Perception Vs. Reality

[Anonymous]

Just want to say that last guest wasn't me: the person who brought up brocolli and says a is not a cult or even "cult-like." I am not a current a, follower.

[Anonymous]

Just want to say that last guest wasn't me: the person who brought up brocolli and says a is not a cult or even "cult-like." I am not a current a, follower.

Uh, that's  "I'm not a current  a. follower, nor have I ever "followed" a."

[Anonymous]

Psy: I'm saying your language and arrogant "I know more than you" attitude sounds program like. You know your right, and believe those who have different views are followers of AA or some how uneducated on the matter.

[psy]

Psy: I'm saying your language and arrogant "I know more than you" attitude sounds program like. You know your right, and believe those who have different views are followers of AA or some how uneducated on the matter.

It might sound that way and that's a fair criticism.  I fully admit I can sound arrogant at times.  I'm not saying i'm right (though obviously I believe I am if i'm arguing a point).  I am saying, however, that I feel strongly that I have a point and maybe if you took the time to read a few of those books you might change your mind (or the other guest might change his).

[Anonymous]

Psy: I'm saying your language and arrogant "I know more than you" attitude sounds program like. You know your right, and believe those who have different views are followers of AA or some how uneducated on the matter.

It might sound that way and that's a fair criticism.  I fully admit I can sound arrogant at times.  I'm not saying i'm right (though obviously I believe I am if i'm arguing a point).  I am saying, however, that I feel strongly that I have a point and maybe if you took the time to read a few of those books you might change your mind (or the other guest might change his).

I am not an advocate for A.A's effectiveness, or greatness, or anything. The ritualized cultic-torture and murder of teens in Cedu, Desisto, Elan, Straight, etc is not similar to aa in any SIGNIFICANT way. Those organizations are genuinely cult-like.

My concern is that you’re saying AA is cult-like (like it or not) you are something of a mouthpiece for the anti-ritualized teen torture and murder movement. When you say “A is cult-like” and “programs are cult-like” you make it sound as if what does on in them is alike and give a dangerously wrong impression about the nature of programs and cults.

[Anonymous]

well, psy is hardly the only one around here who thinks that AA is a cult, and yeah, I'm calling it a flat out cult and not "cult-like." maybe YOU don't experience it that way, and that's fine and fair enough, and that's your gig.

[psy]

I am not an advocate for A.A's effectiveness, or greatness, or anything. The ritualized cultic-torture and murder of teens in Cedu, Desisto, Elan, Straight, etc is not similar to aa in any SIGNIFICANT way.

I agree partially.  There was a lot of stuff added onto AA... but for the most part the underlying belief systems (not to mention language and even literature) were compatible, based on AA's disease model.  Is AA responsible for the actions of those who misuse (or use) their belief system?  That's an interesting discussion there.

On one hand, any belief system can be exploited, such as Christianity is in Teen Challenge.  Now since TC is part of the AOG church, as far as i'm concerned, that would make the AoG church cult-like (how many churches have forced conversion facilities... come on!).  Is the whole of christianity responsible?  No.  But since TC is offically a part of the AoG church, the AoG church is responsible for it's actions.

On the other hand, does AA as an organized entity condemn those who misuse their belief system, or do they support and participate in it?  On the one hand, AA members claim that AA should not be coerced, but on the other hand, Hazelden's little Red Book dictates their members should lobby for just that.  Make no mistake... AA does have a leadership structure that does run treatment centers and they do profit from the free advertising of their deployable members.  Many AA members, have been first introduced to AA through those coercive methods (being forced either by a job, by a judge, or by a school to attend AA, or an AA based treatment center).  Think about it.  Hazelden publishes a religious text advising their members to go out and spread their gospel, which they profit commercially from.  Are all the AA members responsible, all AA groups?  Depends, but they're definitely being used as free advertising.  In that respect, AA/Hazelden can be held responsible for the actions of their group in all it's incarnations.

