Guest guest Posted January 27, 2001 Report Share Posted January 27, 2001 I really don't like to give advice to people I don't know, because even the people I do know don't listen to it. However, I sent you the name of a book yesterday, and I really think that would be helpful reading .. Also, habits are bad. Drinking becomes a habit. As does smoking cigarettes, as does smoking crack. And same with meetings. You get into the habit of going to meetings. You get in the habit of calling a sponsor or someone else who tells you how fucked up you are - you get in a habit of seeking out negative reinforcement, while you'd be much better to have a habit of seeking positive reinforcenment. You won't find positive reinforcement in AA - I doubt if you'll find a lot of it here - some of these people are pretty negative, myself included, at times. So, my suggestion is to not do anything habitually for a while. Break your bad habits. AA and doctors say that geographical cures are bad, however sometimes you need one in order to break a bad habit. I know I couldn't have quit smoking while living with other smokers. So I moved into a smokefree place, and I was able to quit that bad habit. If you have a bad habit of talking to people who cause you harm, and can't make yourself avoid these people - you might need to move. If you lose the losers without moving, then more power to you, but escaping unhappiness is imperative, whether a doctor or AA big book thumper tells you are wrong to escape or not. Its funny, AA people told you not to hang out with your old using friends anymore - you have to look at them the same way... those people in AA are doing something that is harmful for themselves and harmful to you. You are better off to avoid them and the harm they cause. Just like active users would use peer pressure to get you to use again when you are trying to not use, people in AA will try to peer pressure you back to AA - and you already know that you are suscpetible to their bullshit - so just avoid it! Avoid it... like the plaque... at all costs. Thats my advice. G'lck Re: need more advice > Hi , > > Ben's suggestion is a good one. > > Some others--take an adult education course, join a sports team (coed > volleyball at a YMCA or YWCA, for example), try a civic club (Lions, > Kiwanis, Optimists), volunteer for a cause you believe in.... > > And here's a radically different suggestion. When you feel the need > to talk, do something different--take a walk, go for a run, or some > other type of exercise. > > Pyschologists have found that talking about problems is often not a > very effective way to regulate our emotions. ( Thayer, THE > ORIGIN OF EVERYDAY MOODS)In fact, it may make things worse. The best > strategy for overcoming negative emotions appears to be exercise. A > fifteen or twenty minute walk will often do wonders for one's > spirits. > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 27, 2001 Report Share Posted January 27, 2001 I really don't like to give advice to people I don't know, because even the people I do know don't listen to it. However, I sent you the name of a book yesterday, and I really think that would be helpful reading .. Also, habits are bad. Drinking becomes a habit. As does smoking cigarettes, as does smoking crack. And same with meetings. You get into the habit of going to meetings. You get in the habit of calling a sponsor or someone else who tells you how fucked up you are - you get in a habit of seeking out negative reinforcement, while you'd be much better to have a habit of seeking positive reinforcenment. You won't find positive reinforcement in AA - I doubt if you'll find a lot of it here - some of these people are pretty negative, myself included, at times. So, my suggestion is to not do anything habitually for a while. Break your bad habits. AA and doctors say that geographical cures are bad, however sometimes you need one in order to break a bad habit. I know I couldn't have quit smoking while living with other smokers. So I moved into a smokefree place, and I was able to quit that bad habit. If you have a bad habit of talking to people who cause you harm, and can't make yourself avoid these people - you might need to move. If you lose the losers without moving, then more power to you, but escaping unhappiness is imperative, whether a doctor or AA big book thumper tells you are wrong to escape or not. Its funny, AA people told you not to hang out with your old using friends anymore - you have to look at them the same way... those people in AA are doing something that is harmful for themselves and harmful to you. You are better off to avoid them and the harm they cause. Just like active users would use peer pressure to get you to use again when you are trying to not use, people in AA will try to peer pressure you back to AA - and you already know that you are suscpetible to their bullshit - so just avoid it! Avoid it... like the plaque... at all costs. Thats my advice. G'lck Re: need more advice > Hi , > > Ben's suggestion is a good one. > > Some others--take an adult education course, join a sports team (coed > volleyball at a YMCA or YWCA, for example), try a civic club (Lions, > Kiwanis, Optimists), volunteer for a cause you believe in.... > > And here's a radically different suggestion. When you feel the need > to talk, do something different--take a walk, go for a run, or some > other type of exercise. > > Pyschologists have found that talking about problems is often not a > very effective way to regulate our emotions. ( Thayer, THE > ORIGIN OF EVERYDAY MOODS)In fact, it may make things worse. The best > strategy for overcoming negative emotions appears to be exercise. A > fifteen or twenty minute walk will often do wonders for one's > spirits. > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 27, 2001 Report Share Posted January 27, 2001 I really don't like to give advice to people I don't know, because even the people I do know don't listen to it. However, I sent you the name of a book yesterday, and I really think that would be helpful reading .. Also, habits are bad. Drinking becomes a habit. As does smoking cigarettes, as does smoking crack. And same with meetings. You get into the habit of going to meetings. You get in the habit of calling a sponsor or someone else who tells you how fucked up you are - you get in a habit of seeking out negative reinforcement, while you'd be much better to have a habit of seeking positive reinforcenment. You won't find positive reinforcement in AA - I doubt if you'll find a lot of it here - some of these people are pretty negative, myself included, at times. So, my suggestion is to not do anything habitually for a while. Break your bad habits. AA and doctors say that geographical cures are bad, however sometimes you need one in order to break a bad habit. I know I couldn't have quit smoking while living with other smokers. So I moved into a smokefree place, and I was able to quit that bad habit. If you have a bad habit of talking to people who cause you harm, and can't make yourself avoid these people - you might need to move. If you lose the losers without moving, then more power to you, but escaping unhappiness is imperative, whether a doctor or AA big book thumper tells you are wrong to escape or not. Its funny, AA people told you not to hang out with your old using friends anymore - you have to look at them the same way... those people in AA are doing something that is harmful for themselves and harmful to you. You are better off to avoid them and the harm they cause. Just like active users would use peer pressure to get you to use again when you are trying to not use, people in AA will try to peer pressure you back to AA - and you already know that you are suscpetible to their bullshit - so just avoid it! Avoid it... like the plaque... at all costs. Thats my advice. G'lck Re: need more advice > Hi , > > Ben's suggestion is a good one. > > Some others--take an adult education course, join a sports team (coed > volleyball at a YMCA or YWCA, for example), try a civic club (Lions, > Kiwanis, Optimists), volunteer for a cause you believe in.... > > And here's a radically different suggestion. When you feel the need > to talk, do something different--take a walk, go for a run, or some > other type of exercise. > > Pyschologists have found that talking about problems is often not a > very effective way to regulate our emotions. ( Thayer, THE > ORIGIN OF EVERYDAY MOODS)In fact, it may make things worse. The best > strategy for overcoming negative emotions appears to be exercise. A > fifteen or twenty minute walk will often do wonders for one's > spirits. > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 27, 2001 Report Share Posted January 27, 2001 This is kind of what Shermer said about a month ago on Politically Incorrect. Loose quote being " the difference between established religion and a cult is [50 years] " . It effectively highlights the fact that the term cult is derisively thrown around a bit too much in this country. As far as AA is concerned it's enough to say and show that it is indeed religious, contrary to the general line of argument to the contrary by it's members. (even though I'm the last to stay with that reasoning) Is it a cult? Of course it is or it's so close to being one the distinction is so infinitesimal as to be almost indistinguishable. More importantly though it's religious. It's more important, I believe, precisely because the term cult is thrown around so freely. It's too easy to throw off that accusation as the hostile rantings of ex-members. Religious now that's a little more difficult to put off. Even Jim Shirk had to admit that there are " religious aspects " to AA. Of course he did so to avoid being completely honest and admitting that it is indeed and has always been Religious to it's core. You know the funny part was that he claimed it then shortly claimed that Spiritualism doesn't equal religious. So naturally I asked him if AA was spiritual not religious how could AA have religious aspects? As you can imagine I have yet to receive an answer on that one. > Re: need more advice > > >Hi Ben > >There is a Xtian Minister on the freedomofmind group who has an >anti-cults page. Apparently the Big Names in Xtianity, Catholic, >Episcopalian, etc., basically have drawn up a kind of " Industry >Standard " of what is real " Biblical " Xtianity that you must stick >to for them to accept as being a legitimate Xtian Church, and they >call anything a cult, however benevolent to its members, that doesnt >comply with the standard. > >P. > > >> > >> >Hey, >> > >> >Its and I havent had to many responses. Anyway I need >some help >> >here. >> >> >I dont really know where to begin to meet new people. Please get >back to me >> >with your input. >> >> At the risk of promoting something that might itself be called a >cult >> (I've actually heard of funamentalist Christians call it a cult), go >to >> this website <http://www.uua.org/>, click on Congregations and find >the >> congregation nearest you, and go to their next " religious service " . >> Ironically, this is one place where you won't be told what to >believe. >> >> > >> >Thanks, >> > >> > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 27, 2001 Report Share Posted January 27, 2001 This is kind of what Shermer said about a month ago on Politically Incorrect. Loose quote being " the difference between established religion and a cult is [50 years] " . It effectively highlights the fact that the term cult is derisively thrown around a bit too much in this country. As far as AA is concerned it's enough to say and show that it is indeed religious, contrary to the general line of argument to the contrary by it's members. (even though I'm the last to stay with that reasoning) Is it a cult? Of course it is or it's so close to being one the distinction is so infinitesimal as to be almost indistinguishable. More importantly though it's religious. It's more important, I believe, precisely because the term cult is thrown around so freely. It's too easy to throw off that accusation as the hostile rantings of ex-members. Religious now that's a little more difficult to put off. Even Jim Shirk had to admit that there are " religious aspects " to AA. Of course he did so to avoid being completely honest and admitting that it is indeed and has always been Religious to it's core. You know the funny part was that he claimed it then shortly claimed that Spiritualism doesn't equal religious. So naturally I asked him if AA was spiritual not religious how could AA have religious aspects? As you can imagine I have yet to receive an answer on that one. > Re: need more advice > > >Hi Ben > >There is a Xtian Minister on the freedomofmind group who has an >anti-cults page. Apparently the Big Names in Xtianity, Catholic, >Episcopalian, etc., basically have drawn up a kind of " Industry >Standard " of what is real " Biblical " Xtianity that you must stick >to for them to accept as being a legitimate Xtian Church, and they >call anything a cult, however benevolent to its members, that doesnt >comply with the standard. > >P. > > >> > >> >Hey, >> > >> >Its and I havent had to many responses. Anyway I need >some help >> >here. >> >> >I dont really know where to begin to meet new people. Please get >back to me >> >with your input. >> >> At the risk of promoting something that might itself be called a >cult >> (I've actually heard of funamentalist Christians call it a cult), go >to >> this website <http://www.uua.org/>, click on Congregations and find >the >> congregation nearest you, and go to their next " religious service " . >> Ironically, this is one place where you won't be told what to >believe. >> >> > >> >Thanks, >> > >> > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 27, 2001 Report Share Posted January 27, 2001 This is kind of what Shermer said about a month ago on Politically Incorrect. Loose quote being " the difference between established religion and a cult is [50 years] " . It effectively highlights the fact that the term cult is derisively thrown around a bit too much in this country. As far as AA is concerned it's enough to say and show that it is indeed religious, contrary to the general line of argument to the contrary by it's members. (even though I'm the last to stay with that reasoning) Is it a cult? Of course it is or it's so close to being one the distinction is so infinitesimal as to be almost indistinguishable. More importantly though it's religious. It's more important, I believe, precisely because the term cult is thrown around so freely. It's too easy to throw off that accusation as the hostile rantings of ex-members. Religious now that's a little more difficult to put off. Even Jim Shirk had to admit that there are " religious aspects " to AA. Of course he did so to avoid being completely honest and admitting that it is indeed and has always been Religious to it's core. You know the funny part was that he claimed it then shortly claimed that Spiritualism doesn't equal religious. So naturally I asked him if AA was spiritual not religious how could AA have religious aspects? As you can imagine I have yet to receive an answer on that one. > Re: need more advice > > >Hi Ben > >There is a Xtian Minister on the freedomofmind group who has an >anti-cults page. Apparently the Big Names in Xtianity, Catholic, >Episcopalian, etc., basically have drawn up a kind of " Industry >Standard " of what is real " Biblical " Xtianity that you must stick >to for them to accept as being a legitimate Xtian Church, and they >call anything a cult, however benevolent to its members, that doesnt >comply with the standard. > >P. > > >> > >> >Hey, >> > >> >Its and I havent had to many responses. Anyway I need >some help >> >here. >> >> >I dont really know where to begin to meet new people. Please get >back to me >> >with your input. >> >> At the risk of promoting something that might itself be called a >cult >> (I've actually heard of funamentalist Christians call it a cult), go >to >> this website <http://www.uua.org/>, click on Congregations and find >the >> congregation nearest you, and go to their next " religious service " . >> Ironically, this is one place where you won't be told what to >believe. >> >> > >> >Thanks, >> > >> > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 27, 2001 Report Share Posted January 27, 2001 Dave; I'm hearing you say you disagree and I'm thinking I don't know why as I'm pretty much with you on everything you've said. I simply think that the word cult is overused I'm not implying that it's over used in regards to AA. In arguing against AA especially coercive mandatory attendance we come face to face with the fact that because the term is so over used it diminishes it's value with disinterested parties (the ones that count). It doesn't help that AA's tend to highlight this fact as often as they can. For example JL on the Usenet recently gave a long list of organizations that according to him fit the criteria for being a cult. Many have frequently been named cults which is precisely why he could make the argument. It was a trifling argument on his part designed to deflect attention from the fact that AA itself is a Cult. On the one hand he was arguing that based on his own " personal experience " AA wasn't a cult however these other organizations could be termed a cult based on what??? His opinion of what others have experienced in them. He utterly failed to see the duplicity inherent in that position. I'm starting to ramble so let me close quickly. I think we should consider focusing on the fact that it's so obviously religious they can't hardly expect non interested parties to see it as anything other than that without some really hefty rationalizations which when pointed out are readily observable as what they are. > Re: need more advice > > >i disagree, i think aa is obviouly a cult. and the lable can easily >be supported in a debate. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 27, 2001 Report Share Posted January 27, 2001 Dave; I'm hearing you say you disagree and I'm thinking I don't know why as I'm pretty much with you on everything you've said. I simply think that the word cult is overused I'm not implying that it's over used in regards to AA. In arguing against AA especially coercive mandatory attendance we come face to face with the fact that because the term is so over used it diminishes it's value with disinterested parties (the ones that count). It doesn't help that AA's tend to highlight this fact as often as they can. For example JL on the Usenet recently gave a long list of organizations that according to him fit the criteria for being a cult. Many have frequently been named cults which is precisely why he could make the argument. It was a trifling argument on his part designed to deflect attention from the fact that AA itself is a Cult. On the one hand he was arguing that based on his own " personal experience " AA wasn't a cult however these other organizations could be termed a cult based on what??? His opinion of what others have experienced in them. He utterly failed to see the duplicity inherent in that position. I'm starting to ramble so let me close quickly. I think we should consider focusing on the fact that it's so obviously religious they can't hardly expect non interested parties to see it as anything other than that without some really hefty rationalizations which when pointed out are readily observable as what they are. > Re: need more advice > > >i disagree, i think aa is obviouly a cult. and the lable can easily >be supported in a debate. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 27, 2001 Report Share Posted January 27, 2001 you are absolutely right. The word " cult " has a huge stigma attached to it. You know there are " politically correct " rules or guidelines, and I'd say since America got started there has also been an unspoken " religiously correct " . The norm in America is some type of JudeoChristian background. Anything that doesn't at least go along with that JudeoChristian ideology in some remote way is really considered far out and horrible by the majority of people in the US. Perhaps today the girls affected by the atrocity of the Salem witch trials would feel more empathy from their fellow Americans but at the time, I am of the understanding most people were all for " ridding the world of the devil " or whatever they were doing. So, those girls were evil cult like and anybody that doesn't bow down to the JudeoChristian ideology is as well, at least according to the majority of Americans. The word cult is misused, as it is the word used to describe any organization that does not bow down to the JudeoChristian basics of what is " religiously correct. " So, it does AA and any real threatening cult like organization a great service by minimizing the severity of the word's usage. IMO AA is much more destructive than the typical insane group of people (like the Branch ians or those people that all wore Nikes and killed themselves). AA does a good job of bowing down to the JudeoChristian principals. Thats why it changed to AA from the original churchy group it was - they were a little too extreme or too cultlike (in the stigmatic sense of that word) to get very far in this JudeoChristian based country as a religion, so they turned the whole thing into a Spiritual program instead of a religion, and it has lasted many more years than it would have as a result of that transformation). Thats a little off the point though. Almost all Americans who would typically classify cults as religious groups that are not " religiously correct " according to the widespread JudeoChristian ideology do not classify AA as a cult. They don't see it as a cult - because they use an incorrect definition of the word cult due its stigma. So, AA really is a cult, but there should be a word for all these other religiously incorrect groups (AA is religiously correct but tis a cult - a real cult, while a lot of the religiously incorrect are incorrectly dubbed cults when they in fact have no cult like activity (brain washing, indoctrination, etc) but they don't allow for Jesus, or