Re: 12 step coersion in Illinois

May 8, 2001

Dave,

I've thought all along that the federal courts are the proper place to

file all of these complaints, and I detailed my reasons a few weeks

back when was relaying answers to our questions to Stanton

Peele. Anyway, here is the Illinois Bill of Rights and it has a

rather lenthy and detailed article for religious liberty.

http://www.legis.state.il.us/commission/lrb/con1.htm

Also the material you have presented here indicates the state is

engaged in a clear violation of the rights of conscience. The North

Carolina Constitution specifically addresses the right of conscience,

and the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled on the rights of conscience.

From your post:

" The petitioner testified that he believes he is alcohol dependent

and cannot drink again. However, he disagrees with the commonly held

belief that alcoholism is a disease. The Petitioner also disagrees

with the belief that alcoholism is not curable. "

People have a right to freedom of belief even in matters not related

to religion. Hope this will make for some good discussion later on.

Tommy

> Here's what's happened in Illinois on the state level that I know

of. Remember the difference between Federal (7th district) and State.

>

> In the early 1980s Secretary of State Jim Edgar (later Governor)

helped expand DUI punishment including evidence of AA membership.

>

> About 1992 Rational Recovery was first used successfully by a DUI

convict to regain driving privileges. In this period Rational Recovery

was accepted as a recovery group alternative to AA. Since then RR has

cancelled all recovery group meetings and refuses to be justification

for keeping AA mainstream in these hearings or any judicial case for

that matter.

>

> About 1995 a Committtee of the Illinois Supreme Court overseeing

state judicial practices sent out a memo (a copy of which they refused

to supply to me) to all the circuit courts that essentially stated

that judges, probation, and social service departments couldn't

require only AA or jail, that they had to offer alternatives.

>

> In Illinois there's a difference between reigning in the courts and

reigning in the Secretary of State's Division of Administrative

Hearings.

>

> In the following Department of Administrative Hearings standard form

all petitioners recieve (which I believe is evidence of a bald faced

breach of US Constitutional Law) the petitioner is the DUI convict

trying to show evidence of not being a danger to the citizens of

Illinois if he/she were to regain driving privileges.

>

> beginning of form

>

> SECRETARY OF STATE

> SPRINGFIELD, ILLINOIS 62758

>

> NOTICE - LIST OF REFERENCES

>

> Petitioners and their legal counsel are hereby notified that the

Hearing Officer appointed by the Secretary of State may refer to any

of the references listed below in deliberating upon petitions for

driving relief, making findings of fact, drawing conclusions of law

and making a recommendationa for the disposition of petitions to the

Secretaryof State.

>

> The AA Experience; Milton A. Maxwell, MacGraw Hill, 1984.

>

> Alcoholics Anonymous; Alcoholics Anonymous World Service, Inc.,

1939.

>

> American Psychiatric Association: Diagnostic and Statistical Manual

of Mental Disorders(FourthEdition); Washington, D.C., A.P.A., 1994.

>

> Another Chance (Hope and Health for the Alcoholic Family); Sharon

Wegscheider, Science andBehavior Books, Inc., 1981.

>

> The Disease Concept of Alcoholism; E.M. Jellinek, Hillhouse Press,

1960.

>

> 800-Cocaine; Mark S. Gold M.D., Bantam Book, 1984.

>

> Encyclopedic Handbook of Alcoholism; Pattison and Kaufman, eds.,

1982.

>

> 'll Quit Tomorrow; Vernon E. , Harper and Row, 1980.

>

> Loosening the Grip: A Handbook ofAlcohol Information (Third

Edition); J. Kinney and G. Leaton,1987.

>

> The Natural History of Alcoholism; E. Vaillant, Harvard

University.

>

> Physician's Desk Reference (49th Edition); Medical Economics, Inc.,

1995.

>

> Recent Developments in Alcoholism; M. Galanter, ed., 1987.

>

> Twelve Steps and Twelve Traditions; Alcoholics Anonymous World

Service Iric., 1952.

