Discourse

[Markus]

Blue Moon" <mfoco_uk@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:45161ea7ff8b6489b0890a4dfa2ac76d@free.teranew s.com...

Moonraker;

You claim that my posts " are anti-AA, bashing 12 steps whenever
possible, denigrating those who do attend AA?"

I will freely admit that I will challenge what is put out by AA, or
that which people, regardless of their membership in AA put out if I
disagree with it. Same as you do. Does this mean that you are anti
non-step, bashing non-step whenever possible, and denigrating those
who attend non-step?

You tell me.

First off, my only hope is that folks who read what I write (that are
already working a step program) will walk away with a sense that they
are not "selling out" their step program or friends in the program by
looking into a non-step program.

For those looking for the first time my only desire for them is that
they walk away understanding that there is indeed non step programs
available to them. In fact, the methods most used are non step.

The rest is just for fun ;-)

Now, below is a perfect example of someone claiming fiction to be
fact. When I see such, I address it--directly. Now you can call that
what you will, I call it nothing more than correcting a wrong.

> Having realised this reality about his situation, an alcoholic is
> different from a heavy drinker in that a decision to quit on so-called
> "will power" typically fails sooner or later.

This statement, as written, is misleading at best, purposely false at
worst.

"But it doesn't hurt at the level of GSO for AA to have humility and
understand that 60 percent do it without AA" --George Vaillant
Grapevine May 2001

Only in AA is it taught that a persons inner strength (will power) is
not enough to defeat a dependency. You do the math.

-Markus
--
to reply, remove 4u

[Markus]

On Wed, 13 Aug 2003 20:37:56 +0200, "Mias"
<emiasNOSPAM@NOSPAMnetactive.co.za> wrote:

>Marcus
>Please explain why you have a cross-posting address to
>alt.recovery.from-12-steps in the address line.

As soon as you explain why it is you cannot spell my name? That is
the french spelling of it and I am not french. Fuck them wine slurpin
cheese eatin bitches ;-)

Oh, because the original was crossposted by Blue Moon?

On that note, how come you don't chastise your buddies for cross
posting? Just trying to further the stereotype that steppers are
hypocrites?

>Secondly, why do you not hold your anti-AA discussions
> in that group where it seem to be less crazy?

In which group? Neither are 12 step groups, so discussion of non step
methods would be appropriate in either group. Whether you like that
or not is irrelevant.

>This group was only started in the beginning of August.

You are typing to hear yourself type again Mias, as you haven't a clue
of what you say.

Below is one of the original messages from Sean who created arfs
------------

From: Sean <sean@snerts-r-us.org>
Subject: Finally!
Date: 1997/12/17
Message-ID: <34985880.E4FA2944@snerts-r-us.org>#1/1
Mime-Version: 1.0
Reply-To: sean@snerts-r-us.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="------------90A8E7A175B1DE8EFF45C494"
X-Complaints-To: Email abuse@news2.new-york.net if this posting is
inappropriate
X-Trace: news2.new-york.net 882399279 17318 (None) [165.254.1.209]
Organization: None
Newsgroups: alt.recovery.from-12-steps


Hahahaha.

Finally I find an ISP who is carrying this group!!!!

I first suggested this group on alt.config and started posting control
messages 1 month ago this friday. Finally my efforts pay off.

I will be posting a FAQ soon.

Here is a copy of the booster I have been sending out as a control
message, which contains descriptions of what I intended the group for:

> From: Sean@Snerts-r-us.org
> Newsgroups: alt.config,alt.recovery.from-12-steps
> Control: newgroup alt.recovery.from-12-steps
> Subject: cmsg newgroup alt.recovery.from-12-steps
> Summary: discussed in alt.recovery.aa, substantial interest, appropriate name
> Expires:
> Approved: Sean@snerts-r-us.org
> Sender: Sean@snerts-r-us.org
> Reply-To: Sean@snerts-r-us.org
> Distribution:
> Organization: None at all
> Keywords: Recovery, Cult, AA, NA, Addiction, Brainwashing
>
> booster
>
> Comments:
> This was discussed in alt.config and for the last 6 months on alt.recovery.aa
>
> For your newsgroups file:
> alt.recovery.from-12-steps Discussions of harm caused by 12 step recovery
>
> Charter:
> This group is for critics of AA and other twelve step recovery programs to post to.
>
> Justification of Readership:
> The idea of this group has been batted around on alt.recovery.aa for several
> months now, in response to the large number of critics posting to that NG.
> The readers of the alt.recovery.AA NG would very much appreciate it if critics
> had their own NG so they do not have to post to alt.recovery.aa (as if
> creating this group will keep critics out of a.r.aa!!!)

[Xanadu]

On Wed, 13 Aug 2003 18:06:46 +0000, Markus wrote:

>> Having realized this reality about his situation, an alcoholic is
>> different from a heavy drinker in that a decision to quit on so-called
>> "will power" typically fails sooner or later.
>
> This statement, as written, is misleading at best, purposely false at
> worst.


How is this false? I am not the strongest willed person that has ever
walked the Earth, but I really have tried by myself and have failed. I'm,
personally, not into the whole "spiritual" part of AA (perhaps I'm
misunderstanding, of course...) that you bring up in the rest of your post
that I haven't quoted, but I know that people like myself
especially, need those people that *want* to help people like me. Take a
look at the replies to the messages I have posted.

You are so wrong, it's disheartening. (or at least from my
perspective... Again, I could be totally wrong.)

[Moonraker]

"Xanadu" <Xanadu@inorbit.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2003.08.13.20.07.45.639783@inorbit.com...
> On Wed, 13 Aug 2003 18:06:46 +0000, Markus wrote:
>
> >> Having realized this reality about his situation, an alcoholic is
> >> different from a heavy drinker in that a decision to quit on so-called
> >> "will power" typically fails sooner or later.
> >
> > This statement, as written, is misleading at best, purposely false at
> > worst.
>
>
> How is this false? I am not the strongest willed person that has ever
> walked the Earth, but I really have tried by myself and have failed. I'm,
> personally, not into the whole "spiritual" part of AA (perhaps I'm
> misunderstanding, of course...) that you bring up in the rest of your post
> that I haven't quoted, but I know that people like myself
> especially, need those people that *want* to help people like me. Take a
> look at the replies to the messages I have posted.
>
> You are so wrong, it's disheartening. (or at least from my
> perspective... Again, I could be totally wrong.)

That's Marcus's aim....to dishearten you. He cares not about your sobriety,
only that he wants to further propagate the blind hatred of the program of
AA. He's offered no help, no alternatives. Only hatred.

Xanadu...one suggestion. Go sit in on a few AA meetings before you head off
to detox. Tell them you are a newcomer and let folks tell you what it was
like and how it is now. Get some encouragement.

[Markus]

On Wed, 13 Aug 2003 15:40:27 -0400, "Moonraker"
<fuggadaboutit@bellsouth.net> wrote:

>Why are you quoting Blue Moon? What's he got to do with this?

You really are dense aren't you?

And BTW, I'm not denigrating you, you are doing a fine job all on your
own.

>Have you disagreed with any ARF'ers recently? Ahhhh....I didn't think so.

Recently? No, but I have. I also participate in other discussion
groups than alt.recovery.* So what?

> Doesn't mean I'm "against" the St Louis Cardinals.

So you would root for St Louis when they play Atlanta?

>No. Until Anus Odor and the rest of the ARF trolls

You show your true colors when you start a paragraph like this.

>Do your thing and get over your hatred of AA.

No hatred of AA, plenty of distaste for bullshit of which AA has
plenty of.

> It's here, gonna be here, despite the constant bleating

Me too. I suggest you get over it.

::: snipped some mindless rant :::

>>In fact, the methods most used are non step.

>Horseshit. Prove that statement.

I put up a statement from AA spokesperson George Vaillant where he
claims only 40% of those *who seek help* attain such via AA. You
chose to snip that and label it as "unintelligible babble." How
convenient.

