Nuts!

[Guest guest]

>

> ...

> > There

> > are over two million AA members in this country. That has to speak

> > for something.

> ...

>

> Wrong. According to AA's own statistics, there are just over ONE

> million members. The two million is the number alleged to be members

> worldwide.

>

---------------

I'm also curious as to what they define as " member " . I suspect they are

just counting heads at meetings. Now, if someone is at an AA meeting by

coercion (court, employer, etc.) and has no interest in 12-step ideology or

" working the program " , are they a " member " ? I hardly think so. I attended 5

meetings a week for 5 months -- at least 100 meetings -- and NEVER considered

myself a " member " . I was just a person who was " present " , and wouldn't have

been if I had any say in the matter.

That is another reason why that " AA confession " ruling in New York State

was so bizarre. The " confidentiality understanding among members " that was

cited -- why would it apply to anyone who was present at the meeting but not

committed to the program or its ideology?? If I had heard any murder confession

at any of the meetings I went to, I sure as hell would have reported it to the

authorities -- and anyone suggesting I had any obligation of confidentiality as

an " AA member " would have been set straight in short order.

~Rita

> But well over a million people have been going through

> alcoholism/addiction treatment in this country EVERY YEAR for

> decades, and in most cases they have been strongly urged to go to AA

> after treatment.

>

> So what the numbers 'speak for' is that the vast majority of those

> who try AA, often under a degree of compulsion, reject it and/or find

> that it doesn't work.

>

> In the context of the treatment system in this country, and the huge

> influence of AA zealots on the media, gov't, and medical

> establishment, the total membership of AA is AMAZINGLY LOW.

>

> --wally

[Guest guest]

I just like how in one reply she states all kinds of proof and evidence, and

then when questions about her proof are asked (which I did earlier, with no

reply of course) she states it isn't a scientific problem. Orwellian

Doublethink all over this woman

>From: perkinstommy@...

>Reply-To: 12-step-free

>To: 12-step-free

>Subject: Re: Nuts!

>Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2001 16:00:23 -0000

>

>

> > That's a nice try, but its not science. As for answering all your

> > questions you will have to wait until this troll gets some sleep. I

> > will also try to do this message more dignity. Until the PM...

> >

> > But for the grace of God,

> > Kay T.

>

>Kay,

>

>Your responses are so very predictable. Read Dr. Schaler's article

>and you will know why many of us can predict what kind of bullshit

>you will come up with next.

>

>http://www.enabling.org/ia/szasz/schaler/fifth/cultbusting.html

>

>Tommy

>

>http://www.angelfire.com/journal/forcedaa/

>

_________________________________________________________________

Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

[Guest guest]

I just like how in one reply she states all kinds of proof and evidence, and

then when questions about her proof are asked (which I did earlier, with no

reply of course) she states it isn't a scientific problem. Orwellian

Doublethink all over this woman

>From: perkinstommy@...

>Reply-To: 12-step-free

>To: 12-step-free

>Subject: Re: Nuts!

>Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2001 16:00:23 -0000

>

>

> > That's a nice try, but its not science. As for answering all your

> > questions you will have to wait until this troll gets some sleep. I

> > will also try to do this message more dignity. Until the PM...

> >

> > But for the grace of God,

> > Kay T.

>

>Kay,

>

>Your responses are so very predictable. Read Dr. Schaler's article

>and you will know why many of us can predict what kind of bullshit

>you will come up with next.

>

>http://www.enabling.org/ia/szasz/schaler/fifth/cultbusting.html

>

>Tommy

>

>http://www.angelfire.com/journal/forcedaa/

>

_________________________________________________________________

Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

[Guest guest]

Hi Tomboy, folks

The National Longitudinal Alcohol epidemlogical Study (NLAES) has

follwed alcohld ependent ppl for over 20 years. what they have fod s

that a the 20 year mark the were more likely to be not be alcohol

dpendent if they had never had any from of alcohol trament or attended

AA. Also, more ppl recovered to drink moderatly than to abstain. I

think this even applied to the ppl who *had* been to AA.