What i've been getting at, also is whether or not the belief system itself is toxic.  I believe it is.  I believe that the vast majority of program tactics are justified by and complimented by AA.  The underlying philosophies of a "progressive incurable disease", "powerlessness" (no basis in science for either) and "deadinsaneinjail"  come directly from AA.  This means that, from the AA perspective, a person is going to die if they do not get "help" getting "sober" which doesn't mean what you think it means...  In a parent's eyes, this gives all the justification needed to force treatment, and AA does not seem to frown on this at all.  AARC in canada, refers parents to al-anon in addition to their meetings.  It also refers former clients to communal AA.  Those belief systems are complimentary.  But think about this for a moment: Would an average church accept members who had been forceably converted to say, christianity?  No.  The average church would find such practices appalling and most likely come out vocally against them (this would vary, of course, between churches).  AA, on the other hand, at the very least condones the practice and far more common either officially or unofficially endorses the practice... both for kids, and actively lobbying for forced placement for adults (See Hazelden's little Red Book).  That sort of mindset ("helping" people against their will because they "cannot" help themselves) goes to the very core of what makes a program a program.

Those organizations are genuinely cult-like.

Nah. Those organizations weren't just cult-like.  They were cults.  Big difference there.

My concern is that you’re saying AA is cult-like (like it or not) you are something of a mouthpiece for the anti-ritualized teen torture and murder movement.

I'm a mouthpiece for my own viewpoint.  I speak for myself and myself alone.  So does everybody else here.  If others choose to see me as some sort of representative, they'd be wrong.

When you say “A is cult-like” and “programs are cult-like” you make it sound as if what does on in them is alike and give a dangerously wrong impression about the nature of programs and cults.

I understand that concern.  I realize full well what I say sounds like.  But what If i'm right?  Should I be forbidden to speak an opinion simply because it is unpopular or not widely accepted?  As I said, read the books I suggested and maybe you'll come to the same conclusions I have.

[psy]

well, psy is hardly the only one around here who thinks that AA is a cult, and yeah, I'm calling it a flat out cult and not "cult-like." maybe YOU don't experience it that way, and that's fine and fair enough, and that's your gig.

Well.  The charismatic leader is technically dead.  Hence "cult-like".  It's a few technicalities short of a full blown cult (Maybe not as bad as a lot of cults, certainly not as bad as most programs, but a cult nevertheless)

[dishdutyfugitive]

Isn't it better for the collective cult and prospective members that the ' Cult Leader ' is dead ?

Doesn't it provide more purpose and motivation?

This occured to me when reading up on North Korea. The highest position is "Eternal President of the Republic"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_Pr ... e_Republic

This allows the #2 man to implement absurd policies and orders and 'blame' it on the almighty supreme beings' "'wishes" for the nation.

[Antigen]

Warning, Kids:  Fapping is a progressive and incurable disease.  Without our program of recovery, you will end up dead, insane, in jail, or on 4chan.

 :roflmao:  :sue:  :cheers:

[Antigen]

I may well and fairly be called a misanthropic troglodyte, even an irredeemable reprobate by some, but I'm not so much concerned about the personal impact on the individuals who choose (or not) to receive Stepcraft indoctrination. I'm more concerned about that deployable agent thing.

Look, the entire premis for the global, decades long and no sign of letting up War on certain unpatentable drugs not sold by Glaxo Welcome rests on the powerlessness doctrine; i.e. that the substances have power over the volition of the user, therefore we the folk cannot be trusted to have free access to them. This idea has become so broadly accepted in our society that it truly is frightening. I have personally witnessed and seen numerous documented instances where law enforcement will turn a blind eye to reports of the violent abduction of a child or denial of access by legal custodians or even several witnesses swearing to the same set of abuses. The blinder goes like this:

Please understand that addiction has affected far too many families and we as a society must explore a variety of methods to overcome this scourge. That said, I would never advocate harming someone in order to save them. I am not aware of such being the case at Pathway. Should your allegations be substantiated I of course would have to rethink my position.

The same justificatin has resulted in things like random roadside 'safety' checkpoints, forced TC treatment for minor drug law violations and a long list of other bone headed public policy.

The trouble is, they will torment us without end cause the do so with the leave of their own concience. That will remain true so long as few of us question the justification for these policies. That's why it's worth discussing.