Furthermore, many people have posted links to studies that show the
vast majority of folks end their addictions without any program.
Because you have chosen to close your eyes to these facts is your
problem, and suggests it is you that has a problem with folks finding
a way other than the 12 steps. Why does it bother you that what I
write may steer someone to a non step program?

>You obviously disagree with the statement. That's OK, I don't care if you
>believe it or not. I saw the truth of that statement in my own life and the
>lives of lots of my friends.

No, it isn't a case of me disagreeing with the statement. It was a
false statement, period. It is no different then if you claimed that
all people like the taste of strawberries just because you and a few
of your friends did. As soon as I find someone who dislikes
strawberries your claim then becomes false.

Again, it is only the step program that teaches folks to believe they
cannot end an addiction, or cannot be taught how to end an addiction
via empowerment, willpower, utilization of inner strengths or whatever
label you wish to put on it.

Some redundancy for the mentally challenged: Since people, whom have
been diagnosed as alcohol dependent (commonly referred to as
alcoholism) do indeed recover utilizing non step programs, which do
rely on the utilization of ones inner strengths (will power), then
making an empirical claim that those diagnosed as alcohol dependent
cannot rely upon willpower to end such is obviously just plain false.
You don't have to agree with that analogy, and I suspect that you
won't as your desperate and diligent attempt to not agree to anything
that casts AA in a negative light--regardless of the overwhelming
facts--is quite transparent.

Aside: You also made some adolescent snide remark claiming once again
to know how I feel on a subject (taking my inventory I believe you
would call it in your subcultural world of step). For clarification I
haven't any problem with someone who has convinced themselves that
they can only end THIER addiction through religous/spiritual means.
Where I draw the line is when it is claimed publicly that those with
an addiction will only arrest such by the same methodology, or maybe
theology would be a better word. Regardless, that is what moon's
statement implied. He knew it, and you knew it.

Well, maybe you didn't.

-Markus

[Markus]

On Wed, 13 Aug 2003 16:07:46 -0400, Xanadu <Xanadu@inorbit.com> wrote:

>On Wed, 13 Aug 2003 18:06:46 +0000, Markus wrote:
>
>>> Having realized this reality about his situation, an alcoholic is
>>> different from a heavy drinker in that a decision to quit on so-called
>> "will power" typically fails sooner or later.

>> This statement, as written, is misleading at best, purposely false at
>> worst.

>How is this false?

I just answered that in another post.

> I am not the strongest willed person that has ever
>walked the Earth, but I really have tried by myself and have failed.

I believed this too when I first started looking for help. I thought
for sure the only way I was going to ever quit was to either overdose
or put a gun in my mouth and squeeze. The 12 step program will
exploit this in order to get you to believe in a higher power--once
you've first convinced yourself that you are powerless of course.

Non step programs will teach you that you are indeed an autonomous
human being with plenty of self will, and will teach you how to tap
this self will effectively. Something up until now you haven't been
able to accomplish. Nothing to be ashamed of, I've been there along
with millions of others (crack cocaine was my drug of choice).

>that I haven't quoted, but I know that people like myself
>especially, need those people that *want* to help people like me.

People like you? What? A human being that has found himself dependant
upon a substance? No biggy, again, millions have been there, and
there is help. You have also convinced yourself that you "need"
people to help you. Having a group to interact and work with is nice,
but not absolutely necessary for YOU to correct whatever it is you
wish to correct. There are plenty of online chat groups you could
participate in with some of them having real life meetings such as LSR
and SMART. They aren't as prevalent as 12 step meetings of course,
and maybe some step meetings will help you find you way if you insist
on attending meetings and step ones are all that are available in your
area.

My suggestion would be to not rule out any method until you
investigate them.

> Take a look at the replies to the messages I have posted.

"The road to hell is paved with good intentions." I used to think I
knew what that meant. I didn't until I got involved with a group of
people who sincerely believed they were looking out for my best
interests.

The bottom line is if you find a method that just totally agrees with
you, then who cares what anyone has to say about that method. Adopt
it and utilize it as now it is all about you and getting yourself back
into being a part of life. You've already said that you've had some
reservations about the AA program. That could be a red flag that you
shouldn't ignore. Then again, you may go to some of the sites I am
going to post at the end of this and find a whole bunch of red flags.
In that case, go with the one with the least flags ;-)

http://www.unhooked.com/lsr/faq.htm

http://www.smartrecovery.org/faq.html

http://www.rationalrecovery.com/Q%26A.html

Best to ya,
Markus

[Moonraker]

"Markus" <markusx14u@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:8l5ljvsna2846hrl7pif0t216lt9fan9uh@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 13 Aug 2003 15:40:27 -0400, "Moonraker"
>>
> You show your true colors when you start a paragraph like this.

Exactly. Get over it. I must have missed the post by the thought police
demanding that I "make nice" with you.

>
>
> No hatred of AA, plenty of distaste for bullshit of which AA has
> plenty of.

Now, Einstein, apply that same thought process to differentiate between
"religion" and "spirituality".


>
> I put up a statement from AA spokesperson George Vaillant where he
> claims only 40% of those *who seek help* attain such via AA. You
> chose to snip that and label it as "unintelligible babble." How
> convenient.

BFD...."you" put up a statement. Whoop-de-fuckin-do. Point to a URL where
the entire transcript is posted. Like I'd believe anything you
mis-intrepret. You are just parroting Anus Odor's "website".

>
> Furthermore, many people have posted links to studies that show the
> vast majority of folks end their addictions without any program.

Is that because they end up "dead"? That'd be close to 100%, eh?

>Why does it bother you that what I
> write may steer someone to a non step program?

What business is it of yours "what program" anybody might use, or not? Who
are you here to help?


> No, it isn't a case of me disagreeing with the statement. It was a
> false statement, period.

How is it false? Not because YOU say it's false or misleading. Prove it.
I said it was true for me, therefore it can't be false in your black and
white world.


It is no different then if you claimed that
> all people like the taste of strawberries just because you and a few
> of your friends did.

I made the true statement (not a "claim") that I found the (now snipped)
quote true in my life and in the lives of a few of my friends. You lept to
the conclusion that "everybody" has that conclusion. Pay attention. If
it's true for 20 people, how, then can it be always be a false statement?
It's either true or false, according to your original statement.

As soon as I find someone who dislikes
> strawberries your claim then becomes false.

In your twisted world, maybe. You really need to be working on your
reasoning and logic, bubba.

>
> Again, it is only the step program that teaches folks to believe they
> cannot end an addiction, or cannot be taught how to end an addiction
> via empowerment, willpower, utilization of inner strengths or whatever
> label you wish to put on it.

WHERE in the steps am I taught to believe this? I've been around a few
24hrs....must have missed this. Tell me EXACTLY where I'm told I MUST "end
my addiction" using these methods. MUST? Be REAL specific, now.
>
> Some redundancy for the mentally challenged: Since people, whom have
> been diagnosed as alcohol dependent (commonly referred to as
> alcoholism) do indeed recover utilizing non step programs, which do
> rely on the utilization of ones inner strengths (will power), then
> making an empirical claim that those diagnosed as alcohol dependent
> cannot rely upon willpower to end such is obviously just plain false.

A 56 word sentence that says what, exactly? That people can and do
"recover" without using a 12 step program? So? BFD. What's your point?
Making some redundant statement and then taking an argumentative position
proves your lack of reasoning and logic.

Or comprehension of the English language? "Since people, whom have been..."
WTF does this mean?


> You don't have to agree with that analogy, and I suspect that you
> won't

If it were in understandable English, I might.


as your desperate and diligent attempt to not agree to anything
> that casts AA in a negative light--regardless of the overwhelming
> facts--is quite transparent.

OVERWHELMING FACTS? Heh. I'm under no delusion that AA is
letter-perfect. Never said that, or even suggested it. You (and Stumpy
and Anus Odor) have proved one thing. If you can't dazzle 'em with
diamonds, you can always try to baffle them with bullshit.