>

> DAH H-61.1

>

> end of form

>

> At a quasijudicial hearing the petitioner makes his case, about half

the time with a lawyer, and gets his thumbs up or down about two

months later. One person using Rational Recovery a number of years ago

was turned down for the following reason. This is a quote from the

thumbs down reply from the secretary of state

>

> (1997)

> ORDER

> Findings of Fact

> Item 10 d.

>

> quote

> The petitioner testified that he believes he is alcohol dependent

and cannot drink again. However, he disagrees with the commonly held

belief that alcoholism is a disease. The Petitioner also disagrees

with the belief that alcoholism is not curable. The Petitioner is

recommended to return to his treatment provider to address the issue

of the disease concept of alcoholism. The Petitioner shall not be

considered for full reinstatement of driving privileges until the

issue is addressed.

> endquote

>

> The lawyers and hearings officers are professional buddies and often

switch jobs from time to time, totally incestuous. Some lawyers will

test the system, but only with foresight that they'll get a big cut of

whatever moves in to replace AA. RR has been repeatedly

misrepresented and maligned by all types of lawyers and human service

providers here in Illinois in an attempt to not rock the boat.

>

> There's also the deep deep Catholic/Judiciary connection here in

Chicago. Father Ignatious McDermott (a huge bigwig in Chicago) (runs

Haymarket recovery program) was one of those early priests to help AA

way back in the 1940's and 50's get a foot in the door of

acceptability in human services. He has led the judiciary towards AA

punishment for decades through his buddies on the bench. Those early

fights in the Catholic Church over whether to accept AA or not are a

whole unpublished story yet to be told.

>

> On the federal level, there is a case here in the seventh district

coming down soon against a major employer where the EEOC is taking

sides against the employer's EAP/AA program that was mandated on the

plaintiff. I am in the middle of it and will let you all be among the

first to know what happens. It is a slowwwww process, but Stern is

the plaintiff's lawyer, YESSS!

>

> Dave Trippel

May 8, 2001

Dave,

I've thought all along that the federal courts are the proper place to

file all of these complaints, and I detailed my reasons a few weeks

back when was relaying answers to our questions to Stanton

Peele. Anyway, here is the Illinois Bill of Rights and it has a

rather lenthy and detailed article for religious liberty.

http://www.legis.state.il.us/commission/lrb/con1.htm

Also the material you have presented here indicates the state is

engaged in a clear violation of the rights of conscience. The North

Carolina Constitution specifically addresses the right of conscience,

and the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled on the rights of conscience.

From your post:

" The petitioner testified that he believes he is alcohol dependent

and cannot drink again. However, he disagrees with the commonly held

belief that alcoholism is a disease. The Petitioner also disagrees

with the belief that alcoholism is not curable. "

People have a right to freedom of belief even in matters not related

to religion. Hope this will make for some good discussion later on.

Tommy

> Here's what's happened in Illinois on the state level that I know

of. Remember the difference between Federal (7th district) and State.

>

> In the early 1980s Secretary of State Jim Edgar (later Governor)

helped expand DUI punishment including evidence of AA membership.

>

> About 1992 Rational Recovery was first used successfully by a DUI

convict to regain driving privileges. In this period Rational Recovery

was accepted as a recovery group alternative to AA. Since then RR has

cancelled all recovery group meetings and refuses to be justification

for keeping AA mainstream in these hearings or any judicial case for

that matter.

>

> About 1995 a Committtee of the Illinois Supreme Court overseeing

state judicial practices sent out a memo (a copy of which they refused

to supply to me) to all the circuit courts that essentially stated

that judges, probation, and social service departments couldn't

require only AA or jail, that they had to offer alternatives.

>

> In Illinois there's a difference between reigning in the courts and

reigning in the Secretary of State's Division of Administrative

Hearings.

>

> In the following Department of Administrative Hearings standard form

all petitioners recieve (which I believe is evidence of a bald faced

breach of US Constitutional Law) the petitioner is the DUI convict

trying to show evidence of not being a danger to the citizens of

Illinois if he/she were to regain driving privileges.

>

> beginning of form

>

> SECRETARY OF STATE

> SPRINGFIELD, ILLINOIS 62758

>

> NOTICE - LIST OF REFERENCES

>

> Petitioners and their legal counsel are hereby notified that the

Hearing Officer appointed by the Secretary of State may refer to any

of the references listed below in deliberating upon petitions for

driving relief, making findings of fact, drawing conclusions of law

and making a recommendationa for the disposition of petitions to the

Secretaryof State.

>

> The AA Experience; Milton A. Maxwell, MacGraw Hill, 1984.

>

> Alcoholics Anonymous; Alcoholics Anonymous World Service, Inc.,

1939.

>

> American Psychiatric Association: Diagnostic and Statistical Manual

of Mental Disorders(FourthEdition); Washington, D.C., A.P.A., 1994.

>

> Another Chance (Hope and Health for the Alcoholic Family); Sharon

Wegscheider, Science andBehavior Books, Inc., 1981.

>

> The Disease Concept of Alcoholism; E.M. Jellinek, Hillhouse Press,

1960.

>

> 800-Cocaine; Mark S. Gold M.D., Bantam Book, 1984.

>

> Encyclopedic Handbook of Alcoholism; Pattison and Kaufman, eds.,

1982.

>

> 'll Quit Tomorrow; Vernon E. , Harper and Row, 1980.

>

> Loosening the Grip: A Handbook ofAlcohol Information (Third

Edition); J. Kinney and G. Leaton,1987.

>

> The Natural History of Alcoholism; E. Vaillant, Harvard

University.

>

> Physician's Desk Reference (49th Edition); Medical Economics, Inc.,

1995.

>

> Recent Developments in Alcoholism; M. Galanter, ed., 1987.

>

> Twelve Steps and Twelve Traditions; Alcoholics Anonymous World

Service Iric., 1952.

>

> DAH H-61.1

>

> end of form

>

> At a quasijudicial hearing the petitioner makes his case, about half

the time with a lawyer, and gets his thumbs up or down about two

months later. One person using Rational Recovery a number of years ago

was turned down for the following reason. This is a quote from the

thumbs down reply from the secretary of state

>

> (1997)

> ORDER

> Findings of Fact

> Item 10 d.

>

> quote

> The petitioner testified that he believes he is alcohol dependent

and cannot drink again. However, he disagrees with the commonly held

belief that alcoholism is a disease. The Petitioner also disagrees

with the belief that alcoholism is not curable. The Petitioner is

recommended to return to his treatment provider to address the issue

of the disease concept of alcoholism. The Petitioner shall not be

considered for full reinstatement of driving privileges until the

issue is addressed.

> endquote

>

> The lawyers and hearings officers are professional buddies and often

switch jobs from time to time, totally incestuous. Some lawyers will

test the system, but only with foresight that they'll get a big cut of

whatever moves in to replace AA. RR has been repeatedly

misrepresented and maligned by all types of lawyers and human service

providers here in Illinois in an attempt to not rock the boat.

>

> There's also the deep deep Catholic/Judiciary connection here in

Chicago. Father Ignatious McDermott (a huge bigwig in Chicago) (runs

Haymarket recovery program) was one of those early priests to help AA

way back in the 1940's and 50's get a foot in the door of

acceptability in human services. He has led the judiciary towards AA

punishment for decades through his buddies on the bench. Those early

fights in the Catholic Church over whether to accept AA or not are a

whole unpublished story yet to be told.

>

> On the federal level, there is a case here in the seventh district

coming down soon against a major employer where the EEOC is taking

sides against the employer's EAP/AA program that was mandated on the

plaintiff. I am in the middle of it and will let you all be among the

first to know what happens. It is a slowwwww process, but Stern is

the plaintiff's lawyer, YESSS!

>

> Dave Trippel

May 8, 2001

Dave,

I've thought all along that the federal courts are the proper place to

file all of these complaints, and I detailed my reasons a few weeks

back when was relaying answers to our questions to Stanton

Peele. Anyway, here is the Illinois Bill of Rights and it has a

rather lenthy and detailed article for religious liberty.

http://www.legis.state.il.us/commission/lrb/con1.htm

Also the material you have presented here indicates the state is

engaged in a clear violation of the rights of conscience. The North

Carolina Constitution specifically addresses the right of conscience,

and the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled on the rights of conscience.

From your post:

" The petitioner testified that he believes he is alcohol dependent

and cannot drink again. However, he disagrees with the commonly held

belief that alcoholism is a disease. The Petitioner also disagrees

with the belief that alcoholism is not curable. "

People have a right to freedom of belief even in matters not related

to religion. Hope this will make for some good discussion later on.

Tommy

> Here's what's happened in Illinois on the state level that I know

of. Remember the difference between Federal (7th district) and State.

>

> In the early 1980s Secretary of State Jim Edgar (later Governor)

helped expand DUI punishment including evidence of AA membership.

>

> About 1992 Rational Recovery was first used successfully by a DUI

convict to regain driving privileges. In this period Rational Recovery

was accepted as a recovery group alternative to AA. Since then RR has

cancelled all recovery group meetings and refuses to be justification

for keeping AA mainstream in these hearings or any judicial case for

that matter.

>

> About 1995 a Committtee of the Illinois Supreme Court overseeing

state judicial practices sent out a memo (a copy of which they refused

to supply to me) to all the circuit courts that essentially stated

that judges, probation, and social service departments couldn't

require only AA or jail, that they had to offer alternatives.

>

> In Illinois there's a difference between reigning in the courts and

reigning in the Secretary of State's Division of Administrative

Hearings.

>

> In the following Department of Administrative Hearings standard form

all petitioners recieve (which I believe is evidence of a bald faced

breach of US Constitutional Law) the petitioner is the DUI convict

trying to show evidence of not being a danger to the citizens of

Illinois if he/she were to regain driving privileges.

>

> beginning of form

>

> SECRETARY OF STATE

> SPRINGFIELD, ILLINOIS 62758

>

> NOTICE - LIST OF REFERENCES

>

> Petitioners and their legal counsel are hereby notified that the

Hearing Officer appointed by the Secretary of State may refer to any

of the references listed below in deliberating upon petitions for

driving relief, making findings of fact, drawing conclusions of law

and making a recommendationa for the disposition of petitions to the

Secretaryof State.

>

> The AA Experience; Milton A. Maxwell, MacGraw Hill, 1984.

>

> Alcoholics Anonymous; Alcoholics Anonymous World Service, Inc.,

1939.

>

> American Psychiatric Association: Diagnostic and Statistical Manual

of Mental Disorders(FourthEdition); Washington, D.C., A.P.A., 1994.

>

> Another Chance (Hope and Health for the Alcoholic Family); Sharon

Wegscheider, Science andBehavior Books, Inc., 1981.

>

> The Disease Concept of Alcoholism; E.M. Jellinek, Hillhouse Press,

1960.

>

> 800-Cocaine; Mark S. Gold M.D., Bantam Book, 1984.

>

> Encyclopedic Handbook of Alcoholism; Pattison and Kaufman, eds.,

1982.

>

> 'll Quit Tomorrow; Vernon E. , Harper and Row, 1980.

>

> Loosening the Grip: A Handbook ofAlcohol Information (Third

Edition); J. Kinney and G. Leaton,1987.

>

> The Natural History of Alcoholism; E. Vaillant, Harvard

University.

>

> Physician's Desk Reference (49th Edition); Medical Economics, Inc.,

1995.

>

> Recent Developments in Alcoholism; M. Galanter, ed., 1987.

>

> Twelve Steps and Twelve Traditions; Alcoholics Anonymous World

Service Iric., 1952.

>

> DAH H-61.1

>

> end of form

>

> At a quasijudicial hearing the petitioner makes his case, about half

the time with a lawyer, and gets his thumbs up or down about two

months later. One person using Rational Recovery a number of years ago

was turned down for the following reason. This is a quote from the

thumbs down reply from the secretary of state

>

> (1997)

> ORDER

> Findings of Fact

> Item 10 d.

