would help me grow in the program. So far, I have left her home feeling so

horrible. An

> insperational experience it is not. There are things her and I do not

agree on, and I guess she feel her way is the only way. It is hard for me to

explain, but what do I do?

> Sober hugs,

> Vickie

>

> " Live one day at a time "

Now the response from a veteran Programmer.

Vickie,

I was in a similar spot several 24s ago, I thought

my sponsor was out to lunch and asked another guy that

had the same sponsor and he pointed out that I was the

problem, not the sponsor.

He told me to talk to the sponsor and explain how I

felt and go from there. I did as he suggested and it

turned out that my sponsor was giving me what he

thought i was asking for...which I was- just I didn't

know that was what i was doing. Well, we got it all

straightened out and things have gone well ever since.

As a sponsor, I've been fired because of a lack of

communications and I've fired pigeons that found they

no longer wanted what i had to offer. When i " fire " a

pigeon, I first try to (1) sort out the problem

(2)offer alternative solutions (3) offer to help find

a new sponsor that espouses views similar to what the

sticking point was twixt us.

Sponsoring is too valuable to not be used to

everyones advantage...there are far more newcomers in

need than sponsors available and the only way to fill

the void is to help our pigeons become able to reach

out to others.

Thats all from here...Charliep

[Guest guest]

Re: Hi..new member here!

Hi Carl. I have a few comments on your post.

> But the research I have seen and certainly the experience of my own family

> tells me that there is a strong genetic and social component to the

ailment.

> I have no doubt whatsoever on that.

I agree. I know that for me I can't fit into any one mold of what addiction

is and what the solution is.

>Once the phenomenon begins and alcohol

> sinks its fangs into a person it is not at all easy for the preponderance

of

> alcoholics to shake it.

Again, I feel the same way. I read some of the RR literature and a lot of

AVRT helps me. However, it is too simplistic for me to just say that I

won't drink again. I am still learning though and I've read some intriguing

descriptions from people who have seemed to " tame the beast " in that way.

>We have to learn to go against what

> has become a integral part of us and to transform ourselves. Changing any

> habit or form of behavior is difficult and addictions are especially

> difficult to alter.

This is exactly where I am with my addiction. Right now what I'm learning

at SMART makes the most sense and seems to be exactly what I can use right

now to change my thinking that leads to my decision to use alcohol and other

drugs. It isn't easy but at least I can see an actual solution. That was

not that the case with AA where I felt totally hopeless and helpless.

Take care and definitely keep posting your experience and ideas.

Chris

[Guest guest]

Hi Carl

From the below it seems that you might be falling into the false

dilemma that if one rejects a biological model of alcoholism one must

automatically adopt a moral one. This is a non sequitir. Being blunt

about it, one could say that perhaps it isnt about being sick or bad

but just about being stoopid - acquiring a very bad habit. By not

drinking at all till 21, you were denied the chance to learn moderate

drinking habits at earlier, more formative years. Also, alcohol may

have helped you cope with psychogiocal difficulties, perhaps that you

might not have been aware of, which is why you succumbed so quickly.

AS it happens, I am not a total psychosocial modeller who rejects

genetic influences entirely... I aspire to full biopsychosocial

status. However, I can never resist the temptation to jump in when I

see reasoning that appears to support genetic causation for a

behavior

which in fact is entirely explicable by psychosocial factors.

Pete

> I don't know how much you've read about alcoholism and addiction,

but the

> matter is not nearly so simple as you postulate. Your surmising

that I have

> suffered a great deal is quite correct. I have suffered far more

and far

> longer than most. To attribute this to the mere ornery desire to

continue

> with a selfish, immoral desire to drink is quite simplistic. The

academic

> literature continues to rage as to roots of alcoholism. Billions

of

dollars

> rest on find the answser to that problem. Lives are ruined daily

because of

> it. If it were a simple matter getting people to make " moral "

decisions do

> you think we would be shipping thousands of people off the prisons

daily

> which they had been trying desperately to avoid?

>

> I have not been on this list long but I notice a consensus of

opinion

> against the " disease " model. I don't subscribe to notion entirely

myself.

> But the research I have seen and certainly the experience of my own

family

> tells me that there is a strong genetic and social component to the

ailment.

