elsie,

 

i understand what you are saying and maybe you are correct about the lower class and upper class being more into drugs in the past.  i was born in 56 so i guess we aren't too far off age wise from each other.  and, to be totally honest, i think the drugs were better back then cos they weren't cut with all the crap i hear about today that they are cut with.  anyway, i guess i was really just trying to get across that i personally don't have a problem with drug addicts sharing at aa meetings, in spite of the traditions.  i also totally agree with you that the world would be a better place if all people followed this program.  because in reality it really comes down to just love others the way you want to be loved, which is kind of the universal law.

 

cindi

 

Cindi,

Nevertheless, I do agree that the 12 Steps of Recovery can be used to
recover from many maladies. I wish everyone were so fortunate as we are
to be able to work them; I think it would improve the world immensely.

All I was trying to point out is that the per capita drug usage actually
hasn't changed all that much over time. If the crime families have been
supported largely by narcotics--and a few other enterprises--since the
30s, they had to have an awful lot of customers. What has changed is
that middle class young people (and an indeterminate number of aging
hippies) are now addicts so everyone is more aware of the problem. But
I suggest drugs have always been a problem. Its just that it was a
problem of the lower class, who were apparently expendable, and of the
upper class, who had money enough to hide it. The middle class remained
virtually unaffected until the 60s.

I would assume the reason Bill and Bob focused on alcohol is that their
primary problem was alcohol. They had seen the perils that befell the
Oxford Group and the Washingtonians when they tried to be all things to
all people and our founders simply drew a line and said "Alcoholics only."

I'm not trying to quibble with you here. I'm quite enjoying the
discussion. We are, after all, on the same team (recovery). I have
studied the 20s, 30s and 40s extensively; the Noble Experiment and its
fallout fascinate me. I was around in the 50s, though too young to be
aware of anything, but have been fairly compass since the 60s. Drugs
weren't ever talked about in decent society before the 60s, but that
doesn't mean they weren't a devastating problem.

Elsie

cmh176@... wrote:

> Elsie,
>
> yes i am aware of what you wrote in terms of the addicts and the
> cocaine in coca cola but the large scale usage and addiction did not
> exist then. i just personally believe that the steps of aa can be
> used for a drug addict as well as an alcoholic. i'm not suggesting to
> anyone here to agree with me. i also do not believe we can put
> ourselves in 2008 back into 1935 and bill and bob's head to see why
> they focused on alcohol.
>
> cindi
>
> In a message dated 5/31/2008 9:35:22 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
> cobolpoet@mindspring.com writes:
>
> Cindi,
>
> Drug abuse has not changed over the years; there have always been
> addicts and they have always been able to get drugs. What has changed
> is that more drugs are illegal now, the demographics of drug users
> are
> different and the way society views drug abuse has changed
> drastically.
> Coca-Cola originally had cocaine in it. Chinese opium dens were so
> common in cities they were a cliche. Reefers were everywhere. During
> the Prohibition years, the racketeers who had started in business
> dealing only in alcohol, branched out into narcotics as they could
> see
> the handwriting on the wall about the demise of the Noble Experiment
> (i.e., there were enough addicts to make it a profitable business for
> most of the racketeers). What we didn't have in the 20s and the early
> 30s was a program of recovery which, thank God, we have had since
> 1935.
>
> Elsie
>
> cmh176@... <mailto:cmh176%40aol.com> wrote:
>
> > hi jonathan,
> >
> > you will surely get some heated debate on this question. i know (at
> > least i believe) terry is pretty much a stickler about only talking
> > about alcohol but i could be wrong. i don't know if a drug is a
> drug
> > or even care much about that part of it. my personal experience and
> > opinion is that when aa was first established in the 1930's/40's
> a lot
> > of drugs were not easily accessible and their addictive
> qualities were
> > not as well known. maybe the doctor's knew but a lot of drugs were
> > prescribed that today are considered narcotics and/or addictive.
> > obviously, if i tell my doctor i am an alcoholic he/she wouldn't be
> > prescribing me these types of medicine or only if absolutely
> warranted
> > and certainly controlled.
> >
> > anyway, i know what the traditions say about talking about alcohol
> > only but i, personally, disagree. i have only been to na meetings
> > when i was in rehab so i can't say much about them. anyone i ever
> > knew who was in na says that aa talks more about the solution.
> > (that's kind of scary considering what we all see daily). since
> > honesty is a big part of the solution how can we tell drug addicts
> > that they need to say they are alcoholics if they attend and
> share in
> > our meetings? kind of a dishonest approach in my opinion.
> >
> > i guess this is where it comes down to group consciousness and if i
> > disagree with the group i either tolerate their stand or go to a
> > different meeting. i also believe that since we are to practice
> these
> > principles in ALL OUR AFFAIRS, it's not my place to judge.
> >
> > The book was written in 1939 (i think) and drug addiction was
> not what
> > it is today. how can any one of us say that, if bill and bob were
> > living today and didn't have senility, they would change their
> > position. Bob was a drug addict in addition to being an
> alcoholic but
> > his alcoholism was obviously the stronger addiction.
> >
> > For me it's just like my faith. If i say i am a Christian does that
> > mean i don't act that way towards people who are not Christian? not
> > in my faith. that's not what my God tells me. I really just try to
> > be tolerant of other's points of view, when my ego isn't full
> blown.
> > i don't have to agree but it's not my job to change someone else's
> > thoughts either. i try to show by my actions how i live a christian
> > life and since i am human i don't always succeed. God willing i'll
> > never stop trying.
> >
> > cindi
> >
> > In a message dated 5/30/2008 9:31:44 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
> > WooDYFM@aol.com <mailto:WooDYFM%40aol.com> writes:
> >
> > The Daily Reflection today speaks of A.A.'s Primary Purpose - "to
> > stay sober and to help another alcoholic to achieve sobriety".
> > However, so many young people today come into the rooms dual-
> > addicted to drugs other than booze. Should we not allow them to
> > share about the drugs (other than alcohol) that are part of their
> > story? An interesting question that I have heard discussed in
> > the "parking lot" before and after meetings in my area lately. My
> > opinion - a drug is a drug .. my drug of choice happens to be
> > alcohol. I believe we should allow any alcoholic / addict to share
> > their full story so we can best understand where they are coming
> > from. What do YOU think?
> >
> > FYI: The quote in the reading from "A.A. Comes of Age" in Daily
> > Reflections conflicts my viewpoint:
> >
> > OUR PRIMARY PURPOSE
> >
> > "The more A.A. sticks to its primary purpose, the greater will be
> > its helpful influence everywhere."
> > A.A. COMES OF AGE, p. 109
> >
> > Anyway, the weekend is here - get out and enjoy it!
> >
> > Jonathan, Alcoholic from New Jersey
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------
> > Get trade secrets for amazing burgers. Watch "Cooking with Tyler
> > Florence" on AOL Food
> >
> <http://food.aol.com/tyler-florence?video=4&?NCID=aolfod00030000000002
> <http://food.aol.com/tyler-florence?video=4&?NCID=aolfod00030000000002>>.
> >
>
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> Get trade secrets for amazing burgers. Watch "Cooking with Tyler
> Florence" on AOL Food
> <http://food.aol.com/tyler-florence?video=4&?NCID=aolfod00030000000002>.
>