>
> Aside: You also made some adolescent snide remark claiming once again
> to know how I feel on a subject (taking my inventory I believe you
> would call it in your subcultural world of step).

And "subcultural world of step" isn't adolescent and snide? Fuck you.


For clarification I
> haven't any problem with someone who has convinced themselves that
> they can only end THIER addiction through religous/spiritual means.

Then why are you belaboring all this? Other people's recovery is none of
your business, is it? You don't like how it's done? Start your own
recovery center.

> Where I draw the line is when it is claimed publicly that those with
> an addiction will only arrest such by the same methodology, or maybe
> theology would be a better word.

You keep claiming that AA makes this statement. "Who" makes this public
claim? GSO? Somebody in a meeting? You read it on a newsgroup? where
did this start? To whom do you attribute this statement? Is it part of the
"dogma" I've missed, or should we just chalk this up to another of your
unsubstantiated, baseless misstatements?


We might, however, agree about deleting the word "only" in your above
statement. I'd be willing to agree if you substituted "frequently", or
"better be", or "often", or "mostly" or "many times".


Regardless, that is what moon's
> statement implied. He knew it, and you knew it.

Since you didn't include the snip to which you refer, I don't know what I
knew about it. Try to be specific, OK?

[Bobby L.]

"Moonraker" <moonrak9@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:R9z_a.7915$_3.5698@fe02.atl2.webusenet.com...
>
> "Markus" <markusx14u@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:8l5ljvsna2846hrl7pif0t216lt9fan9uh@4ax.com...
> > On Wed, 13 Aug 2003 15:40:27 -0400, "Moonraker"
> >>
> > You show your true colors when you start a paragraph like this.
>
> Exactly. Get over it. I must have missed the post by the thought police
> demanding that I "make nice" with you.
>
> >
> >
> > No hatred of AA, plenty of distaste for bullshit of which AA has
> > plenty of.
>
> Now, Einstein, apply that same thought process to differentiate between
> "religion" and "spirituality".
>
>
> >
> > I put up a statement from AA spokesperson George Vaillant where he
> > claims only 40% of those *who seek help* attain such via AA. You
> > chose to snip that and label it as "unintelligible babble." How
> > convenient.
>
> BFD...."you" put up a statement. Whoop-de-fuckin-do. Point to a URL
where
> the entire transcript is posted. Like I'd believe anything you
> mis-intrepret. You are just parroting Anus Odor's "website".>


Damn, Moon --- Not bad! He stole this quote directly from AO's website...
Didn't even give him credit. That's gotta suck after all AO's hard work....

Unless of course he did give himself credit. What was that about sockpuppet?

Bobby L

[Virtualoso]

In article <kdtkjvg7prftskp6mibsus3u1lhs0tr5k1@4ax.com>, Markus
<markusx14u@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

> First off, my only hope is that folks who read what I write (that are
> already working a step program) will walk away with a sense that they
> are not "selling out" their step program or friends in the program by
> looking into a non-step program.
>
> For those looking for the first time my only desire for them is that
> they walk away understanding that there is indeed non step programs
> available to them. In fact, the methods most used are non step.

So your first ("only"?) hope (purpose? intention?) is to influence and
persuade other people.

And your second, is to influence and persuades.

> The rest is just for fun ;-)

> Only in AA is it taught that a persons inner strength (will power) is
> not enough to defeat a dependency. You do the math.

Well, that's just flat untrue. Plain wrong. Mistaken, at best. Possible
an outright lie. For instance, distinguished and notable experts in the
field of psychology clearly teach the very same thing. And colleagues
of theirs in medical sciences and practices.

Don't you like to talk about "denial"?

[Virtualoso]

In article <Dcw_a.6725$rh1.2778@fe04.atl2.webusenet.com>, Moonraker
<fuggadaboutit@bellsouth.net> wrote:

> Where you go beyond all comprehension is your claim of "misleading" and
> "purposely false". Words fail me to describe my astonishment at such a
> claim. It will be interesting to see your substantiation of this nonsense.

