Is it infallibly true that some drugs should be illegal?

[Bill_7154]

:
They donated “free” cigarettes to the armed forces during wars as a “patriotic” gesture to our soldiers (who then got hooked, of course). Illicit drug pushers do it by offering “free” highs to non-users so that they develop the habit. If you don’t know that, you have no business opining on the subject at all.

I wasn’t aware of the free cigarette thing with soldiers but I understand that to some extent (it does not happen nearly as often as you probably believe, as previously stated I worked in a drug treatment house and lived there as a drug and alcohol counselor as the live in manager in a drug infested neighborhood for 10 years. I’ve also worked in homeless shelters which are infested with drug users. So I happen to have some intimate knowledge of the drug trade and how it works on the small scale and also on larger scales.

More often what happens is that a friend introduces another friend to a particular drug. They may give it to them or charge them for it. This is much more common than drug dealers giving out free samples. But regardless, once someone is hooked, they are hooked. We have had a very small % of the population ‘hooked’ since the 20’s and that % has remained constant. We also have a larger % who are not hooked but use to some extent or abuse to some extent.

The point is once they are using it they are using it. And a fair % of society have been using drugs for some time now. This was when they were legal and since they have become illegal.

Also, as far as dealers offering ‘free highs’ as a first time thing… this depends on the market. This does not happen much in open air drug markets because too many users would pretend to be non users. It happens more in markets with upscale customers with a lot of disposable income.

But the point is that users are users. And the drug war has not stopped or reduced the number of users. And there are serious consequences to drug prohibition over and above the sad fact that a certain % of citizens are users and abusers of drugs.

BTW, you realize that alcohol is also offered as ‘free samples’ too, right? I have seen this in liquor stores more than once (I’m not really a drinker I bet I would see it more if I were). This doesn’t create alcoholics…what it does is try to encourage people to buy their brand. This happens in the drug world as well. Even in the ghetto. And you know what happens next? They drop the % of drug in the sample they gave out the day before where the % of drug was unusually high as a means of getting regular customers to turn to them to be their supplier.

So people play all sorts of marketing games with all sorts of products. But the demand for drugs has remained constant as has the supply of drugs on the streets for decades now despite the war on drugs, evidence that the war on drugs is a failed social policy.

I suggest we consider other approaches in efforts to reduce drug use and abuse. Targetting the supply side does not work. This has been proven by the failed drug war. Drugs are much purer now and cheaper than they were in the 1980’s. How many other popular products are cheaper now than they were in the 80’s?

I would love to see the government start a ‘war’ on beach front property. That way in 40 years I’ll be able to pick up a nice piece of prime beach front real estate at a fraction of the cost of what it is today lol

Or maybe a war on pizza (I like pizza), that way I’ll be able to buy pizza’s for a couple pennies a few decades from now lol

Spend 2 trillion dollars fighting a war on drugs over 40 years and they are just as available now as they were then, but they are cheaper now than they were then while every other product under the sun has risen in price 3 or 4 fold lol

I recommend you go to www.leap.cc and click on watch a video then watch the video that comes up on the left side of the screen. I recommend you watch with an open mind and don’t ‘throw out the baby with the bath water’ (if you hear one tiny bit of the overall video and then dismiss it all outright because of that…we both understand that’s close minded predjuice don’t we?)

Are you able to do that and then come back and report to me what they got wrong in that video? As it seems we would both like to see drug use and abuse lessen in society, however it seems that the policy you support is not working. Professional law enforcement have something to say about that policy. As an adult who would like to see drug use and abuse lessen (and I presume also see murder and robberies lessen) I’m letting you know that these folks have some interesting things to say about the war on drugs.

Or maybe your afraid of the truth? I hope not and hope you watch that video. If they spread falsehoods in that video come back and tell me about it, I don’t think they do though. And I think they make some very interesting points. And when it comes to saving lives that’s a topic I consider of importance.

God Bless,
Bill

 

[Bill_7154]

Maybe not those countries. But England and the U.K. certainly have a strong “pub” and drinking tradition. And while I don’t know for sure I suspect those “soccer hooligans” in England are often battling in gang warfare while intoxicated. But maybe I’m wrong [shrugs].

Maybe your right. I’m pretty sure it’s true in the usa and in England. I don’t follow sports so don’t know about the drinking and sports fan connection in different countries either.

God Bless,
Bill

 

[CopticChristian]

Some like to say that. But I’ve seen plenty of smokers hand strangers cigarettes on the street. I’ve never seen anyone that smokes cigarettes (or marijuana) sell their bodies for sex to get another cigarette either.

That being said… I do acknowledge cigarettes are highly addictive.

Well… truth be told I don’t believe it is. But like a lot of terms - like biological race - it depends on how you want to define that term. If you want to define physical addiction as the medical community does meaning withdrawal from the substance may result in death, then I guess alcohol is the only physically addictive substance (known so far).

But I think crack and heroin or meth are physically addictive too. But this means broadening that term to to be inclusive of people that go through physical responses or have pronounced chemical reactions in their brains to either the thought or withdrawal from those drugs, even though such episodes may not result in death.