And it's worth reading up on, too. But don't ever assume that someone will come to agree with you because they've read the same thing. More likely, they'll have a slightly different take on the material as well as some counter argument and hopefully citation to support their view. This is what's called beating the issues around like red headed step children and see what's left standing at the end.

[Anonymous]

I may well and fairly be called a misanthropic troglodyte, even an irredeemable reprobate by some, but I'm not so much concerned about the personal impact on the individuals who choose (or not) to receive Stepcraft indoctrination. I'm more concerned about that deployable agent thing.

Look, the entire premis for the global, decades long and no sign of letting up War on certain unpatentable drugs not sold by Glaxo Welcome rests on the powerlessness doctrine; i.e. that the substances have power over the volition of the user, therefore we the folk cannot be trusted to have free access to them. This idea has become so broadly accepted in our society that it truly is frightening. I have personally witnessed and seen numerous documented instances where law enforcement will turn a blind eye to reports of the violent abduction of a child or denial of access by legal custodians or even several witnesses swearing to the same set of abuses. The blinder goes like this:

Please understand that addiction has affected far too many families and we as a society must explore a variety of methods to overcome this scourge. That said, I would never advocate harming someone in order to save them. I am not aware of such being the case at Pathway. Should your allegations be substantiated I of course would have to rethink my position.

The same justificatin has resulted in things like random roadside 'safety' checkpoints, forced TC treatment for minor drug law violations and a long list of other bone headed public policy.

The trouble is, they will torment us without end cause the do so with the leave of their own concience. That will remain true so long as few of us question the justification for these policies. That's why it's worth discussing.

And it's worth reading up on, too. But don't ever assume that someone will come to agree with you because they've read the same thing. More likely, they'll have a slightly different take on the material as well as some counter argument and hopefully citation to support their view. This is what's called beating the issues around like red headed step children and see what's left standing at the end.

The citation/counter citation circle is why I don't bother linking to the countless studies evidencing addiction or the effectiveness of A.A. when this comes up.Not that my view is important, but my feeling is you are not powerless over substances and can use, even "abuse" drugs a lot and not be addicted, and you can also be addicted. Similarly, you can feel a lot of sadness and not be depressed or be very nervous and shy and not have PTSD. You can diet and not have an eating disorder. Addiction is a rare end of a usage continuim. Its a mental illness induced by excessive usage and environment. Its existance should never be used as an excuse to imprison without due process especially to imprison and abuse babies. It should never be used as an excues to torture. I really can't understand, beleive that that is allowed to go on...

[Anonymous]

It seems pointless to talk about anything here, seeing how it degenerates, but broccoli and humans are genetically very similar. In fact, all life is. http://biocyc.org/comp-genomics?

LOLOLOLOL... You cannot possibly expect anyone to take you seriously with that kind of an analogy. Gimmee a break! And the link to a genome database? What exactly is that supposed to prove? Do you even know what a genome is and what a sequence analysis entails? If I ran one right now, I would disprove your alleged point to your utter and excruciating humiliation. NO. Broccoli and humans are NOT genetically similar. Not at all.

Well, your historical biological lineage is (probably) helium and hydrogen. Are you, therefore, helium and hydrogen or (alternatively) pure energy?

PLEASE. Someone needs to go back and redo their high school chemistry class. Helium is a GAS (atomic number=2). Or...perhaps you were just trying to warn us that the rest of your post was nothing but HOT AIR? About the only time that a human being has helium in them, is when some bozo inhales some at a balloon party so that he can talk like Mickey Mouse.

(Btw, do you actually try to use these lines to pick up chicks? ...cuz, Maaan, the cut-off IQ must be about 82...)

[Anonymous]

It seems pointless to talk about anything here, seeing how it degenerates, but broccoli and humans are genetically very similar. In fact, all life is. http://biocyc.org/comp-genomics?

LOLOLOLOL... You cannot possibly expect anyone to take you seriously with that kind of an analogy. Gimmee a break! And the link to a genome database? What exactly is that supposed to prove? Do you even know what a genome is and what a sequence analysis entails? If I ran one right now, I would disprove your alleged point to your utter and excruciating humiliation. NO. Broccoli and humans are NOT genetically similar. Not at all.