the ten commandments. Its funny how people are stupid, I think. Re: need more advice > > > > > >i disagree, i think aa is obviouly a cult. and the lable can easily > >be supported in a debate. > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 27, 2001 Report Share Posted January 27, 2001 you are absolutely right. The word " cult " has a huge stigma attached to it. You know there are " politically correct " rules or guidelines, and I'd say since America got started there has also been an unspoken " religiously correct " . The norm in America is some type of JudeoChristian background. Anything that doesn't at least go along with that JudeoChristian ideology in some remote way is really considered far out and horrible by the majority of people in the US. Perhaps today the girls affected by the atrocity of the Salem witch trials would feel more empathy from their fellow Americans but at the time, I am of the understanding most people were all for " ridding the world of the devil " or whatever they were doing. So, those girls were evil cult like and anybody that doesn't bow down to the JudeoChristian ideology is as well, at least according to the majority of Americans. The word cult is misused, as it is the word used to describe any organization that does not bow down to the JudeoChristian basics of what is " religiously correct. " So, it does AA and any real threatening cult like organization a great service by minimizing the severity of the word's usage. IMO AA is much more destructive than the typical insane group of people (like the Branch ians or those people that all wore Nikes and killed themselves). AA does a good job of bowing down to the JudeoChristian principals. Thats why it changed to AA from the original churchy group it was - they were a little too extreme or too cultlike (in the stigmatic sense of that word) to get very far in this JudeoChristian based country as a religion, so they turned the whole thing into a Spiritual program instead of a religion, and it has lasted many more years than it would have as a result of that transformation). Thats a little off the point though. Almost all Americans who would typically classify cults as religious groups that are not " religiously correct " according to the widespread JudeoChristian ideology do not classify AA as a cult. They don't see it as a cult - because they use an incorrect definition of the word cult due its stigma. So, AA really is a cult, but there should be a word for all these other religiously incorrect groups (AA is religiously correct but tis a cult - a real cult, while a lot of the religiously incorrect are incorrectly dubbed cults when they in fact have no cult like activity (brain washing, indoctrination, etc) but they don't allow for Jesus, or the ten commandments. Its funny how people are stupid, I think. Re: need more advice > > > > > >i disagree, i think aa is obviouly a cult. and the lable can easily > >be supported in a debate. > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 27, 2001 Report Share Posted January 27, 2001 you are absolutely right. The word " cult " has a huge stigma attached to it. You know there are " politically correct " rules or guidelines, and I'd say since America got started there has also been an unspoken " religiously correct " . The norm in America is some type of JudeoChristian background. Anything that doesn't at least go along with that JudeoChristian ideology in some remote way is really considered far out and horrible by the majority of people in the US. Perhaps today the girls affected by the atrocity of the Salem witch trials would feel more empathy from their fellow Americans but at the time, I am of the understanding most people were all for " ridding the world of the devil " or whatever they were doing. So, those girls were evil cult like and anybody that doesn't bow down to the JudeoChristian ideology is as well, at least according to the majority of Americans. The word cult is misused, as it is the word used to describe any organization that does not bow down to the JudeoChristian basics of what is " religiously correct. " So, it does AA and any real threatening cult like organization a great service by minimizing the severity of the word's usage. IMO AA is much more destructive than the typical insane group of people (like the Branch ians or those people that all wore Nikes and killed themselves). AA does a good job of bowing down to the JudeoChristian principals. Thats why it changed to AA from the original churchy group it was - they were a little too extreme or too cultlike (in the stigmatic sense of that word) to get very far in this JudeoChristian based country as a religion, so they turned the whole thing into a Spiritual program instead of a religion, and it has lasted many more years than it would have as a result of that transformation). Thats a little off the point though. Almost all Americans who would typically classify cults as religious groups that are not " religiously correct " according to the widespread JudeoChristian ideology do not classify AA as a cult. They don't see it as a cult - because they use an incorrect definition of the word cult due its stigma. So, AA really is a cult, but there should be a word for all these other religiously incorrect groups (AA is religiously correct but tis a cult - a real cult, while a lot of the religiously incorrect are incorrectly dubbed cults when they in fact have no cult like activity (brain washing, indoctrination, etc) but they don't allow for Jesus, or the ten commandments. Its funny how people are stupid, I think. Re: need more advice > > > > > >i disagree, i think aa is obviouly a cult. and the lable can easily > >be supported in a debate. > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 27, 2001 Report Share Posted January 27, 2001 ----- Original Message ----- From: " Dave " dmarcoot@... > and although i understand your point ,now, i still disagree. for > same reasons i disagree with the page i mentioned above. > i think its a cop out. the word has meaning which is definite. > because a group is ignorant as to what the meaning of word is, > doesn't mean the word is wrongly applied to them. in > Washington dc a few years ago, one of the mayors appointees > used the word " niggardly " . he was instantly blasted for > people believed it was some how a racial comment. the word > means stingy, and has no connection to word nigger at all. > the man declined the position a s to not embarrass the mayor. > he gave up a job because of others ignorance. I said niggardly once in rehab. It didn't get a really pleasant response. This was state run rehab in the city, mind ya. Anyway, I've said it before - I think its funny how people are stupid. If you can't see the humor in it, what is the use? You remember gladiator - the emperor who could hear the gods laughing. They probably thought it was funny how people are stupid. Ashcroft has also said the word niggardly, god bless him. And to your point that its a cop out. Sure it is. That's why it works so nicely for AA - the word cult entails so many different types of groups - AA can compare itself to anything and end up looking pretty good. That comparison working for AA (it does) is dependent on the listener's ignorance of the word cult and of the organizations themselves (AA or whoever AA is comparing itself to - either one or both are probably majorly misrepresented). > JL can argue AA is not a cult, but when you look at meaning of > word, and study cult methodlogy, he just comes across as > a fool. Yeah, if you study, its apparent that AA is a cult. Its also apparent that a lot of groups are mislabeled as cults. So has AA another dodge - " oh we are one of the mislabeled cults " - " it's not possible for every organization that's been called a cult to actually be a cult, so obviously we were mislabeled " - they can say " compare us to a real cult. see we're decent, not a cult " just bullshit, but its thick. <snipped some about angry book reviewer> > by casual observers! he coudlnt argue the fact of the > book, so he picked at the edges to find SOMETHING to allow his > mind to work its way around issue. he already had lost > with reason but didnt evebn know. that is where JL is if he has to > dilute the word. he cant argue it, so try to weaken its > meaning. he's already lost and he's backpedeling . check, then > mate. That reminds me of Pete Watts - can't actually argue about something so he resorts to name calling and making up shit. He doesn't do that often, but I guess he does when he is riled, adamant about something or when he is wrong and won't accept it. ;-) > i think to not call AA what it is, allows them to win, and > diminishes the truth about what they are, a faith healing cult. a > cult which uses most of the techniques of manipulation and > distortion typical in all destructive cults. maybe not to same > extremes as the more notable and destructive ones, but it is > because of that, which has allowed aa to survive as long as > it has. if it was as destructive as heavens gate for example, they > would have survived 60 years. its like a low level virus, for a long time it spreads and mutates until eventually everyone is contaminated and it mutates again, and all hell breaks loose. Well, that may be a little overboard, but maybe not. There is some AA sponsor (Clancy I think) with 1,000s of sponsees - that's a mutation of the original (one or two sponsees) is it not? Who knows what he has in mind for all those whackos. And the mutation of the industry AA has spurned. But I'm not scaring you guys. But I kinda see it like a virus, as well as a cult. Did you know they came up with some pretty good medicine for AIDS, it adds about 15 years to people's lives, but the HIV virus has already mutated enough to make that medicine obsolete. Yeah, I definitely see similarities to AA's evolution there. > on the other hand, on the matter of coercion, that aa is a cult at > all probably is irrelevant in regards to 1st amendment, in > which case making the strong argument that AA is religious > would be the strategy to take. Is a cult necessarily a religion? Is a religion necessarily a cult? I think the answer is yes to both, but that's just me. But I think the first amendment covers religion (and therefore AA). > but aa has a ingrained , knee jerk defense on that too, which > although pathetically weak when looked at objectively and > historically, is just as futile to argue with a stepper as it is that is > a cult. imho. Just as futile as arguing politics with a communist - some people prefer to learn the hard way. Can't fix stupid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 27, 2001 Report Share Posted January 27, 2001 ----- Original Message ----- From: " Dave " dmarcoot@... > and although i understand your point ,now, i still disagree. for > same reasons i disagree with the page i mentioned above. > i think its a cop out. the word has meaning which is definite. > because a group is ignorant as to what the meaning of word is, > doesn't mean the word is wrongly applied to them. in > Washington dc a few years ago, one of the mayors appointees > used the word " niggardly " . he was instantly blasted for > people believed it was some how a racial comment. the word > means stingy, and has no connection to word nigger at all. > the man declined the position a s to not embarrass the mayor. > he gave up a job because of others ignorance. I said niggardly once in rehab. It didn't get a really pleasant response. This was state run rehab in the city, mind ya. Anyway, I've said it before - I think its funny how people are stupid. If you can't see the humor in it, what is the use? You remember gladiator - the emperor who could hear the gods laughing. They probably thought it was funny how people are stupid. Ashcroft has also said the word niggardly, god bless him. And to your point that its a cop out. Sure it is. That's why it works so nicely for AA - the word cult entails so many different types of groups - AA can compare itself to anything and end up looking pretty good. That comparison working for AA (it does) is dependent on the listener's ignorance of the word cult and of the organizations themselves (AA or whoever AA is comparing itself to - either one or both are probably majorly misrepresented). > JL can argue AA is not a cult, but when you look at meaning of > word, and study cult methodlogy, he just comes across as > a fool. Yeah, if you study, its apparent that AA is a cult. Its also apparent that a lot of groups are mislabeled as cults. So has AA another dodge - " oh we are one of the mislabeled cults " - " it's not possible for every organization that's been called a cult to actually be a cult, so obviously we were mislabeled " - they can say " compare us to a real cult. see we're decent, not a cult " just bullshit, but its thick. <snipped some about angry book reviewer> > by casual observers! he coudlnt argue the fact of the > book, so he picked at the edges to find SOMETHING to allow his > mind to work its way around issue. he already had lost > with reason but didnt evebn know. that is where JL is if he has to > dilute the word. he cant argue it, so try to weaken its > meaning. he's already lost and he's backpedeling . check, then > mate. That reminds me of Pete Watts - can't actually argue about something so he resorts to name calling and making up shit. He doesn't do that often, but I guess he does when he is riled, adamant about something or when he is wrong and won't accept it. ;-) > i think to not call AA what it is, allows them to win, and > diminishes the truth about what they are, a faith healing cult. a > cult which uses most of the techniques of manipulation and > distortion typical in all destructive cults. maybe not to same > extremes as the more notable and destructive ones, but it is > because of that, which has allowed aa to survive as long as > it has. if it was as destructive as heavens gate for example, they > would have survived 60 years. its like a low level virus, for a long time it spreads and mutates until eventually everyone is contaminated and it mutates again, and all hell breaks loose. Well, that may be a little overboard, but maybe not. There is some AA sponsor (Clancy I think) with 1,000s of sponsees - that's a mutation of the original (one or two sponsees) is it not? Who knows what he has in mind for all those whackos. And the mutation of the industry AA has spurned. But I'm not scaring you guys. But I kinda see it like a virus, as well as a cult. Did you know they came up with some pretty good medicine for AIDS, it adds about 15 years to people's lives, but the HIV virus has already mutated enough to make that medicine obsolete. Yeah, I definitely see similarities to AA's evolution there. > on the other hand, on the matter of coercion, that aa is a cult at > all probably is irrelevant in regards to 1st amendment, in > which case making the strong argument that AA is religious > would be the strategy to take. Is a cult necessarily a religion? Is a religion necessarily a cult? I think the answer is yes to both, but that's just me. But I think the first amendment covers religion (and therefore AA). > but aa has a ingrained , knee jerk defense on that too, which > although pathetically weak when looked at objectively and > historically, is just as futile to argue with a stepper as it is that is > a cult. imho. Just as futile as arguing politics with a communist - some people prefer to learn the hard way. Can't fix stupid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 27, 2001 Report Share Posted January 27, 2001 ----- Original Message ----- From: " Dave " dmarcoot@... > and although i understand your point ,now, i still disagree. for > same reasons i disagree with the page i mentioned above. > i think its a cop out. the word has meaning which is definite. > because a group is ignorant as to what the meaning of word is, > doesn't mean the word is wrongly applied to them. in > Washington dc a few years ago, one of the mayors appointees > used the word " niggardly " . he was instantly blasted for > people believed it was some how a racial comment. the word > means stingy, and has no connection to word nigger at all. > the man declined the position a s to not embarrass the mayor. > he gave up a job because of others ignorance. I said niggardly once in rehab. It didn't get a really pleasant response. This was state run rehab in the city, mind ya. Anyway, I've said it before - I think its funny how people are stupid. If you can't see the humor in it, what is the use? You remember gladiator - the emperor who could hear the gods laughing. They probably thought it was funny how people are stupid. Ashcroft has also said the word niggardly, god bless him. And to your point that its a cop out. Sure it is. That's why it works so nicely for AA - the word cult entails so many different types of groups - AA can compare itself to anything and end up looking pretty good. That comparison working for AA (it does) is dependent on the listener's ignorance of the word cult and of the organizations themselves (AA or whoever AA is comparing itself to - either one or both are probably majorly misrepresented). > JL can argue AA is not a cult, but when you look at meaning of > word, and study cult methodlogy, he just comes across as > a fool. Yeah, if you study, its apparent that AA is a cult. Its also apparent that a lot of groups are mislabeled as cults. So has AA another dodge - " oh we are one of the mislabeled cults " - " it's not possible for every organization that's been called a cult to actually be a cult, so obviously we were mislabeled " - they can say " compare us to a real cult. see we're decent, not a cult " just bullshit, but its thick. <snipped some about angry book reviewer> > by casual observers! he coudlnt argue the fact of the > book, so he picked at the edges to find SOMETHING to allow his > mind to work its way around issue. he already had lost > with reason but didnt evebn know. that is where JL is if he has to > dilute the word. he cant argue it, so try to weaken its > meaning. he's already lost and he's backpedeling . check, then > mate. That reminds me of Pete Watts - can't actually argue about something so he resorts to name calling and making up shit. He doesn't do that often, but I guess he does when he is riled, adamant about something or when he is wrong and won't accept it. ;-) > i think to not call AA what it is, allows them to win, and > diminishes the truth about what they are, a faith healing cult. a > cult which uses most of the techniques of manipulation and > distortion typical in all destructive cults. maybe not to same > extremes as the more notable and destructive ones, but it is > because of that, which has allowed aa to survive as long as > it has. if it was as destructive as heavens gate for example, they > would have survived 60 years. its like a low level virus, for a long time it spreads and mutates until eventually everyone is contaminated and it mutates again, and all hell breaks loose. Well, that may be a little overboard, but maybe not. There is some AA sponsor (Clancy I think) with 1,000s of sponsees - that's a mutation of the original (one or two sponsees) is it not? Who knows what he has in mind for all those whackos. And the mutation of the industry AA has spurned. But I'm not scaring you guys. But I kinda see it like a virus, as well as a cult. Did you know they came up with some pretty good medicine for AIDS, it adds about 15 years to people's lives, but the HIV virus has already mutated enough to make that medicine obsolete. Yeah, I definitely see similarities to AA's evolution there. > on the other hand, on the matter of coercion, that aa is a cult at > all probably is irrelevant in regards to 1st amendment, in > which case making the strong argument that AA is religious > would be the strategy to take. Is a cult necessarily a religion? Is a religion necessarily a cult? I think the answer is yes to both, but that's just me. But I think the first amendment covers religion (and therefore AA). > but aa has a ingrained , knee jerk defense on that too, which > although pathetically weak when looked at objectively and > historically, is just as futile to argue with a stepper as it is that is > a cult. imho. Just as futile as arguing politics with a communist - some people prefer to learn the hard way. Can't fix stupid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 28, 2001 Report Share Posted January 28, 2001 how do you know that alien ghosts aren't inhabiting every living creature on Earth? That would explain a lot. Re: need more advice > i disagree, i think aa is obviouly a cult. and the lable can easily > be supported in a debate. > > from the meaning of the word, its extremly clear AA is cult. the > problem is, people have narrow image of what a cult is, they > hear cult and they think of hollywoods' portayal of cults as people > doing human scarifice and wearing black robes. or they think of > the sucicide cults they see on TV, which is really about only time > the news exposes cults. > > but how many people realize $cientology is a cult when they see > Dianetics advertised on tv, or john travolta talk about on Leno? > hwo many of them know it was inveted by a insane sci-fi writer > and is based alien ghosts inhabiting every living creature on > earth? > > > > 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. > > > > > > > > > It effectively highlights the fact that the term cult is derisively > thrown > > around a bit too much in this country. As far as AA is > concerned it's > > enough to say and show that it is indeed religious, contrary to > the general > > line of argument to the contrary by it's members. (even though > I'm the last > > to stay with that reasoning) > > > > Is it a cult? Of course it is or it's so close to being one the > distinction > > is so infinitesimal as to be almost indistinguishable. More > importantly > > though it's religious. > > > > It's more important, I believe, precisely because the term cult is > thrown > > around so freely. It's too easy to throw off that accusation as > the hostile > > rantings of ex-members. > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 28, 2001 Report Share Posted January 28, 2001 how do you know that alien ghosts aren't inhabiting every living creature on Earth? That would explain a lot. Re: need more advice > i disagree, i think aa is obviouly a cult. and the lable can easily > be supported in a debate. > > from the meaning of the word, its extremly clear AA is cult. the > problem is, people have narrow image of what a cult is, they > hear cult and they think of hollywoods' portayal of cults as people > doing human scarifice and wearing black robes. or they think of > the sucicide cults they see on TV, which is really about only time > the news exposes cults. > > but how many people realize $cientology is a cult when they see > Dianetics advertised on tv, or john travolta talk about on Leno? > hwo many of them know it was inveted by a insane sci-fi writer > and is based alien ghosts inhabiting every living creature on > earth? > > > > 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. > > > > > > > > > It effectively highlights the fact that the term cult is derisively > thrown > > around a bit too much in this country. As far as AA is > concerned it's > > enough to say and show that it is indeed religious, contrary to > the general > > line of argument to the contrary by it's members. (even though > I'm the last > > to stay with that reasoning) > > > > Is it a cult? Of course it is or it's so close to being one the > distinction > > is so infinitesimal as to be almost indistinguishable. More > importantly > > though it's religious. > > > > It's more important, I believe, precisely because the term cult is > thrown > > around so freely. It's too easy to throw off that accusation as > the hostile > > rantings of ex-members. > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 28, 2001 Report Share Posted January 28, 2001 how do you know that alien ghosts aren't inhabiting every living creature on Earth? That would explain a lot. Re: need more advice > i disagree, i think aa is obviouly a cult. and the lable can easily > be supported in a debate. > > from the meaning of the word, its extremly clear AA is cult. the > problem is, people have narrow image of what a cult is, they > hear cult and they think of hollywoods' portayal of cults as people > doing human scarifice and wearing black robes. or they think of > the sucicide cults they see on TV, which is really about only time > the news exposes cults. > > but how many people realize $cientology is a cult when they see > Dianetics advertised on tv, or john travolta talk about on Leno? > hwo many of them know it was inveted by a insane sci-fi writer > and is based alien ghosts inhabiting every living creature on > earth? > > > > 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. > > > > > > > > > It effectively highlights the fact that the term cult is derisively > thrown > > around a bit too much in this country. As far as AA is > concerned it's > > enough to say and show that it is indeed religious, contrary to > the general > > line of argument to the contrary by it's members. (even though > I'm the last > > to stay with that reasoning) > > > > Is it a cult? Of course it is or it's so close to being one the > distinction > > is so infinitesimal as to be almost indistinguishable. More > importantly > > though it's religious. > > > > It's more important, I believe, precisely because the term cult is > thrown > > around so freely. It's too easy to throw off that accusation as > the hostile > > rantings of ex-members. > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 28, 2001 Report Share Posted January 28, 2001 Dave; I'm not saying it's not a cult. I'm saying the word cult is overused. > Re: need more advice > >and although i understand your point ,now, i still disagree. for >same reasons i disagree with the page i mentioned above. >i think its a cop out. the word has meaning which is definite. >because a group is ignorant as to what the meaning of word is, >doesn't mean the word is wrongly applied to them. > >i think to not call AA what it is, allows them to win, and >diminishes the truth about what they are, a faith healing cult. a >cult which uses most of the techniques of manipulation and >distortion typical in all destructive cults. maybe not to same >extremes as the more notable and destructive ones, but it is >because of that, which has allowed aa to survive as long as >it has. if it was as destructive as heavens gate for example, they >would have survived 60 years. I'm really not advocating not calling it what it is. I think for me (although earlier I did say we should take a look at)that I'll be concentrating on the religious nature of AA. Why? Well because I haven't met a disinterested party that when shown the steps doesn't think of AA and the 12 steps as religious faith based healing within seconds of reading it. This contrary to the protestations of steppers. Once there a quick introduction to coerced attendance and it's a short hop from there to " It meets the objective criteria for being a cult. " Only " after " AA has been shown to have lied about being spiritual as opposed to religious it's much more likely the listener will not disregard it out of hand. >on the other hand, on the matter of coercion, that aa is a cult at >all probably is irrelevant in regards to 1st amendment, in >which case making the strong argument that AA is religious >would be the strategy to take. True enough but showing that AA is religious immediately establishes that AA lies about itself. From there it's a cake walk to the inevitable conclusion that it's a cult or so close it doesn't make difference. > > but aa has a ingrained , knee jerk defense on that too, which >although pathetically weak when looked at objectively and >historically, is just as futile to argue with a stepper as it is that is >a cult. imho. I don't know about that. I think if you give a good enough argument you make a difference with some. If you watch Usenet you see some come in strong with their cliché arguments to the contrary and they usually quickly fall by the wayside. I think a large percentage of those have re-evaluated their position in AA. They may still be members but the seed has been planted. I'm willing to bet any amount of money that 95% attrition rate is actually higher now then it was several years ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 28, 2001 Report Share Posted January 28, 2001 Dave; I'm not saying it's not a cult. I'm saying the word cult is overused. > Re: need more advice > >and although i understand your point ,now, i still disagree. for >same reasons i disagree with the page i mentioned above. >i think its a cop out. the word has meaning which is definite. >because a group is ignorant as to what the meaning of word is, >doesn't mean the word is wrongly applied to them. > >i think to not call AA what it is, allows them to win, and >diminishes the truth about what they are, a faith healing cult. a >cult which uses most of the techniques of manipulation and >distortion typical in all destructive cults. maybe not to same >extremes as the more notable and destructive ones, but it is >because of that, which has allowed aa to survive as long as >it has. if it was as destructive as heavens gate for example, they >would have survived 60 years. I'm really not advocating not calling it what it is. I think for me (although earlier I did say we should take a look at)that I'll be concentrating on the religious nature of AA. Why? Well because I haven't met a disinterested party that when shown the steps doesn't think of AA and the 12 steps as religious faith based healing within seconds of reading it. This contrary to the protestations of steppers. Once there a quick introduction to coerced attendance and it's a short hop from there to " It meets the objective criteria for being a cult. " Only " after " AA has been shown to have lied about being spiritual as opposed to religious it's much more likely the listener will not disregard it out of hand. >on the other hand, on the matter of coercion, that aa is a cult at >all probably is irrelevant in regards to 1st amendment, in >which case making the strong argument that AA is religious >would be the strategy to take. True enough but showing that AA is religious immediately establishes that AA lies about itself. From there it's a cake walk to the inevitable conclusion that it's a cult or so close it doesn't make difference. > > but aa has a ingrained , knee jerk defense on that too, which >although pathetically weak when looked at objectively and >historically, is just as futile to argue with a stepper as it is that is >a cult. imho. I don't know about that. I think if you give a good enough argument you make a difference with some. If you watch Usenet you see some come in strong with their cliché arguments to the contrary and they usually quickly fall by the wayside. I think a large percentage of those have re-evaluated their position in AA. They may still be members but the seed has been planted. I'm willing to bet any amount of money that 95% attrition rate is actually higher now then it was several years ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 29, 2001 Report Share Posted January 29, 2001 Re: need more advice <snipped my reasons AA can deny its a cult> > well i can see how that would work for them, but if they will go to > that length, then any critical look at them will be dismised just as > friviosuly, in which case, why not stick with the fact they are a faith > healing cult? I guess because we live in a world where most of the people choose to believe that prayer works, and so condemning AA for " faith healing " hasn't done much good and won't. Its the same reason Christianity is still around and all the others. While its true that AA is a cult, it does no good to call it a cult, unless the person you are talking to knows what a cult actually is. Otherwise it is an inconstructive ad hominem. Also, there are tons of cults out there, and people aren't really trying to do anything about them, so its pointless to focus solely aspect. Pointing out that AA is a cult, and showing scientific proof of why it is useless and even harmful seems like the best thing to do. Ken's book was a terrific start at that (not the first, I guess), and the ideas need to be spread around more. A whole lot more. > > its like a low level virus, for a long time it spreads and > mutates until> eventually everyone is contaminated and it > mutates again, and all hell> breaks loose. Well, that may be a > little overboard, but maybe not. > > i dont think that is overboard at all, just look at how the steps ahe > branched out into 100's of groups and infected the culture in > general. and lets not forget the oxfod group which started this > whole mess is still alive as the MRA. Thanks for expanding on that. Its pretty accurate! > > Is a cult necessarily a religion? Is a religion necessarily a > cult? I> think the answer is yes to both, but that's just me. But I > think the first> amendment covers religion (and therefore AA) > > i dont think the first amendment would offer cover from a cult > group unless it was relgious as aa is. i think you can seperate > the two. cults can be organized along power, money etc. lines > too. amway for example, scientolgy which claims to be a relgion, > was always about profit. I was kinda being silly there. Someone earlier talked about two types of cults - business or religious cults. And I think of the movie Casino... First you get the money, then you get the power, then you get the (I forget) but anyway, thats what cults come down to. Power. You can really look at any cult as a business, while a lot of powerful cults are very good at disguising the fact they are a business. Instead the cult does whatever it can to appear to be an altruistic " good " group of upstanding and caring people. With that outward appearance, it's very hard for anyone who condemns this cult to be taken seriously. Also, since that's how people like to see themselves (although they aren't) they are more apt to defend the cult that helps them feel that way. So anyway, my previous questions I have answered for myself - is a religion necessarily a cult? Yes. Is a cult necessarily a religion. A cult needs some sort of mularkey to use on its " clientele. " A very common type is religion, but also any other kind of hogwash you can get someone to believe in order to manipulate him. People are self doubting I guess, and so when you claim to be GOD or to know GOD, they believe it. But you can use any BS and if people believe and you can get control over them === then you can make a cult. I think the most common is cults that use some type of deity or knowledge of a deity to manipulate other people. AA falls into that category. The US Army, AIr Force, Navy, Marine Corps, AFAICT are guilty of the same thing, deceiving and manipulating human beings to benefit. I'm tired of writing about cults but the word is misused. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 2, 2001 Report Share Posted February 2, 2001 In a message dated 1/27/01 8:02:53 PM Pacific Standard Time, arroyoh@... writes: << You know the funny part was that he claimed it then shortly claimed that Spiritualism doesn't equal religious. So naturally I asked him if AA was spiritual not religious how could AA have religious aspects? As you can imagine I have yet to receive an answer on that one. >> I hate it when they use that spiritual scam to avoid religious. Spiritual indeed. Same game, same number, same time. piper. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 2, 2001 Report Share Posted February 2, 2001 In a message dated 1/27/01 8:02:53 PM Pacific Standard Time, arroyoh@... writes: << You know the funny part was that he claimed it then shortly claimed that Spiritualism doesn't equal religious. So naturally I asked him if AA was spiritual not religious how could AA have religious aspects? As you can imagine I have yet to receive an answer on that one. >> I hate it when they use that spiritual scam to avoid religious. Spiritual indeed. Same game, same number, same time. piper. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 2, 2001 Report Share Posted February 2, 2001 In a message dated 1/27/01 8:02:53 PM Pacific Standard Time, arroyoh@... writes: << You know the funny part was that he claimed it then shortly claimed that Spiritualism doesn't equal religious. So naturally I asked him if AA was spiritual not religious how could AA have religious aspects? As you can imagine I have yet to receive an answer on that one. >> I hate it when they use that spiritual scam to avoid religious. Spiritual indeed. Same game, same number, same time. piper. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.