In rehab centers - at least the V.A. - alcoholics and addicts are routinely told alcohol is the only physically addictive drug and that crack and heroin are only psychologically addictive. Of course, there are college educated social workers and addiction therapists that disagree with this.

After all… I’m old enough to remember when the U.S. medical community came out publicly and said anabolic steroids do not increase muscle mass and that it’s all in the minds of the body builders.

True… that is why I said severe alcoholics. The Veterans Administration has some numerical system or categorization they place alcoholics in. I can’t remember the numerical category. But a veteran I knew that was an engineer (and used to work for oil companies), so, no dummy, was listed as one of the most severe alcoholic types. I think he told me he was listed as “Type 5” alcoholic and they only gave him so many months to live if he ever picked up and drank again.

I read this French-Jewish cardiologist book on his alcoholism too. He was one of Frances and the world’s top cardiologist. I didn’t know alcoholics could have seizures from going without alcohol until I read his book. I didn’t know some would begin to fall down (even while not intoxicated or drinking) and seriously injure themselves (break bones, dislocate joints) either.

He says this prescription drug he took cured his alcoholism where the most expensive rehabilitation centers (for wealthy people) and AA couldn’t even arrest his drinking. He also claims in his book that he helped another white collar professional use this drug (which he prescribed to him) to not just end his alcoholism but turn the guy into a social drinker that never exceeded 3 drinks.

dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1153524/Could-pill-cure-alcoholism-Doctor-drinking-early-grave-tells-fairy-tale-recovery.html

Time,

Your information is random.

I, as a Physician, am not some that say anything. Fact. Nicotine is the most addictive substance on the planet. Research this and prove it to yourself. Whoever some are that don’t say that have no knowledge of facts.

Your notion of addiction makes no sense. It is dependence either psychologically or physically and many things other than alcohol cause physical dependence.

Alcohol withdrawal can be tremors alone, tremors, agitation, nausea, seizures and DT’s. It is said that someone that has a seizure will more than likely not have to experience DT’s. Withdrawal is a spectrum.

 

[fakename]

Is it just a prudential decision? I ask because the CCC says: “2291 The use of drugs inflicts very grave damage on human health and life. Their use, except on strictly therapeutic grounds, is a grave offense. Clandestine production of and trafficking in drugs are scandalous practices. They constitute direct co-operation in evil, since they encourage people to practices gravely contrary to the moral law.”

So to me it seems that this implies that the Church has the authority to both define what a drug and its proper effects are, and to say which drugs are good and others bad (namely medicinal vs non). So to what extent is the above quotation magisterial and etc.? (that is, I now ask my original questions about the quotation I now posted).

Although the debate is both entertaining and interesting I would merely like to point out that the OP was not about any of the things debated but rather about the above quote.

So what is the right exegesis for the above?

 

[Bill_7154]

I, as a Physician, .

CopticChristian,

Your a physician? Great!

Please share with this group in this forum the degree of harmfullness that heroin poses to the human body, such as the bodies organs, compared to say a drug like…um…acetaminophen?

Please do share this truth with the group as a physician.

God Bless,
Bill

 

[Bill_7154]

Notice the date this was published:

August Vollmer, former president of the International Association of Chiefs of Police and critic of drug prohibitionOne of the prominent early critics of prohibition in the United States was August Vollmer, founder of the School of Criminology at University of California, Irvine and former president of the International Association of Chiefs of Police. In his **1936 **book The Police and Modern Society, he stated his opinion that:

Stringent laws, spectacular police drives, vigorous prosecution, and imprisonment of addicts and peddlers have proved not only useless and enormously expensive as means of correcting this evil, but they are also unjustifiably and unbelievably cruel in their application to the unfortunate drug victims. Repression has driven this vice underground and produced the narcotic smugglers and supply agents, who have grown wealthy out of this evil practice and who, by devious methods, have stimulated traffic in drugs. Finally, and not the least of the evils associated with repression, the helpless addict has been forced to resort to crime in order to get money for the drug which is absolutely indispensable for his comfortable existence.
The first step in any plan to alleviate this dreadful affliction should be the establishment of Federal control and dispensation – at cost – of habit-forming drugs. With the profit motive gone, no effort would be made to encourage its use by private dispensers of narcotics, and the drug peddler would disappear. New addicts would be speedily discovered and through early treatment, some of these unfortunate victims might be saved from becoming hopelessly incurable.

Drug addiction, like prostitution, and like liquor, is not a police problem; it never has been, and never can be solved by policemen. It is first and last a medical problem, and if there is a solution it will be discovered not by policemen, but by scientific and competently trained medical experts whose sole objective will be the reduction and possible eradication of this devastating appetite. There should be intelligent treatment of the incurables in outpatient clinics, hospitalization of those not too far gone to respond to therapeutic measures, and application of the prophylactic principles which medicine applies to all scourges of mankind.

God Bless,
Bill

 

[TimeEntrance]

Time,

Your information is random.

I, as a Physician, am not some that say anything. Fact. Nicotine is the most addictive substance on the planet. Research this and prove it to yourself. Whoever some are that don’t say that have no knowledge of facts.