Well, your historical biological lineage is (probably) helium and hydrogen. Are you, therefore, helium and hydrogen or (alternatively) pure energy?

PLEASE. Someone needs to go back and redo their high school chemistry class. Helium is a GAS (atomic number=2). Or...perhaps you were just trying to warn us that the rest of your post was nothing but HOT AIR? About the only time that a human being has helium in them, is when some bozo inhales some at a balloon party so that he can talk like Mickey Mouse.

(Btw, do you actually try to use these lines to pick up chicks? ...cuz, Maaan, the cut-off IQ must be about 82...)

I don’t “need to retake” my “high-school chem. class” or any HS class. I never took them whatsoever because I was busy being tortured.  I’m getting my Uni. Ed, though. My understanding of bio-chem lies there and in reading. It’s basic but enough for basic points concerning whether A.A and Programs are cults that “brainwash” consensual participants or captives. I don’t use ideas about hydrogen “to pick up chicks.” Do you? You’re rude and angry and gutturally inane, senselessly. It’s unbecoming. I don't get “humiliated” by internet exchanges, but as humiliation is a concern for you, re-read your post and consider the impression you impart.

When I said, “our historical-biological lineage is hydrogen and helium” I responded to the idea that if there is historical lineage between program and A.A then programs are the same as AA. Our historical biological-lineage is hydrogen and helium or pure energy as we evolved from it, apparently. http://www.arm.ac.uk/~csj/essays/lmartin/evgalaxy.htm My point was that lineage through something doesn’t make it “the same.”

When I said broccoli and humanity are genetically alike and yet we are quite different, I responded to the idea that if there are similar aspects of AA and program they are both cults that “brainwash.” Everything is very similar molecularly, or atomically. Life has a greater, much more striking degree of similarity. Genetically, broccoli & humanity are strikingly alike in a way that humanity and non-life is not. “While the DNA of almost all organisms is distinct in its fine detail, the overall structure of the DNA found in every living organism is the same”

If you don’t like the link in the last post, these elaborate on how similar all life is genetically. "We share 60% of our DNA with a banana."
http://www.makingthemodernworld.org.uk/ ... =6&tv=true   All life being similar genetically is hardly controversial . How similar you want to say broccoli is to a human depends on how you want to define “similar,” which is kinda my point. More exactly, my point is that finding a “similarity” even striking similarite(s) does not make things “the same” in a relevant sense.

I think I’ve repeated and explained this enough.

[psy]

Ok so now we're debating the scientific merits of a bad analogy rather than the issues themselves.  Bravo!

Look, the entire premis for the global, decades long and no sign of letting up War on certain unpatentable drugs not sold by Glaxo Welcome rests on the powerlessness doctrine; i.e. that the substances have power over the volition of the user, therefore we the folk cannot be trusted to have free access to them.

That's the core of the issue there.  Thank you Antigen.  The powerlessness doctrine and the disease concept both have little or no basis in either science or common sense.  If it were truly possible to scientifically prove that people were powerless over substances, that evidence could be used in court to get people aquitted of crimes they commit while under the influence.  It's not possible, however, and thus people still are held accontable by the law for their actions.  If it were up to the stepcraft folks, on the other hand, they would be simply be sent for "treatment" for a "disease" they invented.  This is already happening in many states which require court ordered AA or institutional AA placement.  Even though high courts have ruled this practice unconstitutional, and the supreme court has refused to challenge those decisions (making it the law of the land), if a person doesn't have a good attorney, it won't matter.  As a result, a bona-fide religion (term used loosely) continues to get members through the courts for consensual and victimless crimes.  Jefferson would be shitting bricks and calling for revolution were he alive today.  Is AA directly responsible for this?  Yes. Hazelden's little red book commands AA members to seek out judges, police, and others in power to encourage coerced AA placement.

Basically this means the 12 steppers want two things: to restrict your freedom as to what you can and can not put in your body, and to force you into "treatment" (which amounts to little more than religious indoctrination into a cult-like religion) for violating their moral commandments regarding substances.  Something is very very wrong when people are not held accountable for their actions, and instead punished for what's in their bodies, regardless of whether the "crime" is consensual and victimless or not.