Most of what's seen by the detrAActors can be found on the oft touted
(by the same handful of folks, that is) indoctrination websites. These
weave an elaborate fabrication of twisty threads from all the strands
not found in reality but spun by these "special" minds. And a much more
blatant, unveiled Conspiracy Theorist basis is presented.
Unfortunately, the whole shebang lines right up with numerous
diagnostic symptoms of particular pathological disorders. You don't
understand all that? Well, maybe not beyond just this much.

[Virtualoso]

In article <8l5ljvsna2846hrl7pif0t216lt9fan9uh@4ax.com>, Markus
<markusx14u@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

> I put up a statement from AA spokesperson George Vaillant where he
> claims only 40% of those *who seek help* attain such via AA.

How long ago was that? He did that as an "AA spokesperson" did he? Or
are you just purposefull mischaracterizing and lieing about this stuff,
again?

> Furthermore, many people have posted links to studies that show the
> vast majority of folks end their addictions without any program.

"Many people"? As in pretty much the same handful, and the same
"studies" which amount to pretty much just the same couple? However, AA
itself has always flatly acknowledged that any number of folks might
end their "addictions" on their own, and also flatly states that any
"addiction" other than what might be involved in alcoholism is an
outside issue as far as AA is concerned, and ought not be brought there
for help.

But "any program"? The "vast majority"? You'd be hard pressed to come
up with much at all that verifiably asserts that, regarding
"addiction". Now that I've said so, I'm sure you must have some really
good reason to not even try.

[Virtualoso]

In article <8l5ljvsna2846hrl7pif0t216lt9fan9uh@4ax.com>, Markus
<markusx14u@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

> Again, it is only the step program that teaches folks to believe they
> cannot end an addiction, or cannot be taught how to end an addiction
> via empowerment, willpower, utilization of inner strengths or whatever
> label you wish to put on it.

Again, you are very, very wrong that "the step program" is the "only"
source of this assertion. On two counts:

1) What is "the step program"? For instance, AA teaches no such thing.

2) Psychiatrists, psychologists, neurologists, other clinicians and
medical doctors do teach that, too.

[Virtualoso]

In article <pakljvgb7p1gov6gb5melelutbkp29svqm@4ax.com>, Markus
<markusx14u@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

> "But it doesn't hurt at the level of GSO for AA to have humility and
> understand that 60 percent do it without AA" --George Vaillant
> Grapevine May 2001

60% of...?

[Virtualoso]

In article <pakljvgb7p1gov6gb5melelutbkp29svqm@4ax.com>, Markus
<markusx14u@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

> Because folks to this date are still being told by fuckwits like
> yourself that the step program is the only way? Maybe not in as many
> words, but implied.

LOL. The "implied" suspicion/projection. Again. It's your delusion,
friend.

[Virtualoso]

In article <pakljvgb7p1gov6gb5melelutbkp29svqm@4ax.com>, Markus
<markusx14u@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

> Especially when you accept as permissible
> sweeping generalizations such as "...an alcoholic will fail if he/she
> tries to fix themselves utilizing will power." (False statement)

Except for those that it's true for.

[Virtualoso]

In article <fv9ljvsbluj9ftdka3v8g129c25lo40ds9@4ax.com>, Markus
<markusx14u@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

> The bottom line is if you find a method that just totally agrees with
> you, then who cares what anyone has to say about that method.

Heck, you can't even say that about yourself regarding *other* people
and their choices.

[Virtualoso]

In article <fv9ljvsbluj9ftdka3v8g129c25lo40ds9@4ax.com>, Markus
<markusx14u@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

> You've already said that you've had some
> reservations about the AA program. That could be a red flag that you
> shouldn't ignore.

Or it might be quite a lot like the reservations you've had about not
drinking or doing drugs, which maybe you've had some ignoring problems
with.

[Markus]

On Wed, 13 Aug 2003 17:58:32 -0700, Virtualoso <virtualoso@dot.com>
wrote:

>How long ago was that?

Read the citation.

> He did that as an "AA spokesperson" did he?

At the time I believe his official title was that of trustee.

>Or are you just purposefull mischaracterizing and lieing
> about this stuff, again?

No, it is only you trying to create that illusion with your
superfluous circular meaningless logic. But since I've not taken the
time to figure out agents kill file, I will have some fun.

>> Furthermore, many people have posted links to studies that show the
>> vast majority of folks end their addictions without any program.
>
>"Many people"?

Yups.

>However, AA itself has always flatly acknowledged that any
> number of folks might end their "addictions" on their own,

Your just repeating the citation. Nothing original or meaningful to
add?

Not surprised.

-Markus
--
to reply, remove 4u

[Markus]

On Wed, 13 Aug 2003 18:01:15 -0700, Virtualoso <virtualoso@dot.com>
wrote:

>In article <8l5ljvsna2846hrl7pif0t216lt9fan9uh@4ax.com>, Markus
><markusx14u@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>> Again, it is only the step program that teaches folks to believe they
>> cannot end an addiction, or cannot be taught how to end an addiction
>> via empowerment, willpower, utilization of inner strengths or whatever
>> label you wish to put on it.
>
>Again, you are very, very wrong that "the step program" is the "only"
>source of this assertion. On two counts:
>
>1) What is "the step program"? For instance, AA teaches no such thing.

Wow. OK. So your saying that AA teaches its members that they can
indeed quit drinking using willpower and can forgo the notion of
higher powers? Interesting.

>2) Psychiatrists, psychologists, neurologists, other clinicians and
>medical doctors do teach that, too.

We were talking about programs that folks can utilize to quit
drinking or more generally utilize to end a dependency. I didn't know
that some obscure individual with a title represented a program. But
I could see how you would want to spin what I had to say. You have
some unknown desperate reason to it appears.

-Markus
--
to reply, remove 4u

[Virtualoso]

In article <n8pljvc26he8e822md82rkiscs16s4t0lg@4ax.com>, Markus
<markusx14u@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

> > He did that as an "AA spokesperson" did he?
>
> At the time I believe his official title was that of trustee.

But not AA Spokesperson, right?

> >Or are you just purposefull mischaracterizing and lieing
> > about this stuff, again?
>
> No, it is only you ...

No, that was definitely you posing what you were.

> >However, AA itself has always flatly acknowledged that any
> > number of folks might end their "addictions" on their own,
>
> Your just repeating the citation. Nothing original or meaningful to
> add?

Except you keep pretending and lieing that AA doesn't acknowledge this
openly, and quite aside and quite otherwise from whatever Valliant
might say. You're a simple liar about all this. For some reason.

[Virtualoso]

In article <8lpljv4giip2vk0jma5gtkehbpg1t1958f@4ax.com>, Markus
<markusx14u@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

> On Wed, 13 Aug 2003 18:01:15 -0700, Virtualoso <virtualoso@dot.com>
> wrote:
>
> >In article <8l5ljvsna2846hrl7pif0t216lt9fan9uh@4ax.com>, Markus
> ><markusx14u@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> >
> >> Again, it is only the step program that teaches folks to believe they
> >> cannot end an addiction, or cannot be taught how to end an addiction
> >> via empowerment, willpower, utilization of inner strengths or whatever
> >> label you wish to put on it.
> >
> >Again, you are very, very wrong that "the step program" is the "only"
> >source of this assertion. On two counts:
> >
> >1) What is "the step program"? For instance, AA teaches no such thing.
>
> Wow. OK. So your saying ...

I'm saying what I just said.

> >2) Psychiatrists, psychologists, neurologists, other clinicians and
> >medical doctors do teach that, too.
>
> We were talking about programs that folks can utilize to quit
> drinking or more generally utilize to end a dependency. I didn't know
> that some obscure individual with a title represented a program. But
> I could see how you would want to spin what I had to say. You have
> some unknown desperate reason to it appears.