I’m not a physician or a scientist. But I have some small familiarity with science and it’s mode of research and scientific writing given my major is biology.

I think what is fact is that more than once in the physical, natural, and medical science what has been believed as “fact” has eventually turned out not to be fact.

Many crack smokers are actually cigarette smokers - even many recovering addicts in AA, NA, and CA smoke cigarettes - and I know as fact that nearly all if not all of them consider cigarettes the least of their concern.

Crack heads are rarely generous enough to break off a $1 hit off their $10 rock for someone without a hit of crack rock. But the generosity - even among strangers - abounds among cigarette smokers.

And I’ve never seen anyone prostitute themselves for a whole cigarette let alone a whole pack. I know as fact there are crack addicts that have provided oral sex on the open stairwells of apartment buildings for a single hit of crack.

Your notion of addiction makes no sense. It is dependence either psychologically or physically and many things other than alcohol cause physical dependence.

LOL. Okay.

Alcohol withdrawal can be tremors alone, tremors, agitation, nausea, seizures and DT’s. It is said that someone that has a seizure will more than likely not have to experience DT’s. Withdrawal is a spectrum.

I don’t believe I’ve ever said withdrawals were not a spectrum. Frankly, I’m not sure what your point is with all this.

But I think it’s worth noting medical science has not discovered a cure for addictions to alcohol, crack, heroin and so forth. Evidently medical science does not have it all figured out. And medical science knows how to cure gonorrhea irrespective of what the patient believes. So, any rhetoric about an addict needing “to believe” X, Y, or Z for the magic cure to work is simply a regression into shamanism and not pure science that deals with chemical structures.

The reason AA, NA, and CA don’t have such a great success rate is because they do not treat the problem or pathology the way doctor treat a patient for gonorrhea. You don’t have to believe 2 hydrogen atoms combined with 1 oxygen atom is water. You can disbelieve it all you want. It still turns out to be water. That science. Shamanism is predicated on prayers, “believing,” and “really wanting it.” Then the medicine works its magic. Kind of like chicken soup. Works for some or many with a cold.

 

[Bill_7154]

Clandestine production of and trafficking in drugs are scandalous practices. They constitute direct co-operation in evil, since they encourage people to practices gravely contrary to the moral law."

So to me it seems that this implies that .

To me the above seems to imply that participating in the black market re: drugs is evil and encourages people to practices gravely contrary to moral law. However, if they were not clandestinely produced and trafficed, it would not be scandalous. Nor would those things then constitute direct cooperation wiht evin since this would not be encouraging poeple to practices gravely contrary to moral law.

In other words if they were produced in the open and sold in the white market it would not be scandalous. And above ground production and white market selling would not constitue direct cooperation with evil in any way since it would be above ground and sold in the white market (as opposed to clandestine production and trafficing- which encourages people to practices gravely contrary to the moral law) but above ground, legal production and sale would not encourage people to practices gravely contrary to moral law, they would be in compliance with moral law.

Clandestine production of and trafficking in drugs are scandalous practices. Why do you think this is? Could it be because people are involved in murdering as part of this business model?

They constitute direct co-operation in evil, since they encourage people to practices gravely contrary to the moral law." Why do you think this is? Could it be because it encourages people to practices (such as murder) that are practices which are gravely contrary to moral law?

Legal production and sales do not encourage murder. Clandestine production and trafficking does encourage murder (since people involved in these activities can not go to the police for protection- so they are forced to resort to being their own ‘police’, their own ‘muscle’ and murder is the tool used to punnish those that break the rules in clandestine production and trafficing businesses.

As I have stated before, I firmly believe that Jesus is against murder. So he must be against business models that encourage mass murder. That is what I read in the quote above.

God Bless,
Bill

 

[Bill_7154]

But I think it’s worth noting medical science has not discovered a cure for addictions to alcohol,

Social Psychiatry, Transactional Analysis, a book written by Dr. Eric Berne called Games People Play, back in the 60’s I believed, discovered a cure for ‘addiction’ to alcohol. I am living that cure. Back in my very late teens and early 20’s I was a severe alcohol abuser, consuming a 12 pack of beer and a pint or more of hard liquor every other night (would have been every night except the hangovers and sickness the day after carried all the way into the night so the most I could stomach was doing this every other day.

Now I drink maybe a glass of wine or a beer a few times a year or something like that. I never think about alcohol. I am not tempted by it ever. I can be around it without desiring it at all. And I can choose to say no to a drink or choose to say yes and have one drink, or 1/2 of a drink, on a rare occasion might be 2 (I think 3 years ago on vacation I actually had 3 beers one afternoon, that was a LOT and put me to sleep and I am well over 200 lbs).

The ‘cure’ is to stop playing ‘the game’ that alcoholics and enablers, rescuers and the various cast members in that game play. In AA people change roles from alcoholic to rescuer, becoming a sponsor and this way still 'playing the game, albiet a different role, where they seek out and involve themselves in the lives of alcoholics in order to rescue them from being an alcoholic.

This is, unconsciously IMO, I believe they say that the newcomer is the most important person in the room. Because without the newcomers the attendees who used to play the role of alcoholic, but have switched to playing the role of rescuer, would have no one to rescue and then would not be able to play the game. If such a person doesn’t have someone to rescue they run a high chance of relapse (unless they learn how to simply ‘not play’ the game). It does make you a boring person, but your able to drink. But that doesn’t matter, just like it doesn’t matter to any other human who is ‘able’ to drink and may or may not drink some small ammt of alcohol on certain occasions but has zero compulsion to do so.

Berne didn’t speak of cocaine or heroin in his book and I don’t think crack had been invented by the 60’s so I’m not SURE if the same principles apply, but they very well may as in NA I believe they operate similarly to the way they do in AA with sponsors and new comers being important…I have attended a few NA meetings. My impression was that the ex adicts were not charged up to rescue poeple like the alcoholics turned to rescuers are in AA meetings though.

God Bless,
Bill

 

[Bill_7154]

Oh, BTW, I should have added ‘secretiveness, and sneaking around’ to the murering.

God Bless,
Bill

 

[Bill_7154]

The use of drugs inflicts very grave damage on human health and life. Their use, except on strictly therapeutic grounds, is a grave offense.

I would also agree with this and point out that I am against drug use, as are the members of LEAP. So I’m assuming that Jesus would support medical/psychological/spiritual treatment for the grave damage on human health and life that drugs cause, particularly since it is a grave offense.

I have not read that people should be subjected to further damage to human health or life as commonly happens in prisons. I have not read that people should be punnished by other humans in this way because they are subjecting themselves to grave damange.

So as I see it, my position (that I learned and adopted after being educated by members of LEAP) and the position held by the members of www.leap.cc are directly in line with: the CCC says: "2291

God Bless,
Bill

 

[TimeEntrance]

Social Psychiatry, Transactional Analysis, a book written by Dr. Eric Berne called Games People Play, back in the 60’s I believed, discovered a cure for ‘addiction’ to alcohol. I am living that cure. Back in my very late teens and early 20’s I was a severe alcohol abuser, consuming a 12 pack of beer and a pint or more of hard liquor every other night (would have been every night except the hangovers and sickness the day after carried all the way into the night so the most I could stomach was doing this every other day.

Now I drink maybe a glass of wine or a beer a few times a year or something like that. I never think about alcohol. I am not tempted by it ever. I can be around it without desiring it at all. And I can choose to say no to a drink or choose to say yes and have one drink, or 1/2 of a drink, on a rare occasion might be 2 (I think 3 years ago on vacation I actually had 3 beers one afternoon, that was a LOT and put me to sleep and I am well over 200 lbs).

The ‘cure’ is to stop playing ‘the game’ that alcoholics and enablers, rescuers and the various cast members in that game play. In AA people change roles from alcoholic to rescuer, becoming a sponsor and this way still 'playing the game, albiet a different role, where they seek out and involve themselves in the lives of alcoholics in order to rescue them from being an alcoholic.

Okay… this is getting ridiculous.

Alcoholics going through seizures is not “playing games.”

AA operates off of the belief that God - a higher power - can deliver one from their affliction, but that one has to go through certain character changes and development. That one has to be willing to suffer for a greater moral good and for their own betterment. Or what Catholics might refer to cooperating in the grace of God. If that means giving up mind altering substances than so be it.

You and Coptic would do well to learn about the engineering and scientific concepts of Type 1 Error and Type 2 Error. Essentially, you two are suggesting a person play a game off Russian Roulette. There is no dishonor in not picking up the gun, putting it to your head, and not squeezing the trigger because you believe the gun is loaded even though it is not. The cost of that error is less than cost of the error of believing the gun is not loaded when in fact it is.

Many alcoholics, those not necessarily of the severest type, say things to the effect of, *“I never know what’s going to happen or what I’m going to do when I drink, and that scares me, because I don’t know if I will behave or not.” *

 

[TimeEntrance]

This is, unconsciously IMO, I believe they say that the newcomer is the most important person in the room. Because without the newcomers the attendees who used to play the role of alcoholic, but have switched to playing the role of rescuer, would have no one to rescue and then would not be able to play the game. If such a person doesn’t have someone to rescue they run a high chance of relapse (unless they learn how to simply ‘not play’ the game). It does make you a boring person, but your able to drink. But that doesn’t matter, just like it doesn’t matter to any other human who is ‘able’ to drink and may or may not drink some small ammt of alcohol on certain occasions but has zero compulsion to do so.

Berne didn’t speak of cocaine or heroin in his book and I don’t think crack had been invented by the 60’s so I’m not SURE if the same principles apply, but they very well may as in NA I believe they operate similarly to the way they do in AA with sponsors and new comers being important…I have attended a few NA meetings. My impression was that the ex adicts were not charged up to rescue poeple like the alcoholics turned to rescuers are in AA meetings though.

God Bless,
Bill

It would have been nice if Catholics or Christians had not persecuted people centuries ago over superstitious things. In general atheists don’t believe in witches where many Christians may have at one time. And my point is you and Coptic unwittingly are making Catholics look like nit wits.

I believe a Catholic nun - if my memory is correct - was even involved in the early formations of AA. But AA was influenced by Protestant Christians involved in the Oxford Movement (C.S. Lewis I think was involved in the Oxford Movement). And again, if I remember correctly, part of the aim of the Oxford Movement was for Anglicans to recapture more of their catholicity.

It is true AA, NA, and CA say promote the new comer as the most important person in the room. I just heard this today from a person at an NA meeting with 6 years clean. Previously he had 20 years sobriety - he gained on his own without NA or ever attending any meetings - before he relapsed. Now, he finds personal growth in going through spiritual and character steps of the 12 Step Program. Part of which is for those that gain sobriety to help others - the new comers - rather than be selfish and turned inward. This act of learning to be less selfish (which they claim addiction makes people become increasingly) is why they encourage “service work” at the meetings.

The meetings themselves offer a community of addicts working to recover (rather than use) and giving each other moral support. Not unlike war veteran groups. Or any other group of people that share common struggles or problems.

And it’s that moral support - from people that understand what you are going through - which is the primary reason I attend. I have no delusions that AA, NA, or CA is not a “magic pill.” Mind you… there are many serious members of AA, NA, and CA that talk about these groups just like Mormons talk about the Mormon Church of Catholics talk about salvation coming through the Catholic Church.

But like I said… AA, NA, and CA methods are akin to Catholicism or religion and not science.

This Dr. Bernie you speak of found no cure nor was he engaged in the scientific methodology of treating pathologies at the chemical level with drugs. What Dr. Bernie did - and your assertions about it working for you and therefore must work for every other person - was a regression into shamanism. And the Shamans medicine worked. That’s why they were not killed. Except it never worked all the time, and it was explained away when it worked on Persons A, B, and C but not on Persons D, E, and F that persons D, E, and F either failed to pray hard enough, or didn’t believe the medicine would work, or that they didn’t “really want to be cured.”

That not how modern science or modern medicine works. You don’t need to believe or even want the medicine to work. It will work anyways.

Or put it this way, there is no “wanting crack to work” or “wanting alcohol to intoxicate you.” They will always work anyways irrespective of what the person consuming them wants or believes. It’s a chemical thing that has to do with the laws within chemistry.

This is why psychiatrists treat people with drugs whereas psychologists treat people along the lines of Catholicism (Spiritual Director - had one in Catholicism) or AA, NA, and CA.

 

[CopticChristian]

I’m not a physician or a scientist. But I have some small familiarity with science and it’s mode of research and scientific writing given my major is biology.

I think what is fact is that more than once in the physical, natural, and medical science what has been believed as “fact” has eventually turned out not to be fact.

Many crack smokers are actually cigarette smokers - even many recovering addicts in AA, NA, and CA smoke cigarettes - and I know as fact that nearly all if not all of them consider cigarettes the least of their concern.

Crack heads are rarely generous enough to break off a $1 hit off their $10 rock for someone without a hit of crack rock. But the generosity - even among strangers - abounds among cigarette smokers.

And I’ve never seen anyone prostitute themselves for a whole cigarette let alone a whole pack. I know as fact there are crack addicts that have provided oral sex on the open stairwells of apartment buildings for a single hit of crack.

LOL. Okay.

I don’t believe I’ve ever said withdrawals were not a spectrum. Frankly, I’m not sure what your point is with all this.

But I think it’s worth noting medical science has not discovered a cure for addictions to alcohol, crack, heroin and so forth. Evidently medical science does not have it all figured out. And medical science knows how to cure gonorrhea irrespective of what the patient believes. So, any rhetoric about an addict needing “to believe” X, Y, or Z for the magic cure to work is simply a regression into shamanism and not pure science that deals with chemical structures.

The reason AA, NA, and CA don’t have such a great success rate is because they do not treat the problem or pathology the way doctor treat a patient for gonorrhea. You don’t have to believe 2 hydrogen atoms combined with 1 oxygen atom is water. You can disbelieve it all you want. It still turns out to be water. That science. Shamanism is predicated on prayers, “believing,” and “really wanting it.” Then the medicine works its magic. Kind of like chicken soup. Works for some or many with a cold.

Time,

You point out the rediculous nature of the 12 step paradigm/disease model and the religion of AA. Cigarettes/tobacco is the most addicting substance on the planet and it will and can kill you. The AA/NA/CA…all treat tobacco as if it is just nothing…duh…it is something…and the focus is so much on the other substances that their minds do not register a health problem like smoking.

The reason AA/NA/CA don’t work is because AA is a religion and it is faith healing that forces someone to accept a lie that they have a disease and they do not, forces them to believe they are powerless and they are not, and then forces them to believe that they must forever and a day go to meetings or die and they do not. They get involved in this malarky of a disease. What kind of disease? A spiritual disease. They get to work on their character defects to solve their problems. What are character defects? Sin. Say what…that is why it does not work.

 

[CopticChristian]

Social Psychiatry, Transactional Analysis, a book written by Dr. Eric Berne called Games People Play, back in the 60’s I believed, discovered a cure for ‘addiction’ to alcohol. I am living that cure. Back in my very late teens and early 20’s I was a severe alcohol abuser, consuming a 12 pack of beer and a pint or more of hard liquor every other night (would have been every night except the hangovers and sickness the day after carried all the way into the night so the most I could stomach was doing this every other day.

Now I drink maybe a glass of wine or a beer a few times a year or something like that. I never think about alcohol. I am not tempted by it ever. I can be around it without desiring it at all. And I can choose to say no to a drink or choose to say yes and have one drink, or 1/2 of a drink, on a rare occasion might be 2 (I think 3 years ago on vacation I actually had 3 beers one afternoon, that was a LOT and put me to sleep and I am well over 200 lbs).

The ‘cure’ is to stop playing ‘the game’ that alcoholics and enablers, rescuers and the various cast members in that game play. In AA people change roles from alcoholic to rescuer, becoming a sponsor and this way still 'playing the game, albiet a different role, where they seek out and involve themselves in the lives of alcoholics in order to rescue them from being an alcoholic.

This is, unconsciously IMO, I believe they say that the newcomer is the most important person in the room. Because without the newcomers the attendees who used to play the role of alcoholic, but have switched to playing the role of rescuer, would have no one to rescue and then would not be able to play the game. If such a person doesn’t have someone to rescue they run a high chance of relapse (unless they learn how to simply ‘not play’ the game). It does make you a boring person, but your able to drink. But that doesn’t matter, just like it doesn’t matter to any other human who is ‘able’ to drink and may or may not drink some small ammt of alcohol on certain occasions but has zero compulsion to do so.

Berne didn’t speak of cocaine or heroin in his book and I don’t think crack had been invented by the 60’s so I’m not SURE if the same principles apply, but they very well may as in NA I believe they operate similarly to the way they do in AA with sponsors and new comers being important…I have attended a few NA meetings. My impression was that the ex adicts were not charged up to rescue poeple like the alcoholics turned to rescuers are in AA meetings though.

God Bless,
Bill

Bill,

What you are speaking of is Karpman’s drama triangle that was adapted to the alcoholic paradigm.

The triangle involves VICTIM-PERPRETATOR-RESCUER…and the addict is forever and a day the victim. It is applied to this addiction paradigm but works in any dysfunctional relationship of which I am sure you will agree the addict is dysfunctional. It is a paradigm that is a description of dysfunction and not necessarily alcoholic, cocaine or any other drug…in fact there does not have to be any drugs involved…just dysfunction…

 

[CopticChristian]

Okay… this is getting ridiculous.

Alcoholics going through seizures is not “playing games.”

AA operates off of the belief that God - a higher power - can deliver one from their affliction, but that one has to go through certain character changes and development. That one has to be willing to suffer for a greater moral good and for their own betterment. Or what Catholics might refer to cooperating in the grace of God. If that means giving up mind altering substances than so be it.

You and Coptic would do well to learn about the engineering and scientific concepts of Type 1 Error and Type 2 Error. Essentially, you two are suggesting a person play a game off Russian Roulette. There is no dishonor in not picking up the gun, putting it to your head, and not squeezing the trigger because you believe the gun is loaded even though it is not. The cost of that error is less than cost of the error of believing the gun is not loaded when in fact it is.

Many alcoholics, those not necessarily of the severest type, say things to the effect of, *“I never know what’s going to happen or what I’m going to do when I drink, and that scares me, because I don’t know if I will behave or not.” *

Time,

You should take a little time to study AA…and any of the 12 step paradigms…the first step is the most important step and if you don’t get that one then everything else fails…AA operates off of this…

I AM POWERLESS…once you accept and believe that then everything else follows…this is faulty thinking but this is the premise for entrance into the religion of AA.

 

[CopticChristian]

It would have been nice if Catholics or Christians had not persecuted people centuries ago over superstitious things. In general atheists don’t believe in witches where many Christians may have at one time. And my point is you and Coptic unwittingly are making Catholics look like nit wits.

I believe a Catholic nun - if my memory is correct - was even involved in the early formations of AA. But AA was influenced by Protestant Christians involved in the Oxford Movement (C.S. Lewis I think was involved in the Oxford Movement). And again, if I remember correctly, part of the aim of the Oxford Movement was for Anglicans to recapture more of their catholicity.

It is true AA, NA, and CA say promote the new comer as the most important person in the room. I just heard this today from a person at an NA meeting with 6 years clean. Previously he had 20 years sobriety - he gained on his own without NA or ever attending any meetings - before he relapsed. Now, he finds personal growth in going through spiritual and character steps of the 12 Step Program. Part of which is for those that gain sobriety to help others - the new comers - rather than be selfish and turned inward. This act of learning to be less selfish (which they claim addiction makes people become increasingly) is why they encourage “service work” at the meetings.

The meetings themselves offer a community of addicts working to recover (rather than use) and giving each other moral support. Not unlike war veteran groups. Or any other group of people that share common struggles or problems.

And it’s that moral support - from people that understand what you are going through - which is the primary reason I attend. I have no delusions that AA, NA, or CA is not a “magic pill.” Mind you… there are many serious members of AA, NA, and CA that talk about these groups just like Mormons talk about the Mormon Church of Catholics talk about salvation coming through the Catholic Church.

But like I said… AA, NA, and CA methods are akin to Catholicism or religion and not science.

This Dr. Bernie you speak of found no cure nor was he engaged in the scientific methodology of treating pathologies at the chemical level with drugs. What Dr. Bernie did - and your assertions about it working for you and therefore must work for every other person - was a regression into shamanism. And the Shamans medicine worked. That’s why they were not killed. Except it never worked all the time, and it was explained away when it worked on Persons A, B, and C but not on Persons D, E, and F that persons D, E, and F either failed to pray hard enough, or didn’t believe the medicine would work, or that they didn’t “really want to be cured.”

That not how modern science or modern medicine works. You don’t need to believe or even want the medicine to work. It will work anyways.

Or put it this way, there is no “wanting crack to work” or “wanting alcohol to intoxicate you.” They will always work anyways irrespective of what the person consuming them wants or believes. It’s a chemical thing that has to do with the laws within chemistry.

This is why psychiatrists treat people with drugs whereas psychologists treat people along the lines of Catholicism (Spiritual Director - had one in Catholicism) or AA, NA, and CA.

Time,

This is getting rediculous…

Oxford movement is the anglican Christian movement not to be confused with the roots of AA…the roots of AA are…

Frank Buchman
Moral Rearmament
Oxford Groupers who believed in “God Control”

The name “Oxford Group” originated in South Africa in 1929, as a result of a railway porter writing the name on the windows of those compartments reserved by a travelling team of Frank Buchman followers. They were from Oxford and in South Africa to promote the movement. The South African press picked up on the name and it stuck.

Frank Buchman was the Benny Hinn of his day filling stadiums preaching a return to first century Christianity…

I would suggest you listen to Michael Jackson…I’m starting with the man in the mirror…concerning nit wits…

 

[CopticChristian]

It would have been nice if Catholics or Christians had not persecuted people centuries ago over superstitious things. In general atheists don’t believe in witches where many Christians may have at one time. And my point is you and Coptic unwittingly are making Catholics look like nit wits.

I believe a Catholic nun - if my memory is correct - was even involved in the early formations of AA. But AA was influenced by Protestant Christians involved in the Oxford Movement (C.S. Lewis I think was involved in the Oxford Movement). And again, if I remember correctly, part of the aim of the Oxford Movement was for Anglicans to recapture more of their catholicity.

It is true AA, NA, and CA say promote the new comer as the most important person in the room. I just heard this today from a person at an NA meeting with 6 years clean. Previously he had 20 years sobriety - he gained on his own without NA or ever attending any meetings - before he relapsed. Now, he finds personal growth in going through spiritual and character steps of the 12 Step Program. Part of which is for those that gain sobriety to help others - the new comers - rather than be selfish and turned inward. This act of learning to be less selfish (which they claim addiction makes people become increasingly) is why they encourage “service work” at the meetings.

The meetings themselves offer a community of addicts working to recover (rather than use) and giving each other moral support. Not unlike war veteran groups. Or any other group of people that share common struggles or problems.

And it’s that moral support - from people that understand what you are going through - which is the primary reason I attend. I have no delusions that AA, NA, or CA is not a “magic pill.” Mind you… there are many serious members of AA, NA, and CA that talk about these groups just like Mormons talk about the Mormon Church of Catholics talk about salvation coming through the Catholic Church.

**But like I said… AA, NA, and CA methods are akin to Catholicism or religion and not science. **
This Dr. Bernie you speak of found no cure nor was he engaged in the scientific methodology of treating pathologies at the chemical level with drugs. What Dr. Bernie did - and your assertions about it working for you and therefore must work for every other person - was a regression into shamanism. And the Shamans medicine worked. That’s why they were not killed. Except it never worked all the time, and it was explained away when it worked on Persons A, B, and C but not on Persons D, E, and F that persons D, E, and F either failed to pray hard enough, or didn’t believe the medicine would work, or that they didn’t “really want to be cured.”

That not how modern science or modern medicine works. You don’t need to believe or even want the medicine to work. It will work anyways.

Or put it this way, there is no “wanting crack to work” or “wanting alcohol to intoxicate you.” They will always work anyways irrespective of what the person consuming them wants or believes. It’s a chemical thing that has to do with the laws within chemistry.

This is why psychiatrists treat people with drugs whereas psychologists treat people along the lines of Catholicism (Spiritual Director - had one in Catholicism) or AA, NA, and CA.

Time,

You hit the nail on the head…

The Supreme Court of the United States has declared AA to be a religion
AA has Protestant religous roots
AA promotes resolution of Character defects to gain sobriety…what are character defects? Sin

A preliminary report of the Catholic Church Jesus Christ the Bearer of the Water of Life says that addiction and recovery have taken the place of sin and salvation…

you are correct AA/NA/CA are faith based healing with Protestant roots…

good job for pointing that out…

 

[CopticChristian]

Social Psychiatry, Transactional Analysis, a book written by Dr. Eric Berne called Games People Play, back in the 60’s I believed, discovered a cure for ‘addiction’ to alcohol. I am living that cure. Back in my very late teens and early 20’s I was a severe alcohol abuser, consuming a 12 pack of beer and a pint or more of hard liquor every other night (would have been every night except the hangovers and sickness the day after carried all the way into the night so the most I could stomach was doing this every other day.

