Is it infallibly true that some drugs should be illegal?

[CopticChristian]

This is interesting because from what I have learned, and from what I have seen in both my personal life and in my professional life, is that the rescuer and the enabler are two separate and distinct roles.

The ‘enabler’ makes excues for the alcoholic, often the spouse, calling in sick for the alcoholic and is also co-dependent on the alcoholic, effectively shifting their psychological/emotional problems into the backround and focusing on the alcoholic as a means of unhealthily coping with their own issues.

And the rescuer is one who will not enable the alcoholic. They will do various things to promote the person to get off of alcohol, but won’t enable. They will take the person to treatment, etc, they will be a person who the alcoholic will confide in, but will be a person who gives the alcoholic the ‘straight dope’ when it comes to their drinking. They may acknowledge that the alcoholic has a lot of problems in their life, and acknowledge that this could very well lead them to drinking…but they will not allow the alcoholic to view these as excues to drink. They will essentiall say “yes, you have it hard” but drinking is making those things worse. I will help you insofar as your getting away from alcohol but wont’ support your use of it at all.

This is part of the psychological model I learned re: alcoholism and believe that those working to reform in AA are moreso resuers and not enablers. They may have small traits of enabling but don’t fit that role like the spouse of an alcoholic typically does, giving money for alcohol, continuing to make excuses for the alcoholic etc…while the rescuer will only work with the alcoholic around stopping drinking, not giving them money for ‘this is the last time’ 100 times in a row, giving them a place to stay dispite their continued use, etc the way enablers do.

God Bless,
Bill

Bill,

Most would say that the rescuer/enabler are the same as seen here…

huffingtonpost.com/carole-bennett/rescuing-the-alcoholicadd_b_476862.html

But what do they mean? What does the **“rescuer” or “enabler” **look like and why are these labels so common to so many well meaning family members and friends that love the alcoholic/addict?

loriklauser.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=47&Itemid=39

An enabler or rescuer is a person whose actions make it easy for someone with an addiction or who is dependent upon something to keep on in their poor behavior.

alcoholism.about.com/cs/info2/a/aa980225.htm

It’s easy to define the “rescuer” or “caretaker” as an enabler.

I don’t think it really matters because once you realize that this is dysfunctional thinking and understand dysfunctional thinking you should then realize that the entire paradigm of AA is dysfunctional filled with lies, secrets, shoulds and shouldnt’s which is the earmark of all dysfunctional thinking.

In other words the disease model of AA/Religion of the 12 steps is a dysfunctional paradigm.

 

[CopticChristian]

What % of the population do you think believes this or understands this or would even agree if a doctor explained it to them?

God Bless,
Bill

Bill,

Truth in education would do wonders. If you know and understand that people have come to believe…does that sound familiar…they have come to believe that addiction is disease and it is not…what might happen if they were told the truth?

Just witness anyone that is a 12 step disciple that is told the truth. They resist, get angry, provide no data and criticize.

 

[Bill_7154]

Time,

If every Veteran using this method went back to using that should tell you something. If you want to believe the counselors then this is tantamount to telling a Fundamentalist to read history and then hear that they have talked to their pastor that denies what you tell them.

I can tell you as a former alcohol and drug counselor that I find it quite unfortunate that not only is there a strong predjuice for the disease model among counselors/treatment facilities, it is also put forth in the education for counselors.

I think it would be far better, at a minimum, if ALL various models and ways of looking at misuse of substances was given equal weight…with various treatment models given equal weight.

I had a discussion once with my mentor, my father figure who saved my life, about AA. He was saying “he’s not sure why it works” I told him I knew why" he said “stop, don’t tell me, I don’t want to know”. He was content to be going to AA and being very invested in AA and the 12 steps, and he was also responsible for saving well over 100 lives IMO. He was content to keep what was subconscious subconscious insofar as there are interworkings of AA among those in attendance, interactions where there are things going on consciously and unconsciously.

I had no interest in sharing with him something he didn’t want to hear, but this is just one example of the resistance that people in AA have to hearing alternate views. Are people diagnosed with cancer resistant to hearing alternate views on the way cancer may form, spread, or be treated? Other ailments? Food for thought.