> I have no doubt whatsoever on that. Once the phenomenon begins and

alcohol

> sinks its fangs into a person it is not at all easy for the

preponderance of

> alcoholics to shake it. A little prayer and slap on the hands will

not

> transform us into " moral " creatures. We have to learn to go

against

what

> has become a integral part of us and to transform ourselves.

Changing any

> habit or form of behavior is difficult and addictions are especially

> difficult to alter. A lecture on morality is totally ineffectual in

> practically every instance.

>

> Turning us into immoral beings is going to do little to cause us to

want to

> be sober. It is only going to affirm our sense of worthlessness

and

self

> contempt. That is not going to get us sober nor does it reflect

our

true

> nature.

>

> I think most of us have a predisposition to alcohol born in us.

This does

> not mean we are diseased any more than a predisposition to breast

cancer or

> heart disease is a disease. It becomes a psychological and physical

> condition, however, once we activate that predisposition. I didn't

have my

> first drink until I was 21. I didn't have my second drink until I

was 22.

> Within three months of beginning to drink I was a full blown

alcoholic. My

> experience is not unique by any means. In fact, it is quite

common.

My

> morals didn't change during that time, by the way. Most people

don't alter

> their morals after about the age of eighteen as you may know. I

attribute

> my quick succombing to alcohol to a very strong genetic

predisposition of

> which I was unaware. I was then placed in circumstances where I

had

no

> understanding of alcohol and no desire to learn about it. I

attributed all

> my problems to a myriad of other factors. Other problems were

certainly

> there unrelated to alcohol, but alcohol made them a great deal

worse. It

> became extraordinarily difficult to extricate myself from that

condition, a

> struggle I am now engaged in again. It is not a moral problem.

All

efforts

> to force me to consider it as such have failed and will continue to

do so.

> I still consider my morality to be far more imbued with integrity

than those

> around me who are intent on making me suffer for moral failure. It

is their

> morality which is at skewed.

>

>

> Re: Hi..new member here!

>

>

> > Dear Carl,

> >

> > This is my point.....I really can't see any way around it.

> >

> >

> > Where does the responsibility lie for drunken behavior? On a

" disease "

> > or on personal choice to pick up a drink?

> >

> > AA would say that degredation while drinking is the fault of

" disease "

> > and the only way to stop this " insane " (immoral) behavior is

through

> > faith in a " god " and moral improvement and adaily repreive from

taking a

> > drink by the " grace of " god and the Fellowship of AA.) But if the

> > " disease " is the cause of moral deficiency, why treat the

symptoms?

> >

> > Why not just cure the " disease " and quit drinking for good based

on a

> > moral choice (as in, I don't want to die from this stupid

behavior

and I

> > don't want to harm others beause of my choosing to drink)

> >

> > AA says that picking up the first drink that leads to insanity is

not my

> > fault but the behavior that ensues from intoxication is? Do you

see the

> > dliemna I've got here. Further, that f I drink it is because I

didn't

> > work the program (moral improvement) which means I'm not moral if

I

> > choose to drink again. Are you beginning to grasp the insanity

of

this

> > thinking?

> >

> > If I pick up a drink and swallow it, knowing that I may commit a

crime

> > (driving while intoxicated, for example) and go ahead and do it

anyway,

> > it is not my reponsibility if I end up killing someone on the

highway.

> > It was my " disease "

> > rearinng it's ugly head.

> >

> > I place no judgment on your reasons to escape reality and from

the

sound

> > of it, life has not been kind to you.

> >

> > My gripe is with AA philosophy. It robs people of the right to

make

> > moral choices by tellig them they can't help their immorality.

That

> > they are " diseased " , instead of people who made stupid choices

and

from

> > those strpid choices have harmed themselves and others by

deliberately

> > picking up a drink in a very selfish manner.

> >

> > Behavior while in a drunken stupor is understandable. That one

goes

> > ahead and dinks anyway with a history of insane behavior is a

moral

> > choice, not a " disease " And those who accept the reasoning of

moral

> > choice at least have a chance of individualtiy and autonomy.

Those in

> > AA do not; they are forever chained to immobilization in their

> > " humility " and their " defects " .

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >