27 years biatch

[TwoJ's]

Holy shit, this thread spiraled out of control since I last clicked. I for one have to agree that AA is definitely not the answer for me. When I was in high school I was arrested, and the court forced me to to go six months of counseling and attend weekly AA meetings. From the first day I went there, I felt the same way that I did when my mom would drag me to church. I felt I didn't belong there because I didn't agree with what they were teaching, but I was forced to be there. So I sat through it.

I don't for one second buy in to the AA philosophy. It's simply not how I think or view things. Maybe it's the religious aspect of it, or just their attitude about how people "like me" should behave, and if I don't then I'm a bad person and I'm going to end up dead or in jail.

That was a long time ago, and I tried to drink in moderation. It worked for a couple years, and then I came to this environment. Abstaining is just what will work for me. I don't think its the only way. When I was a child, I saw my father relapse and his life seriously deteriorate in a very short amount of time. I woke up one day, and I could picture myself in that situation down the road, so I just quit drinking.

Nothing more to it.

[Rigmaster]

Hey you guys, move over- there's just not enough room for all of us on Blunt's sack!!!!






;)

[parkerbink]

Today I choose not to (or to) take a drink, but 14 plus years ago I was a practicing alcoholic with no choice. AA/NA helped me get to the point I am at now. Over the years I have known and seen many people die that just could not get it.

I am in no way saying anyone else should not drink or that AA is the only solution I am saying it was mine.

I don't care when people that have no experience with AA put it down but when I hear blanket negative statements quoting "stats" and demanding stats of AA's success I get irritated.

AA has no stats due to the simple fact that they are ANONYMOUS there is no record keeping. They do not claim any success rate. I can tell you they help many more than they hinder and all that fail do so by choice.

[Turf1600]

If someone has issues with drinking, there's the temptation to start drinking and/or the inability to realize when they've had too much.
Not giving into #1 prevents #2 from being an issue. Don't you read anything?

How do you know you have problems with drinking before you start??

[StereoInstaller1]

Maybe Luke aka stereoinstaller can post that evidence he claims to have, but every single thing I've seen has AA not having an improvement of remission than spontaneous but rather sometimes worse.

First, let me tell you this: the only requirement for membership in AA is a desire to stop drinking.

Get it, the ONLY requirement, as in nothing else? No secret handshake, no special powers, nothing...just a DESIRE to stop drinking.

If you want to quit drinking, AA is the ONLY proven place to go. There is no organization, no structure, no leaders, nothing. AA has no money, no promotional gimmicks, no membership drives, absolutely nothing.

Just a bunch of sober drunks who try to help other drunks get sober.

AA passes the hat at each meeting just to pay rent, buy coffee and help keep the offices open...which are 99.99% staffed with volunteers.

In fact, I will offer you this: Try it for 30 days. Prove to us you can do it. Prove to us that your argument has actual substance, prove that AA is a cult...If brainwashing is happening, it sounds to me like there are plenty of dirty minds that need washing.


I can tell you this: The statistics are very against anyone attempting to get sober. Few make it past their first week. Fewer still make it past their first month...and so on...very few make it past their first year, much less decade.

Since you say you like the debate, I have proof (as in statistics) that alcohol is responsible for over 100,000 deaths per year.

Statistically speaking, consider the enormous numbers of people who have tried AA, first to "dry out" and then tried "moderation" and then "dropped out" of AA...the evidence is clear..."problem drinkers" do NOT respond well to "moderation".

If I knew more about how to dig up good statistics, I would find out how many people who were once cited for DUI (meaning they HAD to do some kind of treatment) ended up dead, due to alcohol, either cirrhosis (or other alcohol related medical issues), fatal drunk driving (or how many others did they kill).

Maybe some smart college graduate could find some statistics to go with that.

So, basically, buckwheat, I can show you many drinkers who do moderation just fine. My GF is a perfect example. One of millions, I am sure.

Moderate drinkers are not who we are talking about here. We are talking about the Chronic Alcoholic...the classic drunk. Unable to live even a single day without getting (or staying) drunk, the guy (or girl) who has drank (or drugged, right?) away all he ever had, hasn't drawn a sober breath in years.

Show me one "Chronic Alcoholic" with documented late stage alcoholism who adopted a policy of "moderation" and has lived 27 years with "moderate" alcohol use.

Yeah right...didn't think so.

In fact, if you show me ONE, just one, and I will show you 10 or more who gave up alcohol in late stage chronic alcoholism and have lived 27 years.

In fact, I already have their stories in a book, all collected and neatly printed.

Show me what you got, buckwheat!

You say it is a copout, I say you are talking out your ass. I have evidence collected over damn near 100 years...what you got?

Luke

[rwh11385]

"No one else said "That's great for you, but that's not the only possible way - just as many people successfully dealt with the issue with moderation and self-control"."

back that up with facts heeter. you cant because you spew bullshit you have no clue about

there was a study, it's bookmarked at home and thought i quoted it in this thread. 12% abstainers 11.7% moderation I think in the fully recovered group (among those who sought help that is, not just decided to moderate problem drinking on their own). also, a study of those who followed AA did better but if they went and didn't bought it, they actually did much worse. overall, the success rate is the same as spontaneous remission, so the effect of AA is 0% - unless Luke has different numbers

[Farbin Kaiber]

devil weed, let's chat. Paging Jeremiel5.

[blunttech]

"No one else said "That's great for you, but that's not the only possible way - just as many people successfully dealt with the issue with moderation and self-control"."

back that up with facts heeter. you cant because you spew bullshit you have no clue about

[rwh11385]

yo heet let's talk about the devil weed

Some people get by but for the majority of people I know and many of whom I have been friends with - it is a great negative influence on their future. Beyond behavioral changes, there is also employment-loss risk, and the (present in 39 states absolutely and all most likely) legal risk. Not worth it IMO, and don't feel positively about those who use it, and wish those I know who do would stop.

[z31maniac]

Thanks for the new sig Mr. Anderson.

[FredK]

yo heet let's talk about the devil weed

[Jand3rson]

Maybe, but like I replied to parkerbink - there's a difference in choosing to abstain because you want to and believing its the only way.

I agree 100%.

[rwh11385]

That's not what I want. But you could have done things differently. You could have just come in saying "I don't agree with how AA works" or something like that, but you instead just kicked everyone that it has worked for in the teeth by saying it's a cop-out and that they're too weak to handle drugs and alcohol in moderation. You were out of line from the get-go, and you know it.

Maybe, but like I replied to parkerbink - there's a difference in choosing to abstain because you want to and believing its the only way.
All too much of that belief seemed to be overwhelming in the thread so I was annoyed by the sheep.

There's a difference between a difference of opinion and trying to make one opinion the only one. Everyone who attacked on me was defending the norm that was existing in the thread that the only feasible solution was abstaining. A group of open-minded people would allow for the moderation, abstain-because-of-choice-and-risk-reduction, and abstaining-for-fear-of-death-and-need-support-of-religion version.

[rwh11385]

How the hell do you know?

If someone has issues with drinking, there's the temptation to start drinking and/or the inability to realize when they've had too much.
Not giving into #1 prevents #2 from being an issue. Don't you read anything?

[Jand3rson]

Hey, but Josh perhaps you want a forum where EVERYONE is forced to think the exact same way and people who don't buy into it are flamed.

so be it


thought this was america though

That's not what I want. But you could have done things differently. You could have just come in saying "I don't agree with how AA works" or something like that, but you instead just kicked everyone that it has worked for in the teeth by saying it's a cop-out and that they're too weak to handle drugs and alcohol in moderation. You were out of line from the beginning. Instead of presenting your argument in a civil manner, you instead just insulted everyone.