God Bless,
Bill

 

[_L]

The war on drugs is a failure, just like prohibition of alcohol was a failure. Both prohibitions only cause black markets to form, and this leads to gangs, violence, foreign cartels, etc. We don’t have bootleggers of alcohol and a black market for alcohol with gang involvement anymore precisely because it is legal. This country is a disgrace in regards to it’s prison system, over 1% of the population is in jail and much of this population is comprised of non-violent prisoners who are getting time for drug possession, it is corrupt and a disgrace that these men, probably poor and in need of help are getting locked away as if this will help us and them, it helps no one except the private prison systems.

You want to end the violence at the border? You want to effectively end organized crime in regards to drugs? You want to end the black market? You legalize drugs, and this all ends. This isn’t saying that we support drug use, I’m against the use of drugs, but this is merely saying that the state isn’t going to use coercion and the threat of prison as a means to combat this. Alcohol is legal, and yes we have alcohol related problems: drunk driving, public drunkenness, alcoholism, but these problems are minute in comparison to what the problems would be if alcohol were illegal again. If people really want it, they will get it, but getting something illegal always involves shady characters and nefarious means which often involve exploitation violence, and so on.

 

[Bill_7154]

Bill,

I don’t think it really matters because once you realize that this is dysfunctional thinking and understand dysfunctional thinking you should then realize that the entire paradigm of AA is dysfunctional filled with lies, secrets, shoulds and shouldnt’s which is the earmark of all dysfunctional thinking.

In other words the disease model of AA/Religion of the 12 steps is a dysfunctional paradigm.

Interesting,
Even before going to my first AA meeting I had already formed the opinion this was not a disease, this was in my teens. And I was always hesitant to buy into a lot of what was said.

But I did benefit from AA, mostly from a couple of the 12 steps…taking a fearless and thorough moral inventory of myself… and then I confessed that to a priest. This helped me a great deal.

for the most part when I attended meetings I would sit and it was a way to occupy my time better than being at a bar room or something like that. So I don’t think there is no value to AA, I just wish that couselors were more enlightened to view all of the various treatment models with at least the same ammt of validity that they give AA. It definitely brainwashes people, but it didn’t brainwash me becasue I already had my own perspective going in (I had a very disfunctional childhood…this drove me to using alcohol as a means of coping with social phobia) and my emotional/psychological/spiritual deficits were the problem, and AA was not the best way to address them. Following that thought I am now able to drink socally (but don’t even care about alcohol, it’s a non issue to me and I prefer soda or juice even when surrounded by alcohol, etc…)

God Bless,
Bill

 

[Bill_7154]

Bill,

Truth in education would do wonders. If you know and understand that people have come to believe…does that sound familiar…they have come to believe that addiction is disease and it is not…what might happen if they were told the truth?

Just witness anyone that is a 12 step disciple that is told the truth. They resist, get angry, provide no data and criticize.

True and unfortunate. This is why I started that thread about LEAP. I want to allow people to hear from law enforcement themselves the harm the drug war does, and the false belief people have that it is acually helping our society and getting poeple off of drugs… I’m against drug use in general, but more against murderers being in control of them and jailing users, putting them in gladiator schools as punnishment (prisons) where they get criminal records and their life for the future is effectively ruined.

I know there is a better way, especially when taking into consideration all the money and resources used for the drug war.

I wish and pray to God that I have the strength and power to help open people’s eyes to the disasterous effects of the war on drugs and allow people to see the drug war as totally separate from the drug abuse issues in society, and how the former does not help lessen the latter…while creating a ton of additonal problems for all of us.

I figured if people heard it directly from the mouths of police officers, judges, etc it may have an impact greater than hearing it from some hippie whose agenda is getting lots of drugs for themselves…but the degree of resistance I’ve gotten to even get people to watch a video or 3 from LEAP is unfortunate.

God Bless,
Bill

 

[CopticChristian]

I can tell you as a former alcohol and drug counselor that I find it quite unfortunate that not only is there a strong predjuice for the disease model among counselors/treatment facilities, it is also put forth in the education for counselors.

I think it would be far better, at a minimum, if ALL various models and ways of looking at misuse of substances was given equal weight…with various treatment models given equal weight.

I had a discussion once with my mentor, my father figure who saved my life, about AA. He was saying “he’s not sure why it works” I told him I knew why" he said “stop, don’t tell me, I don’t want to know”. He was content to be going to AA and being very invested in AA and the 12 steps, and he was also responsible for saving well over 100 lives IMO. He was content to keep what was subconscious subconscious insofar as there are interworkings of AA among those in attendance, interactions where there are things going on consciously and unconsciously.