P.

>

> > But then provided me with

> >some of these studies that have shown that many people who quit on

> >there own.

>

> There aren't studies (that I know of) for people who have quit on

their

> own. I do know that only 3% seek out AA and the other 97% just get

on with

> their lives, so it is really difficult to get statistical studies

out of

> that group.

[Guest guest]

Hi Tomboy, folks

The National Longitudinal Alcohol epidemlogical Study (NLAES) has

follwed alcohld ependent ppl for over 20 years. what they have fod s

that a the 20 year mark the were more likely to be not be alcohol

dpendent if they had never had any from of alcohol trament or attended

AA. Also, more ppl recovered to drink moderatly than to abstain. I

think this even applied to the ppl who *had* been to AA.

P.

>

> > But then provided me with

> >some of these studies that have shown that many people who quit on

> >there own.

>

> There aren't studies (that I know of) for people who have quit on

their

> own. I do know that only 3% seek out AA and the other 97% just get

on with

> their lives, so it is really difficult to get statistical studies

out of

> that group.

[Guest guest]

At 06:41 PM 11/1/01 +0000, you wrote:

>Hi Tomboy, folks

>

>The National Longitudinal Alcohol epidemlogical Study (NLAES) has

>follwed alcohld ependent ppl for over 20 years. what they have fod s

>that a the 20 year mark the were more likely to be not be alcohol

>dpendent if they had never had any from of alcohol trament or attended

>AA. Also, more ppl recovered to drink moderatly than to abstain. I

>think this even applied to the ppl who *had* been to AA.

Interesting data, certainly.

I have also heard that the number of problem drinkers who end

up abstinent is about the same whether or not they get " treatment "

or go to AA, and that the real difference shows up in the number

of moderate drinkers -- without AA or treatment, many people end

up as moderate social drinkers, but with exposure to those things

they are much more likely to continue with heavy drinking.

The data you mention argues even more strongly against AA and

the " treatment " model. Do you have a cite handy, so that I

can look at the exact numbers?

[Guest guest]

> > > " There is a principle which is a bar against all information,

which

> > > is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a

man

> >in

> > > everlasting ignorance - that principle is contempt prior to

> > > investigation. " - Herbert Spencer

> > > [big Book, p. 570]

> >

> >Hi, Kay T.

> >

> >Thanks for reminding us of the wisdom contained in the above quote.

> >

> >If you look around here, you will find the reasoned opinions of

many

> >honest men and women who spent years in AA and/or its offshoots.

> >

> >They came, they saw, they investigated - and they felt contempt.

> >

> >And they talk about it here.

> >

> >Welcome aboard. And thanks for the topics - with any luck, you'll

> >keep us too busy for us to drink for a while.

> >

> >Regards,

> >

> > Tom

> >

>

>

> _________________________________________________________________

> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at

http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

[Guest guest]

Hi Kay

When those " jerks " can operate in AA with the protection of the majority,

then there is a problem. When you have mainstream AAers sharing in a meeting

that Bill W and Co. must have had divine help in creating the 12 steps, then

there is no chance of ever changing what is wrong in AA.

abbadun

>From: kahn_troll@...

>Reply-To: 12-step-free

>To: 12-step-free

>Subject: Re: Nuts!

>Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2001 00:00:38 -0000

>

>

> > > > " There is a principle which is a bar against all information,

>which

> > > > is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a

>man

> > >in

> > > > everlasting ignorance - that principle is contempt prior to

> > > > investigation. " - Herbert Spencer

> > > > [big Book, p. 570]

> > >

> > >Hi, Kay T.

> > >

> > >Thanks for reminding us of the wisdom contained in the above quote.

> > >

> > >If you look around here, you will find the reasoned opinions of

>many

> > >honest men and women who spent years in AA and/or its offshoots.

> > >

> > >They came, they saw, they investigated - and they felt contempt.

> > >

> > >And they talk about it here.

> > >

> > >Welcome aboard. And thanks for the topics - with any luck, you'll

> > >keep us too busy for us to drink for a while.

> > >

> > >Regards,

> > >

> > > Tom

> > >

> >

> >

> > _________________________________________________________________

> > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at

>http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

>

_________________________________________________________________

Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

[Guest guest]

At 08:57 AM 01/11/01 +0000, kahn_troll@... wrote:

No not strange at all. The whole

point of those instructions is to

determine whether you are one such real alcoholic who may be facing

insanity or death down the road if they continue. Such alcoholics

have difficulty controlling their drinking or abstaining. There is no

other way to learn ifyou are an alcoholic.

So, you would send a child onto a busy street because you don't know

which child will get hit or not?

Your solution to someone who is having alcohol issues but isn't sure that

they are alcoholic is to tell them to go and try controlled drinking?

that is cruel and irresponsible.

You have to know from

experience what your drinking is like and if you need to be

concerned. There is no sense wasting time with alcoholics who do not

see or people who are unsure. Those instructions are telling you how

to get some self knowledge. It is giving some things to be aware of

next time you drink.

What if they don't survive after resuming drinking? are you then liable

for the advice you gave them?

> Hmmm, but you are in a

fundamentalist Religious program called AA

Puh-leeeeezzzzzz. This is a new one on me. Sounds extreme to me.

Recently decided in a New York Supreme court case. Extreme ? not

according to the state of New York.

I think I remember this. It was

over some murders and the

confidentiality of the group being like a confessional. Is that the

one? Personally my understanding is that guy should have been

convicted. He was not legally protected. It was a travesty. AA could

not possibly support this courts decision and AA doesnt call itself a

religion, it does not enjoy the usual legal protections and tax

breaks that organized religions have. I dont see how this one unusual

case proves that AA is a religion. It is not a religion, never has

been, never will be. This isjust more of people biased against the

god stuff of the program.

No, wrong case. People who were forced to go to AA meetings took the case

to court, stating that they did not want to be forced to go to a

Christian based religious organisation. They won.

Tom Boy

[Guest guest]

At 09:08 AM 01/11/01 +0000, kahn_troll@... wrote:

No. There are few. It is a rare case. Most people who are not

successful just dont try.

But again, the ones who don't succeed are pathological liars?

Tom Boy

[Guest guest]

At 07:09 AM 11/1/01 -0000, kahn_troll@... wrote:

>

>> I think it is more dangerous behaviour to have people in AA tell

>others

>> that if they drink they will die.

>

>AA does not " tell people that they will die if they drink " . AA does

" And with us, to drink is to die. " Big book, page 66.

>But for the grace of God,

>Kay T.

----------

http://listen.to/benbradley

[Guest guest]

>

> >No not strange at all. The whole point of those instructions is to

> >determine whether you are one such real alcoholic who may be facing

> >insanity or death down the road if they continue. Such alcoholics

> >have difficulty controlling their drinking or abstaining. There is

no

> >other way to learn ifyou are an alcoholic.

>

> So, you would send a child onto a busy street because you don't

know which

> child will get hit or not?

> Your solution to someone who is having alcohol issues but isn't

sure that

> they are alcoholic is to tell them to go and try controlled

drinking? that

> is cruel and irresponsible.

No that is not the point. It is assumed that the person is already

drinking as a matter of habit. The suggestion is that they try to do

some controlled drinking and pay attention to the results they get.

Read what the book says again and think in context. It is not cruel

and irresponsible. As I have tried to make very clear the point is

that a person has to know from experience and the only way to get

that is by drinking. Maybe a person isn't accostomed to trying

controlled drinking. So the suggestion is that they try this and see

if they are able. There is nothing cruel or unusual about this. It is

am empirical shot at defining one's alcohol problem. It is becoming

apparent that AA can do absolutely no good in your eyes. You read

what you want to see in those books and try to make it out to be some

sort of sinister cult and it is not that. You are not the only person

on this list who is skilled at taking things outof context to make

others look silly. This is a very simple and reasonable excersise to

establish whether one is a real alcoholic. Thats all.

>

>

> >You have to know from

> >experience what your drinking is like and if you need to be

> >concerned. There is no sense wasting time with alcoholics who do

not

> >see or people who are unsure. Those instructions are telling you

how

> >to get some self knowledge. It is giving some things to be aware of

> >next time you drink.

>

>

> What if they don't survive after resuming drinking? are you then

liable for

> the advice you gave them?

Once again, stop taking this out of context. The suggestion is not

that a problem drinker resume drinking. The book is addressing people

who are already drinking. The suggestion is to try some controlled

drinking.

As for the New York case I am not familiar witht he one you mention

about the plaintiffs being sentenced to AA. Could you send me a link

to some information about this case?

Kay T.

[Guest guest]

WHat if they succeed i controlling there drinking? Are they then an

aloholic, even after all they may have been through before? What happens if

a person who has controlled there drinking for 20 odd years has a series of

bad experiences, becomes depressed and then starts to drink very heavily?

Are they an alcoholic,and always been one? What if they do start to drink

heavily and then, deal with there issues, and go back to drinking

controlled? Where they ever an alcoholic, even though they had several bad

experiences with it?

>From: kahn_troll@...

>Reply-To: 12-step-free

>To: 12-step-free

>Subject: Re: Nuts!

>Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2001 07:01:29 -0000

>

>

> >

> > >No not strange at all. The whole point of those instructions is to

> > >determine whether you are one such real alcoholic who may be facing

> > >insanity or death down the road if they continue. Such alcoholics

> > >have difficulty controlling their drinking or abstaining. There is

>no

> > >other way to learn ifyou are an alcoholic.

> >

> > So, you would send a child onto a busy street because you don't

>know which

> > child will get hit or not?

> > Your solution to someone who is having alcohol issues but isn't

>sure that

> > they are alcoholic is to tell them to go and try controlled

>drinking? that

> > is cruel and irresponsible.

>

>

>No that is not the point. It is assumed that the person is already

>drinking as a matter of habit. The suggestion is that they try to do

>some controlled drinking and pay attention to the results they get.

>Read what the book says again and think in context. It is not cruel

>and irresponsible. As I have tried to make very clear the point is

>that a person has to know from experience and the only way to get

>that is by drinking. Maybe a person isn't accostomed to trying

>controlled drinking. So the suggestion is that they try this and see

>if they are able. There is nothing cruel or unusual about this. It is

>am empirical shot at defining one's alcohol problem. It is becoming

>apparent that AA can do absolutely no good in your eyes. You read

>what you want to see in those books and try to make it out to be some

>sort of sinister cult and it is not that. You are not the only person

>on this list who is skilled at taking things outof context to make

>others look silly. This is a very simple and reasonable excersise to

>establish whether one is a real alcoholic. Thats all.

>

> >

> >

> > >You have to know from

> > >experience what your drinking is like and if you need to be

> > >concerned. There is no sense wasting time with alcoholics who do

>not

> > >see or people who are unsure. Those instructions are telling you

>how

> > >to get some self knowledge. It is giving some things to be aware of

> > >next time you drink.

> >

> >

> > What if they don't survive after resuming drinking? are you then

>liable for

> > the advice you gave them?

>

>Once again, stop taking this out of context. The suggestion is not

>that a problem drinker resume drinking. The book is addressing people

>who are already drinking. The suggestion is to try some controlled

>drinking.

>

>As for the New York case I am not familiar witht he one you mention

>about the plaintiffs being sentenced to AA. Could you send me a link

>to some information about this case?

>

>Kay T.