>

> quote

> The petitioner testified that he believes he is alcohol dependent

and cannot drink again. However, he disagrees with the commonly held

belief that alcoholism is a disease. The Petitioner also disagrees

with the belief that alcoholism is not curable. The Petitioner is

recommended to return to his treatment provider to address the issue

of the disease concept of alcoholism. The Petitioner shall not be

considered for full reinstatement of driving privileges until the

issue is addressed.

> endquote

>

> The lawyers and hearings officers are professional buddies and often

switch jobs from time to time, totally incestuous. Some lawyers will

test the system, but only with foresight that they'll get a big cut of

whatever moves in to replace AA. RR has been repeatedly

misrepresented and maligned by all types of lawyers and human service

providers here in Illinois in an attempt to not rock the boat.

>

> There's also the deep deep Catholic/Judiciary connection here in

Chicago. Father Ignatious McDermott (a huge bigwig in Chicago) (runs

Haymarket recovery program) was one of those early priests to help AA

way back in the 1940's and 50's get a foot in the door of

acceptability in human services. He has led the judiciary towards AA

punishment for decades through his buddies on the bench. Those early

fights in the Catholic Church over whether to accept AA or not are a

whole unpublished story yet to be told.

>

> On the federal level, there is a case here in the seventh district

coming down soon against a major employer where the EEOC is taking

sides against the employer's EAP/AA program that was mandated on the

plaintiff. I am in the middle of it and will let you all be among the

first to know what happens. It is a slowwwww process, but Stern is

the plaintiff's lawyer, YESSS!

>

> Dave Trippel

May 8, 2001

The NC Constitution has only this for religious liberty. The Illinois

section on conscience was more lenthy and also a bit vague I thought:

" Sec. 13. Religious liberty. All persons have a natural and

inalienable right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates

of their own consciences, and no human authority shall, in any case

whatever, control or interfere with the rights of conscience. "

May 10, 2001

Tommy,

Thanks for the reference.

It could also be pointed out that in the Secretary of State's list of references, not only are there the AA religious cult books, but Jellinek has been shown by Ron Roizen http://www.roizen.com/ron/rr11.htm to have no evidence of the doctorate he passed himself off with. So they are using the writings of a probable fraud.

Dave Trippel

Re: 12 step coersion in Illinois

> From your post:> > "The petitioner testified that he believes he is alcohol dependent > and cannot drink again. However, he disagrees with the commonly held > belief that alcoholism is a disease. The Petitioner also disagrees > with the belief that alcoholism is not curable."> > People have a right to freedom of belief even in matters not related > to religion. Hope this will make for some good discussion later on.> > Tommy> Scroll down to Freedom of Belief:http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment01/

May 10, 2001

Tommy,

Thanks for the reference.

It could also be pointed out that in the Secretary of State's list of references, not only are there the AA religious cult books, but Jellinek has been shown by Ron Roizen http://www.roizen.com/ron/rr11.htm to have no evidence of the doctorate he passed himself off with. So they are using the writings of a probable fraud.

Dave Trippel

Re: 12 step coersion in Illinois

> From your post:> > "The petitioner testified that he believes he is alcohol dependent > and cannot drink again. However, he disagrees with the commonly held > belief that alcoholism is a disease. The Petitioner also disagrees > with the belief that alcoholism is not curable."> > People have a right to freedom of belief even in matters not related > to religion. Hope this will make for some good discussion later on.> > Tommy> Scroll down to Freedom of Belief:http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment01/

May 10, 2001

Tommy,

Thanks for the reference.

It could also be pointed out that in the Secretary of State's list of references, not only are there the AA religious cult books, but Jellinek has been shown by Ron Roizen http://www.roizen.com/ron/rr11.htm to have no evidence of the doctorate he passed himself off with. So they are using the writings of a probable fraud.

Dave Trippel

Re: 12 step coersion in Illinois

> From your post:> > "The petitioner testified that he believes he is alcohol dependent > and cannot drink again. However, he disagrees with the commonly held > belief that alcoholism is a disease. The Petitioner also disagrees > with the belief that alcoholism is not curable."> > People have a right to freedom of belief even in matters not related > to religion. Hope this will make for some good discussion later on.> > Tommy> Scroll down to Freedom of Belief:http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment01/

May 10, 2001

.. Galileo was sent to the inquisition for affirming that the earth was a sphere: the government had declared it to be as flat as a trencher, and Galileo was obliged to abjure his error. This error however at length prevailed, the earth became a globe, and Descartes declared it was whirled round its axis by a vortex.

Actually, Galileo's difficulty had nothing to do with his affirmation that the earth was a sphere; he repudiated Aristotle's geocentric theory, which had long been embraced by Christendom, and instead produced evidence in support of Copernicus' heliocentric theory of planetary movements. The Vatican ruled that it was heresy to teach -- contrary to scripture -- that the earth was not the center the universe and that the sun and moon revolved around it. Galileo persisted in adducing and publishing evidence that Aristotle was wrong, and that the earth in fact revolved around the sun -- for that heresy the Inquisition sentenced him to life imprisonment, which was commuted to house arrest.

--Mona--

May 10, 2001

.. Galileo was sent to the inquisition for affirming that the earth was a sphere: the government had declared it to be as flat as a trencher, and Galileo was obliged to abjure his error. This error however at length prevailed, the earth became a globe, and Descartes declared it was whirled round its axis by a vortex.

Actually, Galileo's difficulty had nothing to do with his affirmation that the earth was a sphere; he repudiated Aristotle's geocentric theory, which had long been embraced by Christendom, and instead produced evidence in support of Copernicus' heliocentric theory of planetary movements. The Vatican ruled that it was heresy to teach -- contrary to scripture -- that the earth was not the center the universe and that the sun and moon revolved around it. Galileo persisted in adducing and publishing evidence that Aristotle was wrong, and that the earth in fact revolved around the sun -- for that heresy the Inquisition sentenced him to life imprisonment, which was commuted to house arrest.

--Mona--

May 10, 2001

.. Galileo was sent to the inquisition for affirming that the earth was a sphere: the government had declared it to be as flat as a trencher, and Galileo was obliged to abjure his error. This error however at length prevailed, the earth became a globe, and Descartes declared it was whirled round its axis by a vortex.

Actually, Galileo's difficulty had nothing to do with his affirmation that the earth was a sphere; he repudiated Aristotle's geocentric theory, which had long been embraced by Christendom, and instead produced evidence in support of Copernicus' heliocentric theory of planetary movements. The Vatican ruled that it was heresy to teach -- contrary to scripture -- that the earth was not the center the universe and that the sun and moon revolved around it. Galileo persisted in adducing and publishing evidence that Aristotle was wrong, and that the earth in fact revolved around the sun -- for that heresy the Inquisition sentenced him to life imprisonment, which was commuted to house arrest.

--Mona--

May 10, 2001

Here is another weapon that could be used in that situation, Dave. I

posted a piece here on Dec. 14, 1999 titled " 200 Years Ago Today " and

commented on Traynor v. Turnage where the Supreme Court denied two

veterans their education benefits because their time limit had

expired. They claimed their alcoholism was the reason they did not

apply for their benefits on time. Justice White wrote " It is not our

role to resolve this medical issue on which the authorities are

sharply divided. " in addressing the " is alcoholism a disease "

question. So how the hell can someone's liberties be conditional on

such a belief?

>

> > From your post:

> >

> > " The petitioner testified that he believes he is alcohol

dependent

> > and cannot drink again. However, he disagrees with the commonly

held

> > belief that alcoholism is a disease. The Petitioner also

disagrees

> > with the belief that alcoholism is not curable. "

> >

> > People have a right to freedom of belief even in matters not

on.

> >

> > Tommy

> >

>

> Scroll down to Freedom of Belief:

>

> http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment01/

>

May 10, 2001