I had no interest in sharing with him something he didn’t want to hear, but this is just one example of the resistance that people in AA have to hearing alternate views.** Are people diagnosed with cancer resistant to hearing alternate views on the way cancer may form, spread, or be treated? Other ailments? Food for thought.**
God Bless,
Bill

Bill,

This is a good point. You know as well as I do that the Medical establishment provides education on treatements. There are forces that promote the 12 step paradigm/religion of AA and fortunately not all swallow it.

Cancer is a good objection to cause someone to think. Many just accept the medical opinion and others travel all over the world looking for miracle cures not accepting that opinion. What is the difference? People make decisions that will affect their time on earth. It would appear that those that swallow the 12 step paradigm/religion of AA do not see their lives as threatened or they would look for alternatives.

 

[fakename]

Fake,

How does the law define a drug?

Usually a drug is something that is used to diagnose, treat or prevent a disease.

Now then that leaves the question open to alcohol. Is it a drug too? Does it diagnose, treat or prevent disease? Some would say that it does aid the heart and prevent. Alcohol is a depressant and an antiseptic. It is also a beverage used for social consumption. So it requires a formed conscience to understand and know how to adhered to what the Church would say use or misuse of something that is legal.

Those drugs that are illegal should be easy to discern.

So basically any drug can be made legal (including currently illegal ones) as long as we have a good reason?

 

[CopticChristian]

So basically any drug can be made legal (including currently illegal ones) as long as we have a good reason?

Fake,

any drug is declared legal or not, but not be “us” because we have a good reason. Drugs are classified and some classifications make no sense. I don’t want to get into that.

If it was discovered that Heroin cured Breast Cancer and an institution had studies to do so then they would probably declassify Heroin as a cure rather than a narcotic or as a narcotic with therapeutic side effects. Heroin as it stands is a narcotic that is not used for medicinal purposes.

They is the FDA.

 

[Bill_7154]

Bill,

This is a good point. You know as well as I do that the Medical establishment provides education on treatements. There are forces that promote the 12 step paradigm/religion of AA and fortunately not all swallow it.

Cancer is a good objection to cause someone to think. Many just accept the medical opinion and others travel all over the world looking for miracle cures not accepting that opinion. What is the difference? People make decisions that will affect their time on earth. It would appear that those that swallow the 12 step paradigm/religion of AA do not see their lives as threatened or they would look for alternatives.

CopticChristian,
I hear your point, and obviously value you being a member and posting in these forums a great deal. In my experience as a ‘former alcoholic’ or whatever way someone wants to view it, I was basically only ‘presented’ with AA as the ONLY way to address my issue when I came across someone in the helping professions (not doctors, people of less stature). So, if I had not done my own self help education prior (understanding that as someone who suffered extreme abuse and neglect as a child…and reading a lot of books about how this impacts people…and more or less assuming it is what drove me to drink…I don’t remember any books I read specificially suggesting this…but the books I read were all from the ‘psychology’ sections of bookstores, I figured I would get more help from those books than the ‘self help section’, and in retrospect believe I was correct) and was told you have x, AA is the solution…and not encouraged to explore other solutions, etc… I mean it is so engrained that the counselors themselves are not even open to other solutions…so I can understand why so many jump to AA if they are going to jump to any type of solution at all.

And the (name removed by moderator)atient tx centers all have AA meetings as a focal point. It’s a shame that the general public, and those who drink to excess, are not presented from the outset, a variety of tx options. I think the general public should receive education about this since alcohol is a big problem in society, and AA only stops and keeps stopped a very limited number of those who drink to excess. And as you have pointed out so aptly, it is filled with disfuction.

If we were told of different options from the beginning, more would have the chance to find other solutions before drinking the AA coolaid and becoming convinced beyond all dout that this is the only solution to their problem.

God Bless,
Bill

 

[CopticChristian]

CopticChristian,
I hear your point, and obviously value you being a member and posting in these forums a great deal. In my experience as a ‘former alcoholic’ or whatever way someone wants to view it, I was basically only ‘presented’ with AA as the ONLY way to address my issue when I came across someone in the helping professions (not doctors, people of less stature). So, if I had not done my own self help education prior (understanding that as someone who suffered extreme abuse and neglect as a child…and reading a lot of books about how this impacts people…and more or less assuming it is what drove me to drink…I don’t remember any books I read specificially suggesting this…but the books I read were all from the ‘psychology’ sections of bookstores, I figured I would get more help from those books than the ‘self help section’, and in retrospect believe I was correct) and was told you have x, AA is the solution…and not encouraged to explore other solutions, etc… I mean it is so engrained that the counselors themselves are not even open to other solutions…so I can understand why so many jump to AA if they are going to jump to any type of solution at all.

And the (name removed by moderator)atient tx centers all have AA meetings as a focal point. It’s a shame that the general public, and those who drink to excess, are not presented from the outset, a variety of tx options. I think the general public should receive education about this since alcohol is a big problem in society, and AA only stops and keeps stopped a very limited number of those who drink to excess. And as you have pointed out so aptly, it is filled with disfuction.

If we were told of different options from the beginning, more would have the chance to find other solutions before drinking the AA coolaid and becoming convinced beyond all dout that this is the only solution to their problem.

God Bless,
Bill

Bill,

From The Truth About Addiction, Stanton Peele, Phd.

People quit addictions on their own all the time. We all know this is the case. How many people do you know who quit cigarettes, the most common and the most powerful of drug addictions? Did you do so? In the United States, tens of millions of people have quit smoking without treatment, about half of those who have ever smoked.

Surprisingly, the percentage of former heroin, cocaine, and alcohol addicts who have quit on their own is even higher. Yet an enormous treatment/recovery industry, backed by a large government bureaucracy, tells us that it is virtually impossible to quit an addiction—and completely impossible to do so without the use of all their services.

Of course, some private treatment centers have a vested interest in this debate. These are the ones that treat Lindsay Lohan, Charlie Sheen, Whitney Houston, and their ilk, often repeatedly. It’s obvious why they insist that quitting addictions takes repeated, expensive stays at their facilities.

Even the services of 12-step programs like Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) and Gamblers Anonymous can come with a price: Many claim that no one can succeed in overcoming alcoholism unless they remain in AA or another twelve-step group.

Less well known is that the government has invested millions to get an “addictive disease” message across. The National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) is the government agency responsible for getting to the root of drug abuse. Since 2003, the NIDA has been headed by brain researcher Nora Volkow, who has popularized the idea of “Addiction as a Brain Disease.” Typical of this exposure was the massive, 14-part series that premiered on HBO in 2007 that officially told Americans that addiction is a “chronic, relapsing brain disease.”

Today, it is rare to see a study claiming some new finding about such a “disease” in which Volkow is not quoted (findings about self-cure, thought far more common, get much less coverage). According to Volkow, drugs (and now, it seems, many other activities) stimulate the neurochemical dopamine in the brain. The brain becomes acclimated to this dopamine saturation, and will do anything to prompt restimulation of the chemical. Volkow views this process as the inevitable—and inescapable—result of people taking certain drugs (although which drugs—and whether only due to drugs—is a matter of some dispute).

The addiction is inescapable, that is, unless it is treated medically, according to Volkow, who in 2011 spurred the formation of the American Board of Addiction Medicine. Except, there really is no agreed-upon medical treatment for addiction. While some drugs (like naltrexone) have been used in therapies for both narcotic addiction and alcoholism, none has been reliably successful. So, when you enter a major medical addiction treatment center, you invariably end up attending AA groups.

You may want to understand that those that are 12 step disciples will attack this information and discount the messenger and not the message.

If you listen to Joe & Charlie, AA gurus, that explain the history of AA and the steps…you will hear that it was Bill Wilson’s dream to have Missionaries, Missions, all oriented towards getting people into AA.

You now have the missions, the 12 step rehab facilities…where they have a vested interest in their existince, $50,000.00 for a 6 week stay.

You now have the disciples, those that attend the meetings and those that graduate from the missions…all looking for people to get into the religion of AA

The catch 22 is that if, like you, you say you drink…then you were never an alcoholic or if you deny that you have a problem, then you are in denial because it is a black and white paradigm…

 

[Bill_7154]

Bill,
From The Truth About Addiction, Stanton Peele, Phd.
You may want to understand that those that are 12 step disciples will attack this information and discount the messenger and not the message.

If you listen to Joe & Charlie, AA gurus, that explain the history of AA and the steps…you will hear that it was Bill Wilson’s dream to have Missionaries, Missions, all oriented towards getting people into AA.

You now have the missions, the 12 step rehab facilities…where they have a vested interest in their existince, $50,000.00 for a 6 week stay.