>

_________________________________________________________________

Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

[Guest guest]

>

> As for the New York case I am not familiar witht he one you mention

> about the plaintiffs being sentenced to AA. Could you send me a

link

> to some information about this case?

>

> Kay T.

Scroll to the bottom the home page here and you will see " Continue " .

Click there and you will see " Contents " . There you will see " Court

Opinions " Click there and you will be able to read the court

opinions of the four major 12-step coercion cases including the two

from New York. Be sure and spread the word throughout stepdom that

the federal courts have ruled 12-step coercion unconstitutional.

Also tell them that anyone who participates in 12-step coercion is

sticking their necks out to be sued.

http://www.angelfire.com/journal/forcedaa

[Guest guest]

This is a very simple and reasonable excersise to

> establish whether one is a real alcoholic. Thats all.

>

Morning Kay,

Have a question for you.....

What, exactly, in your own words, is a real alcoholic?

netty

[Guest guest]

I'm alcoholic, yes I'm the real alcoholic, all you

other alcoholics are just imitating. Will the real

alcoholic please stand up, please stand up....

--- caenemy@... wrote:

>

>

> This is a very simple and reasonable excersise to

> > establish whether one is a real alcoholic. Thats

> all.

> >

>

> Morning Kay,

>

> Have a question for you.....

>

> What, exactly, in your own words, is a real

> alcoholic?

>

> netty

>

>

__________________________________________________

[Guest guest]

Nope , we have provided plenty of links for you already. Do your own

homework. I have done mine.

kisses

Tom Boy

> At 08:57 AM 01/11/01 +0000,

kahn_troll@y... wrote:

As for the New York case I am not familiar witht he one you mention

about the plaintiffs being sentenced to AA. Could you send me a link

to some information about this case?

Kay T.

[Guest guest]

> If somebody told you that you should go back out and use if you

were

> not willing to do all those things they were dead wrong.

Hi Kay,

Am a little irate, my first reply to this post got lost.

And i don't feel like doing this again. Will be much shorter.

Not all those things, even just one thing.

Are you sure

> you didn't just hear it that way?

Ignore this statement.

Some one actually said that to you

> just like that?

Not only me, but the entire room...just like that.

I turned to an elder and asked' Why is he saying that?'

Was told he was weeding. In other words, getting rid of the

ones who still had a strong will. The defiant ones, the goats.

The ones who would not do what they are told.

You are describing a perversion of the program.

AA is a perversion - just takes a long time for many

of us, me anyway, to see it.

AA is

> not to be used to beat anything out of anyone.

Are you sure of this? Maybe they'll ask nicely for you

to give up your will - little by little.

My sponsor never

> treated me like that. She told me that if she was going to sponsor

me

> then there would be a few requirements: telephone calls, meetings,

> study the big book, outreach work, that's all. I thought it was

> reasonable. She never told me what to do.

>

> > What did she say or do when you balked at doing those few

requirements day in and day out? She never told you to call?

She never told you what to read in the BB? Meetings? Others?

Never told you to ask god? What exactly did she do?

>

> But it sounds like someone you know did die because they drank

again.

Yes, 3 people, within a 11 month period, from my home group.

> Wasn't this a reasonable and valid warning.

Yes, the way they used was very dangerous. Have you ever

wondered how some people escalate to that level of use?

Also, it was more then a warning. One way to manipulate.

Tried explaining in other post, don't want to write it out

again.

I am truly sorry, but I

> don't follow how aa is responsible for this.

I'd wager to say that if these people had never heard

of AA, they would not have died in the manner that they

did. AA teaches self-destruction with no options. Those

who internalize these AA beliefs and believe they are this

alcoholic, powerless and with no choices can have very sad

endings. For this AA IS responsible.

I don't know how aa

> manipulates people into following the program.

If you really want to know, keep reading. Check out the

files and bookmarks. Compare books and different authors

perceptions...then find your own conclusion.

Its a matter of choice.

AA takes away your choices.

netty