Now I drink maybe a glass of wine or a beer a few times a year or something like that. I never think about alcohol. I am not tempted by it ever. I can be around it without desiring it at all. And I can choose to say no to a drink or choose to say yes and have one drink, or 1/2 of a drink, on a rare occasion might be 2 (I think 3 years ago on vacation I actually had 3 beers one afternoon, that was a LOT and put me to sleep and I am well over 200 lbs).

The ‘cure’ is to stop playing ‘the game’ that alcoholics and enablers, rescuers and the various cast members in that game play. In AA people change roles from alcoholic to rescuer, becoming a sponsor and this way still 'playing the game, albiet a different role, where they seek out and involve themselves in the lives of alcoholics in order to rescue them from being an alcoholic.

This is, unconsciously IMO, I believe they say that the newcomer is the most important person in the room. Because without the newcomers the attendees who used to play the role of alcoholic, but have switched to playing the role of rescuer, would have no one to rescue and then would not be able to play the game. If such a person doesn’t have someone to rescue they run a high chance of relapse (unless they learn how to simply ‘not play’ the game). It does make you a boring person, but your able to drink. But that doesn’t matter, just like it doesn’t matter to any other human who is ‘able’ to drink and may or may not drink some small ammt of alcohol on certain occasions but has zero compulsion to do so.

Berne didn’t speak of cocaine or heroin in his book and I don’t think crack had been invented by the 60’s so I’m not SURE if the same principles apply, but they very well may as in NA I believe they operate similarly to the way they do in AA with sponsors and new comers being important…I have attended a few NA meetings. My impression was that the ex adicts were not charged up to rescue poeple like the alcoholics turned to rescuers are in AA meetings though.

God Bless,
Bill

Bill,

Here is the site to see the Drama Triangle. If you click on the left side of the page you can read the original article. This Drama Triangle has been applied to all sorts of things. Transactional Analysis in my opinion has limitations and is something to know about, understand and recognize for what it is. I find that it has little in the way of broad sweeping applications to problem solving for anything other than dysfunction.

karpmandramatriangle.com/

 

[Bill_7154]

Okay… this is getting ridiculous.

Alcoholics going through seizures is not “playing games.”

AA operates off of the belief that God - a higher power - can deliver one from their affliction, but that one has to go through certain character changes and development. That one has to be willing to suffer for a greater moral good and for their own betterment. Or what Catholics might refer to cooperating in the grace of God. If that means giving up mind altering substances than so be it.

You and Coptic would do well to learn about the engineering and scientific concepts of Type 1 Error and Type 2 Error. Essentially, you two are suggesting a person play a game off Russian Roulette. There is no dishonor in not picking up the gun, putting it to your head, and not squeezing the trigger because you believe the gun is loaded even though it is not. The cost of that error is less than cost of the error of believing the gun is not loaded when in fact it is.

Many alcoholics, those not necessarily of the severest type, say things to the effect of, *“I never know what’s going to happen or what I’m going to do when I drink, and that scares me, because I don’t know if I will behave or not.” *

I am thoroughly familiar with the way AA operates. I was active in AA for several years. What I pointed out was a way to understand the UNCONSCIOUS HAPPENINGS to those who are participating in AA.

Before you judge and deny how Dr. Eric Berne describes alcoholics I think you should actually read the chapter in his book that describes in detail the psychology of the alcoholic, the psychology of others connected to alcoholics (you’ve heard of enablers I assume?), including the rescuer, and the other roles of people who are co-dependent to alcoholics in different ways.

Once you have that information, once you are educated in that fashion, I encourage you to come back and discuss it. Right now your essentially ‘flying blind’ and have NO IDEA what I’m talking about while I have a thorough understanding of the AA model and the model put forth by Dr. Eric Berne.

And where did I say going through seizures is playing games? Why would you attribute such ridiculousness to me? I am not encouraging anyone in AA to not be in AA. I benefited from AA myself. However, I also benefited from the teachings of Dr. Eric Berne on the subject.

Have you not witnessed in AA the ‘need’ that those in recovery have to help another. I’m not simply talking about following step 12 because it’s the right thing to do, or because that’s what AA teaches, I’m talking about how there are plenty of people who are ‘emotionally charged, emotionally driven’ to take on the role of rescuer…almost like an alcoholic is emotionally charged to go drink.

Go read and educate yourself my friend before you dismiss something as untrue. But you probably won’t do it because you want (assuming your in AA and a practicing member) what is in your unconscious about the underlying psychology of why AA works (as opposed to the underlying spirituality of why AA works) to remain in your unconscious rather than enter into your consciousness and shed new light for you on the way AA works.

God Bless,
Bill