Guest guest Posted October 10, 2000 Report Share Posted October 10, 2000 > Why do you assume it is insincere? Alot of the arguments relating to > this involve his quotes. Could we not question other quotes sincerity > also? or validity? Hell, we all know Bill experimented with LSD in > search of that spiritual experience. Who knows what he was on when > he > made some of these comments. Even the one I mentioned. i cant take a blanket PR statement from him that people who disagree are welcome and are seen as equals to all other AA members as long as they have a desire to stop drinking as sincere, if he has a qualifying statement within the groups sacred texts that says " We feel a man is unthinking when he says that sobriety is enough " . (who exactly are these " we " people he is speaking for? rather all inclusive isnt it? he does that alot, offer his beliefs and opinons as sum wisdom) nor do i believe he any real understanding of any eastern or non creation myth religions, or atheism, i think he felt they were dishonest for not accepting a god. this is interesting: " Being an atheist is still " the most discriminated-against characteristic of the eight tested in the research, " according to the latest Gallup poll asking who people would vote for for U.S. President. Only 49 percent would vote for an atheist, while 59 percent would vote for a homosexual, 92 percent would vote for a black, and 95 percent would vote for a woman. This figure is up from 1958, when only 18 percent would have voted for an atheist. No other group has ever gone lower than 26 percent, which was how many people would have voted for a homosexual in 1987 (when the homosexual category for this poll began). As for religious preferences, 94 percent would vote for a Catholic (Kennedy), 94 percent would vote for a Baptist (; Clinton), and 92 percent would vote for a Jew (VP candidate Lieberman), but only 79 percent would vote for a Mormon. This makes our meager 49 percent look like something to be very concerned about. http://www.gallup.com/poll/releases/pr990329.asp " in 1930's atheism was certainly not an significant belief and probably was more discriminated against than it was in late 50's. bill 's attitude towards it reflects that. > I agree. I believe A.A is a religious program. But I don't think > that makes it bad. I know A.A professes to be non-religious but I > really don't think they were out to blatantly lie about it, they just > wanted all people of all religions and creed to feel comfortable > there. if im not mistaken, buddhist don't pray to any higher power. i have read buddhist arguments that the 12-step beliefs are largely incompatible with buddhism. i wouldn't be surprised if this were true, i don't believe bill wilson had other religions in mind when he wrote steps or big book. he wasn't studying koran, but the bible. he may have thought he understood, but he was under the blanket impression from his oxford group studies that all problems were moral and could be solved by turning will over to a god. that compatible with all religious beliefs, nor is the Living Creator " he mentions in big book. > > 'fake it till you make it " . > > I always interpreted " fake it till you make it " as meaning I should > change the way I lived (not drinking anymore even though difficult) > until not drinking became a way of life. > i was under impression that it meant faking your belief in a HP until you made it, praying to ashtrays and such. your understanding as you phrased it, doesn't make sense to me either. if you change your way of life, how is that " faking " ? it probably would be interesting to take a informal survey of list members to see what they were told it meant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 10, 2000 Report Share Posted October 10, 2000 Pat, you are absolutely correct that AA literature is full of contradictions. That is why I say it's like a Third Testament of the Bible. Of course, in StepSpeak, a contradiction is just a " spiritual paradox. " I think part of the brainwashing process is when you learn not to question the blatant contradictions. You just totally " let go " of logic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 10, 2000 Report Share Posted October 10, 2000 > > > Why do you assume it is insincere? Alot of the arguments > relating to > > this involve his quotes. Could we not question other quotes > sincerity > > also? or validity? Hell, we all know Bill experimented with LSD > in > > search of that spiritual experience. Who knows what he was > on when > > he > > made some of these comments. Even the one I mentioned. > > i cant take a blanket PR statement from him that people who > disagree are welcome and are seen as equals to all other AA > members as long as they have a desire > to stop drinking as sincere, if he has a qualifying statement > within the groups sacred texts that says " We feel a man is > unthinking when he says that sobriety is enough " . > (who exactly are these " we " people he is speaking for? rather all > inclusive isnt it? he does that alot, offer his beliefs and opinons > as sum wisdom) Yes he does speak for A.A. But what else would you expect he was responsible for starting it. Most members put him on a pedestal. I think its due to the members that so much credence is given to his statments in A.A. He was just a human being. Nothing more. Not everyone sees these texts as being " sacred " . The subsequent statement is subject to interpretation. > > > nor do i believe he any real understanding of any eastern or non > creation myth religions, or atheism, i think he felt they were > dishonest for not accepting a god. Maybe. Shouldn't we say that he was ignorant rather than dishonest? > > > this is interesting: > " Being an atheist is still " the most discriminated-against > characteristic > of the eight tested in the research, " according to the latest Gallup > poll > asking who people would vote for for U.S. President. Only 49 > percent would > vote for an atheist, while 59 percent would vote for a > homosexual, 92 > percent would vote for a black, and 95 percent would vote for a > woman. > This figure is up from 1958, when only 18 percent would have > voted for an > atheist. No other group has ever gone lower than 26 percent, > which was how > many people would have voted for a homosexual in 1987 (when > the homosexual > category for this poll began). > > As for religious preferences, 94 percent would vote for a Catholic > (Kennedy), 94 percent would vote for a Baptist (; Clinton), > and 92 > percent would vote for a Jew (VP candidate Lieberman), but only > 79 percent > would vote for a Mormon. This makes our meager 49 percent > look like > something to be very concerned about. > http://www.gallup.com/poll/releases/pr990329.asp " > > > in 1930's atheism was certainly not an significant belief and > probably was more discriminated against than it was in late > 50's. bill 's attitude towards > it reflects that. very interesting writeup. But that was not reflective of A.A. It seemed to be a societal perception. > > > > > I agree. I believe A.A is a religious program. But I don't think > > that makes it bad. I know A.A professes to be non-religious but > I > > really don't think they were out to blatantly lie about it, they > just > > wanted all people of all religions and creed to feel comfortable > > there. > > if im not mistaken, buddhist don't pray to any higher power. i > have read buddhist arguments that the 12-step beliefs are > largely incompatible with buddhism. i > wouldn't be surprised if this were true, i don't believe bill wilson > had other religions in mind when he wrote steps or big book. he > wasn't studying koran, but > the bible. he may have thought he understood, but he was under > the blanket impression from his oxford group studies that all > problems were moral and could > be solved by turning will over to a god. that compatible with all > religious beliefs, nor is the Living Creator " he mentions in big > book. Like I mentioned that doesn't make him a liar. Just ignorant. One has to realize he was a stockbroker not a philosopher or a scholar. > > > > > > > > > 'fake it till you make it " . > > > > I always interpreted " fake it till you make it " as meaning I > should > > change the way I lived (not drinking anymore even though > difficult) > > until not drinking became a way of life. > > > > i was under impression that it meant faking your belief in a HP > until you made it, praying to ashtrays and such. your > understanding as you phrased it, doesn't > make sense to me either. if you change your way of life, how is > that " faking " ? it probably would be interesting to take a informal > survey of list members to see what they were told it meant. Its faking because you attitude toward alcohol is not healthy. After some time my attitude toward alcohol changed. If you took an informal survey on this list you would probably come up with what you expect. I am sure if you did so in A.A you might get differing opinions some equal to yours.....but not all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 10, 2000 Report Share Posted October 10, 2000 > To all, > > I see many quotes attributed to Bill to prove a point. > Particularly religiousity. Couldn't an argument be made to the > contrary in light of the following quote? > > The following quote is also Bill s........verbatim. > > " We (A.A) cannot compel any new man to believe anything, pay > anything, or to do anything. As a matter a fact we invite that new > man to disagree with everything and If he still wants to be a member > he is if he says so. " > > The following was part of a talk he did on the third tradition. > The only requirement for A.A membership is a desire to stop drinking. Look, here is a simple concept. When you post in support of *A here, people will argue with you. Personally I think these arguments can be valuable as a way of recognizing false assumptions that remain from the 12 step experience. But don't pull the " poor little me, I'm so hurt that people are arguing with me " act when you support *A here. You are starting it. OK. Now that I've made it clear that I think your post is little more than an attempt to be provoking, I'll respond to it. *A is a religion. the 12 steps are a religion. I don't think Bill W. wanted it that way, but I think that's the way it is. I don't think Christianity is the way Christ wanted it to be, either. No matter to me, I'm neither Christian nor a stepper. But the second someone tells me that I should believe what they do, I stop listening and start defending my right to believe what I believe. judith Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 10, 2000 Report Share Posted October 10, 2000 groups.com, pat_timi@b... wrote: > Yes he does speak for A.A. But what else would you expect he > was responsible for starting it. Most members put him on > a pedestal. I think its due to the members that so much > credence is given to his statments in A.A. He was just a > human being. Nothing more. > Not everyone sees these texts as being " sacred " . The subsequent > statement is subject to interpretation. > > > Maybe. Shouldn't we say that he was ignorant rather than dishonest? it makes him intellectually dishonest to proclaim it is compatible with all religions if he hasn't actuality investigated whether it is or not. on face value, its absurd claim to begin with. if your doctor said, " this medication works with all blood types " and administers it to you, how would you feel about his honesty if you learned afterwards it didn't, that there was no way it possible could and he never bothered to check ? > very interesting writeup. But that was not reflective of A.A. It > seemed to be a societal perception. and aa is a sub culture of our society is it not? its very much so reflective of aa and is relevant if they are to claim a perception that atheist should have no problems with steps as long as they believe in a " higher power " of their choosing. thats insane! atheist don't believe in any Higher Power! its double speak designed to cloud the religious nature of Program. atheist were unpopular and discriminated against, they certainly weren't honesty being considered when steps were written and bill wilson went on his 'spiritual " trips to god. if AA is a sub culture of our society, (made up of a cross section of people based on a habit), it is reasonable to examine what discriminatory beliefs were held in a society towards a minority group and whether or not they were reflected in group which claims we " all " can have a relationship with our " living Creator " (whom we are its " children " ) when we are " honest enough to try. " > Like I mentioned that doesn't make him a liar. Just ignorant. One > has > to realize he was a stockbroker not a philosopher or a scholar. there is no licensing board for philosophy. he became a philosopher when he wrote a " program for living " , offered it to his members, wrote it in a book and offered it for sale, whether he liked it or not. i suspect he did like it, simply from how much he wrote and the way he speaks for everyone with the countless usage of 'we " and " must " . ignorant yes, but also intellectually dishonest. maybe not a liar, just conveniently, and self serving side stepping the truth so there wouldn't being any flaws in what was intended to be the ultimate all inclusive program (more from the oxford group there). that fact that other beliefs really doesn't jive as well as he claimed, is just a unpleasantness that was best glossed over, we wouldn't want a slight blemish to tarnish the masterpiece. he was a scholar, he studied and wrote upon his " findings " , " This is the Great Fact for us. " . it just that his studies were narrow and myopic in range. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 10, 2000 Report Share Posted October 10, 2000 here is another slander of athiests and agnostics in " we Agnostics " : " Yes, we of agnostic temperament have had these thoughts and experiences. Let us make haste to reassure you. We found that as soon as we were able to lay aside prejudice and express even a willingness to believe in a Power greater than ourselves, we commenced to get results " agnostics are prejudiced in thier beleifs, not reasoned or objective universal view, its apparently a disorder of awarness which can be cast aside, one which seems to prevent " results " Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 10, 2000 Report Share Posted October 10, 2000 > > To all, > > > > I see many quotes attributed to Bill to prove a point. > > Particularly religiousity. Couldn't an argument be made to the > > contrary in light of the following quote? > > > > The following quote is also Bill s........verbatim. > > > > " We (A.A) cannot compel any new man to believe anything, pay > > anything, or to do anything. As a matter a fact we invite that new > > man to disagree with everything and If he still wants to be a > member > > > he is if he says so. " > > > > The following was part of a talk he did on the third tradition. > > The only requirement for A.A membership is a desire to stop > drinking. > > Look, here is a simple concept. When you post in support of *A here, > people will argue with you. Personally I think these arguments can be > valuable as a way of recognizing false assumptions that remain from > the 12 step experience. But don't pull the " poor little me, I'm so > hurt that people are arguing with me " act when you support *A here. > You are starting it. Judith you don't know me....I was not hurt. Just disturbed with all the trashing and hostility exhibited. What I have said is supportive of A.A ? I'm just stating as I see it. Whats wrong with that? If I thought it was great I would have said that. I have alot of years in A.A and not everyone fits the mold that is projected and attributed to all A.A's here. Why does that qualify for being supportive? I am contemplating leaving isn't that what this list is about. People who have left or are contemplating leaving? I think that the approach has alot to do with why people get on the defensive. When someone attacks the very institution that you at one point credited with saving your life its natural to do so. Would you expect otherwise? A more factual approach rather than a judgemental and opinionated one would be much more conducive to healthy conversation and debating. Particulary one minus the sarcasm that I see here often from some. I understand that people here are passionate in what they believe and are probably hurt from their experiences with A.A. A little tact and understanding for someone who is where they claim to have been would go much further. Especially if you are trying to shed light on the truths about A.A. I don't mean to put him on the spot but Dave has been a perfect gentleman in handling that new member even after having been insulted often. He has not judged me or what I have stated. Just countered with facts.....that makes me receptive to what he has to say. There are others like him on this list. But not all. > > OK. Now that I've made it clear that I think your post is little > more than an attempt to be provoking, I'll respond to it. *A is a > religion. the 12 steps are a religion. I don't think Bill W. wanted > it > that way, but I think that's the way it is. I don't think > Christianity > is the way Christ wanted it to be, either. No matter to me, I'm > neither Christian nor a stepper. But the second someone tells me that > I should believe what they do, I stop listening and start defending > my > right to believe what I believe. You have that right and so does everyone else. I never said I didn't think so. If you read my post you can see that I clearly stated that I thought A.A was religious or could be thought of as a religion as you said. My posting again is not an attempt to get anything started or to provoke anyone. Despite that some of you may see it as that. I was just questioning some of the arguments validity. I am here to learn. I have seen alot of good information being posted. > > judith Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 10, 2000 Report Share Posted October 10, 2000 > Judith you don't know me....I was not hurt. Just disturbed with all > the trashing and hostility exhibited. I'm not talking about the exact truth as you see it. All I can share are my impressions, the truth according to me. I leave it to others to share their impressions. > What I have said is supportive of A.A ? I'm just stating as I see > it. > Whats wrong with that? If I thought it was great I would have said > that. I have alot of years in A.A and not everyone fits the mold > that > is projected and attributed to all A.A's here. Why does that qualify > for being supportive? In my mind it does sound supportive. > I am contemplating leaving isn't that what this list is about. > People > who have left or are contemplating leaving? The list purpose is not narrowly defined. A broad range of topics are addressed. One topic I'm sensitive about is people defending *A on a group that's dedicated to recovering from *a. I was coerced into 12 step treatment and it damaged me. *A represents one of the biggest mistakes I ever made. It represents something different to you. You talk about your opinions and I'll talk about mine. > I think that the approach has alot to do with why people get on the > defensive. When someone attacks the very institution that you at one > point credited with saving your life its natural to do so. Would you > expect otherwise? I don't feel obligated to let you say whatever you want, and never question your or voice disagreement. I don't put your feelings, your needs, your priorities and opinions before mine. > A more factual approach rather than a judgemental and opinionated one > would be much more conducive to healthy conversation and debating. > Particulary one minus the sarcasm that I see here often from some. I > understand that people here are passionate in what they believe and > are probably hurt from their experiences with A.A. A little tact and > understanding for someone who is where they claim to have been would > go much further. Especially if you are trying to shed light on the > truths about A.A. OK. You think I should be more tactful and understanding. I'm not here to gain your approval. It's OK with me if you disapprove of me. > I don't mean to put him on the spot but Dave has > been a perfect gentleman in handling that new member even after > having > been insulted often. He has not judged me or what I have stated. Just countered with > facts.....that makes me receptive to what he has to say. There are > others like him on this list. But not all. Well, unfortunately for you, I'm not Dave. For me personally, I don't think it's a great thing to be polite to people who are insulting. > My posting again is not an attempt to get anything started or > to provoke anyone. Despite that some of you may see it as that. I > was just questioning some of the arguments validity. I am here to > learn. I have seen alot of good information being posted. OK. I'll take you at your word. judith Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 10, 2000 Report Share Posted October 10, 2000 In case I wasn't emphatic enough the first time... > > > What I have said is supportive of A.A ? Yes. > > I'm just stating as I see it. > > Whats wrong with that? Nothing, that's exactly what I'm doing too. Do you want to argue or not? Because my definition of an argument, or discussion, or communication, or whatever you want to call what is happening between us, is 2 people stating to each other exactly what they see. > > If I thought it was great I would have said that. I have alot of years in A.A and not everyone fits the mold that is projected and attributed to all A.A's here. Why does that qualify for being supportive? Because you're generalizing about the attitude of this group, about my attitude. You assume (1) that 12 step free has a " mold " which all AA's are " projected and attributed to, " and (2) that not everyone fits that mold. In doing so, you are casting 12 sf into a mold. Not everyone on 12sf sees *A the same way. We all have our specific stories, and the specific things we're sensitive about come from our specific experiences. That's a sensitive issue to me: We are not a herd. We do not have a herd mentality. Don't tell me what I think! Listen to me, I want to tell you what I think. I don't need you to agree or approve. judith Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 10, 2000 Report Share Posted October 10, 2000 > > Dave, great job! I have been in and out of " the program " for oh, > > seventeen years now, and since I made the break this past year, I > > have come to know more about the cultishness of the whole shooting > > match. Your reply to the stepper was dead-on, well-thought out, > and > > certainly full of facts that nobody in his right mind can dispute. > > here is another nugget for your archive. According to D., > > writer of the Annotated AA Handbook, while " the program " is a > > suggested one, the steps MUST be taken in order to work the > program. > > > All the newbies like to bandy about the old saw about the steps > being > > just suggestions, but ole hit it on the head. He even refers > > extensively to the religious aspect of the program as being > necessary > > to effect the pyschic change that all alcoholics need in order to > > stop drinking. He writes, the program suggested in this book is > not > > a self-help program, it is a God-help program. pg 119:19 > > > > It does not get any clearer than this. This book is priceless in > > terms of putting the overt religiosity of xa out in the open. I > have > > the book handy for reference should you need any more ammo-er, info! > > > > Cheryl, " I once was blind, but now I see " Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 10, 2000 Report Share Posted October 10, 2000 --- In 12-step-freeegroups, " Dave Marcoot " <dmarcoot@y...> quoted: > > > The following was part of a talk he did on the third tradition. > > The only requirement for A.A membership is a desire to stop > drinking. In addition I will say that I am pretty sure that when they wrote this what theyt actually meant the there are no other PRIOR requirements for AA membership, like " must/must not be a jailbird " or whatever, not that they wouldnt have things expected of them later on. It must have come as quite a shock when " Ed " made it clear that he intended to STAY an atheist. P. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 10, 2000 Report Share Posted October 10, 2000 > > > > What I have said is supportive of A.A ? > > Yes. your entitled to think that. > > > > I'm just stating as I see it. > > > Whats wrong with that? > > Nothing, that's exactly what I'm doing too. Do you want to argue or > not? Because my definition of an argument, or discussion, or > communication, or whatever you want to call what is happening between > us, is 2 people stating to each other exactly what they see. I'm glad you feel that way. So do I. > > > > If I thought it was great I would have said that. I have alot of > years in A.A and not everyone fits the mold that is projected and > attributed to all A.A's here. Why does that qualify for being > supportive? > > Because you're generalizing about the attitude of this group, about > my > attitude. You assume (1) that 12 step free has a " mold " which all > AA's > are " projected and attributed to, " and (2) that not everyone fits > that > mold. In doing so, you are casting 12 sf into a mold. Not everyone on > 12sf sees *A the same way. We all have our specific stories, and the > specific things we're sensitive about come from our specific > experiences. That's a sensitive issue to me: We are not a herd. We do > not have a herd mentality. Don't tell me what I think! Listen to me, > I > want to tell you what I think. I don't need you to agree or approve. I respectfully disagree. I have been watching this board for about a month now and you can't tell me there isn't a consensus about A.A. The majority of the posts (95% or better) are from the same people. Its clearly my observation. I am not trying to tell you what to think just trying to tell you what I think. > judith Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 10, 2000 Report Share Posted October 10, 2000 > My point was to focus on the following.....A.A literature is > inundated > with contradictions. Yes, but self-serving ones, to hide not just to others what they are up to but also themselves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 10, 2000 Report Share Posted October 10, 2000 > --- In 12-step-freeegroups, " Dave Marcoot " <dmarcoot@y...> > quoted: > > > > > The following was part of a talk he did on the third tradition. > > > The only requirement for A.A membership is a desire to stop > > drinking. > Actually it was a live talk I have heard I think during the 20th national A.A convention by Bill. W. In any case I do see your point. > In addition I will say that I am pretty sure that when they wrote > this what theyt actually meant the there are no other PRIOR > requirements for AA membership, like " must/must not be a jailbird " or > whatever, not that they wouldnt have things expected of them later on. > It must have come as quite a shock when " Ed " made it clear that he > intended to STAY an atheist. > > P. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 10, 2000 Report Share Posted October 10, 2000 > > --- In 12-step-freeegroups, " Dave Marcoot " <dmarcoot@y...> > > quoted: > > > Correction.....a tape of the 20th national convention. I am not that old. > > > > The following was part of a talk he did on the third tradition. > > > > The only requirement for A.A membership is a desire to stop > > > drinking. > > > Actually it was a live talk I have heard I think during the 20th > national A.A convention by Bill. W. > In any case I do see your point. > > > > In addition I will say that I am pretty sure that when they wrote > > this what theyt actually meant the there are no other PRIOR > > requirements for AA membership, like " must/must not be a jailbird " > or > > whatever, not that they wouldnt have things expected of them later > on. > > It must have come as quite a shock when " Ed " made it clear that he > > intended to STAY an atheist. > > > > P. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 10, 2000 Report Share Posted October 10, 2000 > I respectfully disagree. I have been watching this board for about a > month now and you can't tell me there isn't a consensus about A.A. > The majority of the posts (95% or better) are from the same people. > Its clearly my observation. > > > I am not trying to tell you what to think just trying to tell you > what > I think. Pat, you are being respectful here. Just wanted to give you that feedback. The truth is, we have this discussion periodically: if 12 step free is a list for people in various stages of detaching from a 12 step group, then shouldn't we be gentle and welcoming with newcomers? My answer is, 12 step doctrine and assumptions continue to shape a person's thoughts long after they leave the actual groups. My experience was in 1984-85, and I never directly tried to recover until 1999. The reason I never pursued this issue is because I pretended to be grateful for the sobriety I got from treatment. I did that because I felt people would shun me if I was honest about my feelings. Then I came here in July 1999. I found people who stood up for themselves, took their cases to court, and actually made a positive difference in how the US deals with chemical dependency/ addiction. Gradually, I became free of the need to find the good in *A, to find my part in the coerced treatment that harmed me. I stopped expressing gratitude for being harmed, and I started arguing with people who (implicitly or explicitly) told me I shouldn't speak up about the truth as I saw it. This experience has made me feel a lot stronger, a lot more self-confident. I am more confident in trusting the evidence of my senses; when something bothers me, I can admit that (at least to myself). It's improved my mental health, which of course is tied to my overall physical health (since my mind is part of my body). Plus, the idea of being nice to newcomers is so 12 steppy to me. Be nice, call it love, huggy huggy woo woo, and then when they question the doctrine, pull out the threats of death, jails, institutions. Call them insane. It's verbal abuse, it's intimidation, and I'd rather get my cards on the table up front. It's not that I don't want you here, it's that I want you to get a glimpse of something that has been positive and helpful to me. It IS scary to question something that has been the center of your life. But if you are already asking the questions, trust yourself enough to look for answers that lie outside your past experience. I think I know where you're coming from, and I hope you have an idea of my frame of reference too. judith Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 10, 2000 Report Share Posted October 10, 2000 > > > I respectfully disagree. I have been watching this board for about > a > > month now and you can't tell me there isn't a consensus about A.A. > > The majority of the posts (95% or better) are from the same people. > > > Its clearly my observation. > > > > > > I am not trying to tell you what to think just trying to tell you > > what > > I think. > > Pat, you are being respectful here. Just wanted to give you that > feedback. The truth is, we have this discussion periodically: if 12 > step free is a list for people in various stages of detaching from a > 12 step group, then shouldn't we be gentle and welcoming with > newcomers? Thanks for your feedback I do appreciate it. I think yes and no. If people are rude and obnoxious then probably not. Otherwise as you mentioned it takes time for people to shed those beliefs and thoughts. Sometimes they including myself may not even be aware of it. To shame them and insult them for that is not helpful. > > My answer is, 12 step doctrine and assumptions continue to shape a > person's thoughts long after they leave the actual groups. My > experience was in 1984-85, and I never directly tried to recover > until > 1999. The reason I never pursued this issue is because I pretended to > be grateful for the sobriety I got from treatment. I did that because > I felt people would shun me if I was honest about my feelings. > > Then I came here in July 1999. I found people who stood up for > themselves, took their cases to court, and actually made a positive > difference in how the US deals with chemical dependency/ addiction. That is admirable. Its great to see people doing that. I really enjoy reading up on the facts which I never really new about. Its been very enlightening. > Gradually, I became free of the need to find the good in *A, to find > my part in the coerced treatment that harmed me. I stopped expressing > gratitude for being harmed, and I started arguing with people who > (implicitly or explicitly) told me I shouldn't speak up about the > truth as I saw it. Maybe one day I'll see it that way also? Right now its hard for me to see it that way. But I commend you for speaking your mind and being your own person. > > This experience has made me feel a lot stronger, a lot more > self-confident. I am more confident in trusting the evidence of my > senses; when something bothers me, I can admit that (at least to > myself). It's improved my mental health, which of course is tied to > my > overall physical health (since my mind is part of my body). > > Plus, the idea of being nice to newcomers is so 12 steppy to me. Be > nice, call it love, huggy huggy woo woo, and then when they question > the doctrine, pull out the threats of death, jails, institutions. > Call > them insane. It's verbal abuse, it's intimidation, and I'd rather get > my cards on the table up front. > > It's not that I don't want you here, it's that I want you to get a > glimpse of something that has been positive and helpful to me. It IS > scary to question something that has been the center of your life. > But > if you are already asking the questions, trust yourself enough to > look > for answers that lie outside your past experience. > > I think I know where you're coming from, and I hope you have an idea > of my frame of reference too. Yes I do. Thanks for the support. Being nice to people is not 12 steppy though. Its universal and a good thing. It takes down massive walls. > > judith Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 10, 2000 Report Share Posted October 10, 2000 Jim, I think you are absolutely right about this. AA'ers are encouraged not to think...witness the upside-down 'think' sign, or 'My best thinking got me here'. If they thought at all, they would see the contradictions. I still find this scary because it says to me that, given the right place and the right frame of mind, many (if not most) of us are susceptible to mind-control. Thank goodness for this list...it is obviously populated with intelligent, independent thinkers! Ellen > Pat, you are absolutely correct that AA literature is full of > contradictions. That is why I say it's like a Third Testament of the > Bible. Of course, in StepSpeak, a contradiction is just a " spiritual > paradox. " I think part of the brainwashing process is when you learn > not to question the blatant contradictions. You just totally " let go " > of logic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 10, 2000 Report Share Posted October 10, 2000 Pat, I wish I would have read this response from you before I responded. My apologies. In fact, this is an example of 'not listening to one's gut'...I was wondering if you were trying to decide to leave AA. In this light, I surely understand why you are asking the questions you are. However, in defense of this group, there were strong reactions to 'Coolguy'...and with good reason. You are right, we here have been hurt by 12-step ideology, and we are passionate about 'getting the word out'...because, as far as I am concerned (and I hope I speak for the list), everyone is hurt by this ideology. Anytime someone is told that he or she is powerless against a behavior, this is cause for grave concern. We may be powerless against many things, but we are never powerless over our behavior and the choices that we make. I hope that you will find that this is a very supportive and dynamic list, and I hope you choose to stay (bear in mind that I haven't read the posts beyond this point as yet...<grin>) Ellen > Judith you don't know me....I was not hurt. Just disturbed with all > the trashing and hostility exhibited. > > What I have said is supportive of A.A ? I'm just stating as I see > it. > Whats wrong with that? If I thought it was great I would have said > that. I have alot of years in A.A and not everyone fits the mold > that > is projected and attributed to all A.A's here. Why does that qualify > for being supportive? > I am contemplating leaving isn't that what this list is about. > People > who have left or are contemplating leaving? > > I think that the approach has alot to do with why people get on the > defensive. When someone attacks the very institution that you at one > point credited with saving your life its natural to do so. Would you > expect otherwise? > > A more factual approach rather than a judgemental and opinionated one > would be much more conducive to healthy conversation and debating. > Particulary one minus the sarcasm that I see here often from some. I > understand that people here are passionate in what they believe and > are probably hurt from their experiences with A.A. A little tact and > understanding for someone who is where they claim to have been would > go much further. Especially if you are trying to shed light on the > truths about A.A. I don't mean to put him on the spot but Dave has > been a perfect gentleman in handling that new member even after > having > been insulted often. > He has not judged me or what I have stated. Just countered with > facts.....that makes me receptive to what he has to say. There are > others like him on this list. But not all. > > > > You have that right and so does everyone else. I never said I didn't > think so. If you read my post you can see that I clearly stated that > I > thought A.A was religious or could be thought of as a religion as you > said. My posting again is not an attempt to get anything started or > to provoke anyone. Despite that some of you may see it as that. I > was just questioning some of the arguments validity. I am here to > learn. I have seen alot of good information being posted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 10, 2000 Report Share Posted October 10, 2000 >To: 12-step-freeegroups >From: pat_timi@... >Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 05:31:02 -0000 >Reply-To: 12-step-freeegroups >Subject: Re: Coolguy? Think again > > I believe A.A is a religious program. But I don't think >that makes it bad. I know A.A professes to be non-religious but I >really don't think they were out to blatantly lie about it, they just >wanted all people of all religions and creed to feel comfortable >there. > ----------------- But people of many religious (and non-religious) creeds DO feel uncomfortable in AA. You may have noticed that there are a great many atheists on this list -- and that is certainly understandable, as clearly not believing in a god or HP of any sort would certainly make one uncomfortable in " the rooms " ! But there are several 12-step-free'ers who are religiously affiliated -- but find Step theology offensive and unsuitable. My religious and cultural tradition (Judaism) places heavy emphasis on free will and personal moral responsibility for behavioral change. It is, quite simply, completely contrary to any teaching of my faith with which I am familiar, to expect that God (or an ocean, or a doorknob!) will " remove shortcomings " , whether or not any of us humans is " entirely ready " , or partially ready for that matter! That " god as you understand him " thing is very disingenuous. Sure, steppers are allowed to have appealing VISUALIZATIONS of a god, but what is required in order to " work the steps " is to believe that that god, or " higher power " , actually has the ability to change your behavior for you -- that is, to SAVE you. No understanding of God that does not include personal daily salvation and guidance on all matters is allowed in this ideology. And AA literature is rife with admonitions to not take any personal credit for any positive behavioral changes -- the credit must go to that god and to AA. Taking credit and being proud of positive achievement -- bad bad bad -- that would be " pride " and " selfishness " and would indicated that you're still running on " Self-Will " -- BAD!!! Well, this ideology is NOT inclusive of all religions. It is based on Lutheranism and German Pietism, and I think has parallels in Pentecostalism. But in my religion, there is no such thing as " salvation " by an outside force (Higher Power) -- and " Self-Will " is GOOD!! I have also met practicing members of some Christian sects who believe this way. (Dave, quoting Big Book) >> " it means that all of us, whatever our race, creed, or >> color are the children of a living Creator with whom we may form >> a relationship upon simple and understandable terms as soon >> as we are willing and honest enough to try. Those having >> religious affiliations will find here nothing disturbing to their >> beliefs or ceremonies. There is no friction among us over such >> matters. " >> Apparently Bill arrogantly assumed all people were (or ought to be) Christians of his particular persuasion. You are correct that there is nothing " bad " about AA being religious (though AA as a whole is very dishonest about this) -- but I hope you agree that it is indeed " bad " -- actually, " unconstitutional " is the word -- for any court or state agency to require anyone to attend AA against their will, specifically BECAUSE it is religious. ~Rita ------------------------------------------------------------ --== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==-- Before you buy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 10, 2000 Report Share Posted October 10, 2000 Hi, Would someone please send me all the emails to this list since 3AM EST Tuesday? I haven't gotten any mails until now... Since it says re: coolguy... I think I would like to read whatever the first one said. Rita, I don't know if you saw my mail that said I think that no institution teaches self-responsibility more than AA except Judaism. Now, to you, AA may seem very much opposed to self will, but compared to everything else I have been exposed to (except judges in court) AA is very good at showing people they are responsible for their own actions! Most institutions have been teaching and promoting the idea that self will is no good. I don't agree with that but it is extremely pervasive in this world, and if AA falls into it too, I am not surprised. I find it interesting that I see that AA actually does more than most in teaching people that they are responsible for their own actions, and you see that they just aren't as goof as your religion. I'd agree with both of us, but maybe you should rethinkit, and give AA some credit for that as well. Its no just Christianity, or AA, that teaches people to shun the self... I believe most churches and all governments and most big businesses, too. I think its fair to say our society, our culture, our world promotes that type of thinking. > >Reply-To: 12-step-freeegroups >To: 12-step-freeegroups >Subject: Re: Coolguy? Think again >Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 19:28:54 -0700 > > > > > >To: 12-step-freeegroups > >From: pat_timi@... > >Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 05:31:02 -0000 > >Reply-To: 12-step-freeegroups > >Subject: Re: Coolguy? Think again > > > > > I believe A.A is a religious program. But I don't think > >that makes it bad. I know A.A professes to be non-religious but I > >really don't think they were out to blatantly lie about it, they just > >wanted all people of all religions and creed to feel comfortable > >there. > > >----------------- > > But people of many religious (and non-religious) creeds DO feel >uncomfortable in AA. > > You may have noticed that there are a great many atheists on this >list -- and that is certainly understandable, as clearly not believing in a >god or HP of any sort would certainly make one uncomfortable in " the >rooms " ! But there are several 12-step-free'ers who are religiously >affiliated -- but find Step theology offensive and unsuitable. > > My religious and cultural tradition (Judaism) places heavy emphasis >on free will and personal moral responsibility for behavioral change. It >is, quite simply, completely contrary to any teaching of my faith with >which I am familiar, to expect that God (or an ocean, or a doorknob!) will > " remove shortcomings " , whether or not any of us humans is " entirely ready " , >or partially ready for that matter! > > That " god as you understand him " thing is very disingenuous. Sure, >steppers are allowed to have appealing VISUALIZATIONS of a god, but what is >required in order to " work the steps " is to believe that that god, or > " higher power " , actually has the ability to change your behavior for you -- >that is, to SAVE you. No understanding of God that does not include >personal daily salvation and guidance on all matters is allowed in this >ideology. And AA literature is rife with admonitions to not take any >personal credit for any positive behavioral changes -- the credit must go >to that god and to AA. Taking credit and being proud of positive >achievement -- bad bad bad -- that would be " pride " and " selfishness " and >would indicated that you're still running on " Self-Will " -- BAD!!! > > Well, this ideology is NOT inclusive of all religions. It is based >on Lutheranism and German Pietism, and I think has parallels in >Pentecostalism. But in my religion, there is no such thing as " salvation " >by an outside force (Higher Power) -- and " Self-Will " is GOOD!! > > I have also met practicing members of some Christian sects who >believe this way. > >(Dave, quoting Big Book) > > >> " it means that all of us, whatever our race, creed, or > >> color are the children of a living Creator with whom we may form > >> a relationship upon simple and understandable terms as soon > >> as we are willing and honest enough to try. Those having > >> religious affiliations will find here nothing disturbing to their > >> beliefs or ceremonies. There is no friction among us over such > >> matters. " > >> > > Apparently Bill arrogantly assumed all people were (or ought to be) >Christians of his particular persuasion. > > You are correct that there is nothing " bad " about AA being religious >(though AA as a whole is very dishonest about this) -- but I hope you agree >that it is indeed " bad " -- actually, " unconstitutional " is the word -- for >any court or state agency to require anyone to attend AA against their >will, specifically BECAUSE it is religious. > >~Rita > > > >------------------------------------------------------------ >--== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==-- >Before you buy. > > _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 10, 2000 Report Share Posted October 10, 2000 that would be a lot of emails, if you go to egroups page for this group, you can read every messege ever posed on this list thru your web browser > Hi, > Would someone please send me all the emails to this list since 3AM EST > Tuesday? I haven't gotten any mails until now... Since it says re: > coolguy... I think I would like to read whatever the first one said. > Rita, > I don't know if you saw my mail that said I think that no institution > teaches self-responsibility more than AA except Judaism. Now, to you, AA > may seem very much opposed to self will, but compared to everything else I > have been exposed to (except judges in court) AA is very good at showing > people they are responsible for their own actions! Most institutions have > been teaching and promoting the idea that self will is no good. I don't > agree with that but it is extremely pervasive in this world, and if AA falls > into it too, I am not surprised. I find it interesting that I see that AA > actually does more than most in teaching people that they are responsible > for their own actions, and you see that they just aren't as goof as your > religion. I'd agree with both of us, but maybe you should rethinkit, and > give AA some credit for that as well. Its no just Christianity, or AA, that > teaches people to shun the self... I believe most churches and all > governments and most big businesses, too. I think its fair to say our > society, our culture, our world promotes that type of thinking. > > >From: " Railroad Rita " <rita66@w...> > >Reply-To: 12-step-freeegroups > >To: 12-step-freeegroups > >Subject: Re: Coolguy? Think again > >Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 19:28:54 -0700 > > > > > > > > > > >To: 12-step-freeegroups > > >From: pat_timi@b... > > >Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 05:31:02 -0000 > > >Reply-To: 12-step-freeegroups > > >Subject: Re: Coolguy? Think again > > > > > > > > I believe A.A is a religious program. But I don't think > > >that makes it bad. I know A.A professes to be non-religious but I > > >really don't think they were out to blatantly lie about it, they just > > >wanted all people of all religions and creed to feel comfortable > > >there. > > > > >----------------- > > > > But people of many religious (and non-religious) creeds DO feel > >uncomfortable in AA. > > > > You may have noticed that there are a great many atheists on this > >list -- and that is certainly understandable, as clearly not believing in a > >god or HP of any sort would certainly make one uncomfortable in " the > >rooms " ! But there are several 12-step-free'ers who are religiously > >affiliated -- but find Step theology offensive and unsuitable. > > > > My religious and cultural tradition (Judaism) places heavy emphasis > >on free will and personal moral responsibility for behavioral change. It > >is, quite simply, completely contrary to any teaching of my faith with > >which I am familiar, to expect that God (or an ocean, or a doorknob!) will > > " remove shortcomings " , whether or not any of us humans is " entirely ready " , > >or partially ready for that matter! > > > > That " god as you understand him " thing is very disingenuous. Sure, > >steppers are allowed to have appealing VISUALIZATIONS of a god, but what is > >required in order to " work the steps " is to believe that that god, or > > " higher power " , actually has the ability to change your behavior for you -- > >that is, to SAVE you. No understanding of God that does not include > >personal daily salvation and guidance on all matters is allowed in this > >ideology. And AA literature is rife with admonitions to not take any > >personal credit for any positive behavioral changes -- the credit must go > >to that god and to AA. Taking credit and being proud of positive > >achievement -- bad bad bad -- that would be " pride " and " selfishness " and > >would indicated that you're still running on " Self-Will " -- BAD!!! > > > > Well, this ideology is NOT inclusive of all religions. It is based > >on Lutheranism and German Pietism, and I think has parallels in > >Pentecostalism. But in my religion, there is no such thing as " salvation " > >by an outside force (Higher Power) -- and " Self-Will " is GOOD!! > > > > I have also met practicing members of some Christian sects who > >believe this way. > > > >(Dave, quoting Big Book) > > > > >> " it means that all of us, whatever our race, creed, or > > >> color are the children of a living Creator with whom we may form > > >> a relationship upon simple and understandable terms as soon > > >> as we are willing and honest enough to try. Those having > > >> religious affiliations will find here nothing disturbing to their > > >> beliefs or ceremonies. There is no friction among us over such > > >> matters. " > > >> > > > > Apparently Bill arrogantly assumed all people were (or ought to be) > >Christians of his particular persuasion. > > > > You are correct that there is nothing " bad " about AA being religious > >(though AA as a whole is very dishonest about this) -- but I hope you agree > >that it is indeed " bad " -- actually, " unconstitutional " is the word -- for > >any court or state agency to require anyone to attend AA against their > >will, specifically BECAUSE it is religious. > > > >~Rita > > > > > > > >------------------------------------------------------------ > >--== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==-- > >Before you buy. > > > > > > __________________________________________________ _______________________ > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. > > Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at > http://profiles.msn.com. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 10, 2000 Report Share Posted October 10, 2000 Cool Guy go to the website to view them. /group/12-step-free > Re: Re: Coolguy? Think again > > > Hi, > Would someone please send me all the emails to this list since 3AM EST > Tuesday? I haven't gotten any mails until now... Since it says re: > coolguy... I think I would like to read whatever the first one said. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 11, 2000 Report Share Posted October 11, 2000 Thanks to those who replied and to those who forwarded all these mails! It didn't occur to me that maybe more than one person would answer my request! Glad I won't have to ask this favor again! > >Reply-To: 12-step-freeegroups >To: <12-step-freeegroups> >Subject: RE: Re: Coolguy? Think again >Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 22:09:14 -0500 > >Cool Guy go to the website to view them. > >/group/12-step-free > > > > Re: Re: Coolguy? Think again > > > > > > Hi, > > Would someone please send me all the emails to this list since 3AM EST > > Tuesday? I haven't gotten any mails until now... Since it says re: > > coolguy... I think I would like to read whatever the first one said. > > _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 11, 2000 Report Share Posted October 11, 2000 ....blind enough to see that I am a stepper. Thats really a hurtful word, since you guys seem to have more hate for steppers than Arabs hold for Jews. How many times did you do the 12 steps, lady? I did one step, ever. Ok you wasted 17 years in that program - at least it sounds like that is how you are looking at it now. Thats your problem, not mine. I doubt if it was a waste, I think you are probably better off for it. Just like you spent about 17 years with your parent(s). They probably didn't do everything right, but your probably better off that they were a part of your life. Lady, you are still blind enough to believe you have to " work some program " or " do the steps " to be helped by AA. I was helped by PEOPLE who were members of AA although I didn't fall into that other stuff (powerlessness, destruction of self - these are things others proclaimed AA is guilty of). It sounds like you are ridiculing me in your post; I am not the one who spent 17 years in AA thanks very much. I don't want to be your enemy, but your not exactly extending a warm welcome. Maybe 2 of all these people have, so don't feel unique. You know you are liar if you try to say AA did not help you in any way (I know you didn't say that but I don't know what you're thinking - unlike these others I am not a mindreader). I'll leave it at that. > Dave, great job! I have been in and out of " the program " for oh, > seventeen years now, and since I made the break this past year, I > have come to know more about the cultishness of the whole shooting > match. Your reply to the stepper was dead-on, well-thought out, and > certainly full of facts that nobody in his right mind can dispute. > here is another nugget for your archive. According to D., > writer of the Annotated AA Handbook, while " the program " is a > suggested one, the steps MUST be taken in order to work the program. > All the newbies like to bandy about the old saw about the steps being > just suggestions, but ole hit it on the head. He even refers > extensively to the religious aspect of the program as being necessary > to effect the pyschic change that all alcoholics need in order to > stop drinking. He writes, the program suggested in this book is not > a self-help program, it is a God-help program. pg 119:19 > > It does not get any clearer than this. This book is priceless in > terms of putting the overt religiosity of xa out in the open. I have > the book handy for reference should you need any more ammo-er, info! > > Cheryl, " I once was blind, but now I see " 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.