You now have the disciples, those that attend the meetings and those that graduate from the missions…all looking for people to get into the religion of AA

The catch 22 is that if, like you, you say you drink…then you were never an alcoholic or if you deny that you have a problem, then you are in denial because it is a black and white paradigm…

I understand the catch 22…since I now drink socially (actually rarely dirnk at all and prefer not to on most all occasions with rare execptions, and have zero complusion whatsoever either before taking a sip or after a sip or a drink) people of the AA discipline/the disease model claim that I ‘must not have been an alcoholic in the first place’. Well, to those who knew me when I was drinking at my heaviest levels… no one in their right mind would say I was not an alcoholic (except those who don’t believe in the disease model). And no one, period, would say that my relationship with alchol was the least bit healthy.

What is interesting, is that as I began my journey of recovery from severe childhoold trauma… my drinking… in both frequency and intensity lessened over time. I went from drinking to a druken stupor every other night (only reason it wasn’t every night is because I drank so much and got so physically ill it took the next day to recouperate) to periods of abstinance to periods where I drank to drunkenness but not to a drunken stupor…to drinking to excess (to what the DSM would still classify as alchol abuse) and at times still to excess but less so. Mixed in were other periods of abstinance. And still over more time I would drink technically to ‘abuse’ ammt’s, but around 6-8 drinks rather than 40-50 drinks (beer and hard liquor mixed). And then I would drink maybe 2-3 times a week, then 2 times a week…maybe 6 beers…but about once every 6 months, and without the ability to predict when… I would wind up drinking that 40-50 drinks or whatever (many beers and a pint or more of hard liquor).

I obviously saw this as a problem, but also saw it as evidence that as I worked on my childhood trauma…there was a direct coorelation in that my drinking became much less severe and much less frequent. Due to legal consequences (arrested for drinking and driving- a terrible thing, I know) I was seered toward treatment and due to concerns about drinking and driving made the choice to not drink at all…and this lasted for a period of several years. I continued with the belief that my excess drinking was directly connected to my childhood trauma, but also became involved in AA. I did find some value in AA, mostly with the 4th and 5th steps I believe (taking a thorough and fearless moral inventory of myself- which I did extensively, soul searching for a period of months and writing it all down) and then the 5th step telling another person of these wrongs … I choose to do this with a Catholic Priest and did so face to face. I found those things to be very helpful. I also attended various types of AA meetings and basically kept to myself my beliefs that AA was cultish, with the leaders engaged in obsessive compsulsive types of behaviors, seemingly to have obsessive compulsive thought patterns related to AA, and my objections to those types of behaviors and the seemingly indoctrinating of ‘newcomers’. I ocasionally would hear of people talking about AA being ‘a cult’ and basically agreed with them, I mostly didn’t approach those people after meetings to share my beliefs as I didn’t have the time or energy to take them under my wings and spend the time and energy showing them my own self help methods and felt as if I validated their belief it was a cult that I may do more harm than good… they may go from not drinking to drinking after hearing what I had to say and then wind up drinking/driving and killing someone or simiilar…so mostly kept those things to myself. … to be continued to next post due to word limits…

 

[Bill_7154]

At other times I did speak individually and in open meetings, not necessarilly directly criticizing AA, but speaking generally about my beliefs that what lead me to drinking was an inability to cope with childhood trauma, one of the eventual manifestations of this which was social phobia…and more generally about the emotional pain and maladaptive psychological thinking/behaving patterns that I developed as a victim of childhood abuse/neglect…and how I saw that addressing that as critical, that drinking was one symptom of that… and that I was addressing that in many different ways and finding it helpful. I never openly criticized AA in AA as I felt it would be disrecpectful. I felt that many were better off not drinking and being addicted to AA than what their life must have been like before, especially if their drinking was very excessive causing problems for them and their families. So I saw it in many cases as a lesser evil than their prior life.

Eventually I started drinking again and didn’t have those unpredictible times that happened 1-2x/year when I would drink to severe excess. I would go out on the weekends and have 4-6 drinks, mingling in order to meet women. Eventually I met my wife. She was a very light drinker (2 drinks as a maxium pretty much) and we would go out on weekends dancing a lot (both loved dancing). My drinking more or less decreased and became what was in line with the ammt she drank, so I was drinking like 3 drinks on 1-2 weekend nights. Eventually we stopped going out dancing regularly as we became more serious and started doing other things together, where alcohol was not around. So I drank even less. I became friends with her friends and their social parties were familie oriented, where the majority of the time there was no alcohol present. So I wouldn’t drink at all.

All this time mind you, I continued to work on myself, the ramifications of my childhood. I had help from physicians and saw a therapist a couple of times. As we became a couple, and became engaged, alcohol wasn’t really much a part of my life at all anymore (except on Christmas eve, new years eve, and the occasional celebration of someone’s birthday). But this social circle didn’t drink (or did so rarely, if they were drinking a glass of wine and dinner was served…they would put their wine aside and drink soda with their dinner). Reflecting back to my past this was CRAZY, having alcohol in front of me with a meal served used to be an excuse to drink twice as much twice as quickly ‘to wash down my meal’. But now my thinking and behaving was very different than that. I could and would drink 1 drink, or even 1/2 glass of wine and put it aside. To me, when I was in my late teens or early 20’s (and even later when I would drink 6 drinks on a weekend night…leaving a glass of alcohol unfinished was UNTHINKABLE. Now it was just the way it was. It was normal and part of the new way I was.

Yet the indoctrination of society is so severe re: alcohol is a disease, if you have it you can’t be cured and the only solution is abstinance (and preferably continued AA for life), it’s so severe I don’t even tell my doctor that I occasionally have a drink. Since my past is filled with such severe alcohol abuse, and I"m not sure what his views are on alcohol and those who have drank to considerable excess…I basically keep it private that I might have 3-6 drinks a year now. This is the impact that the disease model has on me, I’m afraid to tell my own dr the truth, that I transformed myself from a servere alcohol abuser to someone who drinks less than the vast majority of people, never gets drunk, does not have the slightest compulsion to do so, whether or not I have imbibed a little alchol or none.

So I’m a ‘cured’ alcoholic for those that believe in the disease model. And for those who don’t, I’ve made enough progress in addressing my childhood trauma’s so that I don’t see alcohol as a tool to cope with that at all. Nor do I engage in any patterns of drinking, nor am I tempted at all by it. More often than not I turn down a glass of wine at parties. And now, especially since I have a 10 month old son I would NEVER drink at all if I were to be the one driving. I don’t care if I would only drink potentially 1 drink and then not be driving for 4 hours later. I’m simply not going to do that in order to be absolutely safe and out of principle…even though I know that a drink will pass through my system… and as someone who weights 250lbs, wouldn’t even ‘impair’ me by the legal definition even if I drove directly after drinking the drink. And my BAC would be 0.00 4 hours later. But I still wont’ do it.

THAT"S the biggest problem with alcohol I have now. Being overly cautious in relation to alcohol consumption and driving with my baby on board.

To those of you who used to drink and don’t anymore, I don’t recommend you start. But I am saying that it is possible to address underlying spiritual/psychological/emotional/mental issues that I think lead a lot of people to use alcohol and/or other mood altering substances to excess as a way to deal with the pain, to escape… to manage emotions so that one feels comfortable enough in their own skin they can participate in life in such a way so that they have no need for, no compulsion to consume to excess. I say that with caution as you could be playing with fire if you choose to try and go down that path.

to be continued again…

 

[Bill_7154]

But it’s not a disease, and it’s not incurable. I consider myself very fortunate to be alive today, and to have some sort of a life, as not only did I have problems with alcohol, I was also a sex addict (use whatever term you wish to define it- and don’t have those compulsions or egnage in those behaviors anymore- I similarly addressed that as sex was another way my childhood trauma manifested, I’ve also had compulsions to eat to excess, another example of the manifestation of coping with trauma, and at present I AM someone who smokes cigarettes. I ‘relapsed’ after being a non smoker for 6 years based on a series of major life stressors that hit me in a short period of time, a recurrence of PTSD symptoms that hit me as I was more ‘primed’ for that to happen due to the stress I was under and then had a bad interaction with my father- one of my abusers/neglectors- and due to stress in my marriage where my wife basically went crazy and went off on me… and as a reaction I got the thought in my head of smoking…I was in my car at the time…I drove directly to the store and bought cigarettes and started smoking them.

I can and will quit. I understand the process to go through. I also know that I have to be ready to quit. It’s an unhealthy coping mechanism I was familiar and unfortunately reverted to this when stress got overwhelming. I have quit cigarettes before and went several years without smoking. I’ve quit a few times in my life actually. Once cold turkey. Once using Wellbutrin and making a quit plan where I picked a quit date in the future to help me prepare and build up to quitting along with having a long list of alternatet things to do when I got the urge.

Not sure exactly what method I will use to quit this time, but do agree that nicotine is the hardest substance to quit. And at least for myself, I do not think that I would ever be able to ‘socially smoke’, and since the miniscule psychological benefits that can be attributed to nicotine on the brain are EXTREMELY OUTWEIGHED by the negative impacts on one’s life and health see no reason to even try… and don’t believe I could even if I did try, but won’t. I will quit outright. I am praying regularly around this. But there are life changes I need to make to prepare to quit. I’m not able to just quit in the moment. I must have a plan and pick a date to quit like a month or so ahead of time to use in order to build myself up, as part of readying myself. I may use something like Welbutrin, or nicotine gum and I may go cold turkey.

I have a dr’s appt today and plan to discuss it with him today. He’s a great dr and understands my past and how it impacts me. I am very blessed to have him as a doctor. But I wouldn’t join something like AA and attend a support group for non smokers for years and years. I think for me that would be counterproductive.

God Bless,
Bill

 

[Bill_7154]

So basically any drug can be made legal (including currently illegal ones) as long as we have a good reason?

ALL drugs were legal in the usa prior to something like 1920, including heroin, cocaine, etc. You could buy kits out of places like the sears and robucks co. magazine with needles, etc to inject heroin.

And back then the same % of the population was addicted to drugs than after the harrison drug act passed that made those drugs illegal. Then the same % of people were addicted to drugs in the 60’s as was back in and before the 20’s and we passed the war on drugs. And after the war on drugs up until the present day the same % of the population is addicted to drugs.

So passing laws against possession and sale of drugs has not been effective in reducing the % of the population addicted to drugs. So if you are an adult who is sane and able to reason it should be easy to conclude that the criminal justice system has been and continues to be completely innefective at reducing the % of the populatioin addicted to drugs.

And it doesn’t take a genius to realize that there are insane ammt’s of violence associated with drugs being a black market commodoty (use Al Capone et al as examples… prohibit alcohol crime gangs take over and they use violence as the means of doing business (since the cops are now out of the picture with respect to protecting the manufacture and sale of the product… so they are high value targets for robbers…because the cops can’t be called) and they can’t use the courts to settle disputes re: who has what territory, etc who sells to who… it isn’t done above board…it’s done in the black market with threats, violence, and murder used to determine who comes out on top).

End prohibtion and you end drug cartels involvement. Legal buinessess who don’t use violence take over (since violence and murder are costly aspects of a business model) and we can focus on treatment, lessen drug use and abuse… and end the senseless violence and murder that only exists because they are illegal.

Violence and murder from those under the influence would also be less, I think than violence and murder by those under the influence of alcohol. There would be some violence associated with coke and meth use, but bascially none associated wtih heroin and pot. They relax people.

And if legal we would have tons more resources to address that violence and the real underlying issue, drug abuse. Ton’s of money is being thrown away and tons are being murdered and jailed and for what? Drugs are everywhere…even in max security prisons. If we can’t keep them out of there how can someone be a sane adult and think they can be kept out of schools and off the streets given the current policy of drug prohibtion i.e. the war on drugs?

God Bless,
Bill

 

[fakename]

Fake,

any drug is declared legal or not, but not be “us” because we have a good reason. Drugs are classified and some classifications make no sense. I don’t want to get into that.

If it was discovered that Heroin cured Breast Cancer and an institution had studies to do so then they would probably declassify Heroin as a cure rather than a narcotic or as a narcotic with therapeutic side effects. Heroin as it stands is a narcotic that is not used for medicinal purposes.

They is the FDA.

"but not be “us” "

What does that mean?

And if what counts as a drug or what drug to make illegal is up to us, then why would the Church say anything in the CCC?

Or is the Church speaking outside of its authority again?

 

[CopticChristian]

"but not be “us” "

What does that mean?

And if what counts as a drug or what drug to make illegal is up to us, then why would the Church say anything in the CCC?

Or is the Church speaking outside of its authority again?

Fake,

Thank you for catching that. I try to proof read everything…

“but not by us”

The Church, I believe is saying to follow the laws. If it is declared that Marijuana is legal and therapeutic then follow the laws. If a drug is illegal then don’t use it. The Church is not saying that illegal drugs are OK…it is not saying using prescription drugs are OK…but use them as prescribed…a little common sense here…

The Church is not speaking outside it’s authority…More to come later on this…

 

[Bill_7154]

"but not be “us” "

What does that mean?

And if what counts as a drug or what drug to make illegal is up to us, then why would the Church say anything in the CCC?

Or is the Church speaking outside of its authority again?

What I find interesting, is that when the AMA has been called to testify before congress in relation to whether or not to make drugs illegal, and/or under what ‘classification’ they should fall, the congress has consistently tossed away the advice of the AMA and made certain drugs illegal despite recommendations from the AMA that they should not do so.

A somewhat recent (in the 80’s I think) was the case of steriods. The AMA recommended against making them illegal, congress made them illegal.

There are historical examples of other drugs as well.

Why should I have any faith or trust in a government that throws aside the opinions of medical professionals when it comes to things like drugs and instead hold up the views of beaurocrats that are certainly less well informed than doctors are when it comes to things like drugs?

I don’t. And this is yet another reason I have contempt for government.

God Bless,
Bill

 

[Bill_7154]

Fake,

Thank you for catching that. I try to proof read everything…

“but not by us”

The Church, I believe is saying to follow the laws. If it is declared that Marijuana is legal and therapeutic then follow the laws. If a drug is illegal then don’t use it. The Church is not saying that illegal drugs are OK…it is not saying using prescription drugs are OK…but use them as prescribed…a little common sense here…

The Church is not speaking outside it’s authority…More to come later on this…

But it doesn’t say that man should punnish other men for using them, or in what particular ways they should be punnished, and if different punnishments should be doled out for using different drugs or different ammt’s of drugs, does it?

God Bless,
Bill

 

[CopticChristian]

But it doesn’t say that man should punnish other men for using them, or in what particular ways they should be punnished, and if different punnishments should be doled out for using different drugs or different ammt’s of drugs, does it?

God Bless,
Bill

Bill,

I don’t think the Church is saying anything about this. I do believe that the Church as Paul says that you should obey the laws. How the laws are enforced is not the issue with the Church for drugs. If something is illegal don’t use it. If you do then you have violated the law. Here is what Paul says and I am confident that the Church agrees.

Be Subject to Government

  1Every person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God. 2Therefore whoever resists authority has opposed the ordinance of God; and they who have opposed will receive condemnation upon themselves. 3For rulers are not a cause of fear for good behavior, but for evil. Do you want to have no fear of authority? Do what is good and you will have praise from the same; 4for it is a minister of God to you for good. But if you do what is evil, be afraid; for it does not bear the sword for nothing; for it is a minister of God, an avenger who brings wrath on the one who practices evil. 5Therefore it is necessary to be in subjection, not only because of wrath, but also for conscience’ sake. 6For because of this you also pay taxes, for rulers are servants of God, devoting themselves to this very thing. 7Render to all what is due them: tax to whom tax is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honor to whom honor.

Here also is the section concerning Drugs in the Catechism…I would take note of a few things.

Respect for health
2288 **Life and physical health are precious gifts entrusted to us by God. **We must take reasonable care of them, taking into account the needs of others and the common good.

Concern for the health of its citizens requires that society help in the attainment of living-conditions that allow them to grow and reach maturity: food and clothing, housing, health care, basic education, employment, and social assistance.

2289 If morality requires respect for the life of the body, it does not make it an absolute value.

It rejects a neo-pagan notion that tends to promote the cult of the body, to sacrifice everything for it’s sake, to idolize physical perfection and success at sports.
By its selective preference of the strong over the weak, such a conception can lead to the perversion of human relationships.

2290 **The virtue of temperance disposes us to avoid every kind of excess: the abuse of food, alcohol, tobacco, or medicine. **Those incur grave guilt who, by drunkenness or a love of speed, endanger their own and others’ safety on the road, at sea, or in the air.

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.

The Catechism in this section is addressing the 5th Commandment…we are to respect our lives and our health and note that the virtue of Temeperance is mentioned. The virtue of temperance is a human virtue, a cardinal virtue, that is rooted to the virtue of Charity. It is by temperance also that concupiscence is harnessed and tamed.

So the Church is saying that while we have the capacity to sin, we are given the vritue of Temperance that is rooted in the virtue of Charity.

I discussed this in post # 31 found here…

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=715970&page=3

Our actions should be directed to the love of God and in taking drugs, respecting our lives, to practice Temperance and obey the laws of the land since those laws are in effect God given as Pauls says…