"We were talking about" whatever "we" are talking about. You've several
times, in several posts, kept asserting that "AA is the only" that
teach that "will power" alone is all a person needs. And that's flat
out wrong, whether we're referring to "a program" (whatever might
qualify as that) or otherwise.

You're a weasling liar. As usual.

[Virtualoso]

In article <fvpljvstu0bvnfc91jpjfdsphceljk7pk8@4ax.com>, Markus
<markusx14u@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

> On Wed, 13 Aug 2003 18:03:19 -0700, Virtualoso <virtualoso@dot.com>
> wrote:
>
> >In article <8l5ljvsna2846hrl7pif0t216lt9fan9uh@4ax.com>, Markus
> ><markusx14u@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> >
> >> Some redundancy for the mentally challenged: Since people, whom have
> >> been diagnosed as alcohol dependent (commonly referred to as
> >> alcoholism) do indeed recover utilizing non step programs, which do
> >> rely on the utilization of ones inner strengths (will power), then
> >> making an empirical claim that those diagnosed as alcohol dependent
> >> cannot rely upon willpower to end such is obviously just plain false.
> >
> >Except for those that it's true.
>
> Correction: For those who have come to believe that is true.

So you may merely believe.

[Virtualoso]

In article <e8qljv84l5me0g51pgd9r8prvcsqrl33mc@4ax.com>, Markus
<markusx14u@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

> On Wed, 13 Aug 2003 17:51:42 -0700, Virtualoso <virtualoso@dot.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Most of what's seen by the detrAActors can be found on the oft touted
> >(by the same handful of folks, that is) indoctrination websites. These
> >weave an elaborate fabrication of twisty threads from all the strands
> >not found in reality but spun
>
> snip snip snip
>
> Nowya've gone an dun it. ....

Mentioned the pathological and disordered nature to those wacky
websites that are the primary reference for so many of these deluded
ARF posted premises.

[Virtualoso]

In article <1060842602.13794.0@echo.uk.clara.net>, Ian Waterhouse wrote:

> "Virtualoso" <virtualoso@dot.com> wrote in message
> news:130820031809445855%virtualoso@dot.com...
> > In article >
> > > Non step programs will teach you that you are indeed an autonomous
> > > human being with plenty of self will, and will teach you how to tap
> > > this self will effectively.
> >
> > Well, such completely nonscientific "beliefs" and outfits
> > indoctrinating people into believing their particular brand of
> > religious faith about intangible, unproven "powers" like "will" and
> > "self" and such are probably not too uncommon. Even if they come in
> > many differing denominations.
>
> And what exactly do you have against the organisations mentioned by
> Markus ...

What, more exactly, do you mean by "have against" them? The above
unproven claim made by marcus is what I replied to.

[rita]

"Virtualoso" <virtualoso@dot.com> wrote in message
news:130820031751420935%virtualoso@dot.com...

> Unfortunately, the whole shebang lines right up with numerous
> diagnostic symptoms of particular pathological disorders.
>
------------------------

And what diagnostic symptoms of which pathological disorder do YOU
display? Inquiring minds want to know.

~Rita

[Virtualoso]

In article <QAR_a.14369$uv.2934769@twister.nyc.rr.com>, rita
<rita66@webtv.net> wrote:

> "Virtualoso" <virtualoso@dot.com> wrote in message
> news:130820031751420935%virtualoso@dot.com...
>
> > Unfortunately, the whole shebang lines right up with numerous
> > diagnostic symptoms of particular pathological disorders.

> And what diagnostic symptoms of which pathological disorder do YOU
> display? Inquiring minds want to know.

Not these characteristic ARFy, anti-AA delusional disorder ones, so
often seen acted out here and in the crank rank amateur books and
websites and special gripe venues they frequently rave about. It's
really a curious phenomena, that the more strident anti-AA and
detrAActors, as few as there actually are, have such a high proportion
of self-proclaimed "disordered," "mentally ill" and even psychiatric
patients.