• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

What do you consider alcoholism to be ?

#121
soulgeezer said:
I've actually learned a lot during this debate. During my research, I've discovered that the whole "disease concept of alcoholism" has been supported and propagated by the AA crowd, as they see it as advantageous to their agenda. So, it seems that we have a little politics mixed in with the science, as well.
Click to expand...

Er...which agenda would that be? Getting people sober and teaching them to stay that way? Also, implying AA has anything to do with politics of any kind, even the internal variety is...ignorant.

Note, I don't think you were trying to throw suspicion on the organization, just that maybe the phrasing of that sentence came out that way.

For anyone doubting AA's credibility regarding science, politics, or agendas, I would urge you to look at their Twelve Traditions, and remind you that they're anonymous, and as a result unable to lobby for legislation, funding, or anything else for that matter from anyone, even if they wanted to.
 
#122
soulgeezer said:
Y'know, kserg, that raises an interesting question...

If Jesus needed a drink so badly that He was turning water into wine, was He an acoholic?

Or, should that be "Alcoholic" (capital "A")?

And, if He was, and He went to AA, did He acknowledge Himself?

Wow, I'd hate to be the guy that He was sponsoring! ;) :p
Click to expand...


crackup.gif
 
#124
soulgeezer said:
Y'know, kserg, that raises an interesting question...

If Jesus needed a drink so badly that He was turning water into wine, was He an acoholic?

Or, should that be "Alcoholic" (capital "A")?

And, if He was, and He went to AA, did He acknowledge Himself?

Wow, I'd hate to be the guy that He was sponsoring! ;) :p
Click to expand...

Even if he was, no one would be able to prove it... He is a sneaky one, if you catch him being drunk and go "hey man, you are drunk, you need help". He'll just turn the alcohol in his blood back into water and be like "uh, no i am not". Go ahead, prove he was drunk, you can't.
 
#125
Mark Latimour said:
Perhaps you are not backtracking, but you are clearly misunderstanding what I was saying about the article. I think the article is valid for both of us to rely on. However, it is biased, therefore I am not relying on it to suppot anything I have put forward other than the statement of fact about the adopting of the definition which I quoted.

You can rely on the figures quoted about disagreement. That is fine. However, as I have said I would not put too much weight on those figures as they are 10 years old in a field that is developing rapidly. That is all I was saying. I was not saying that the article was not valid for you to use or rely on, just that the only part I was relying on was the factual statement made and not the rest of the assertions made (such as the conclusion in the last paragraph).
Click to expand...

Gotcha. Actually, I think we're more or less on the same page about this. I agree the stats were old; but, as they're apparently the only stats available, then this is what we both have to base our arguments on.

I've been looking for other stats, but I can't find any from an unbiased source. Almost everything I've found is from organizations and companies pushing 12-step style programs. The rest has been from an author named Peele, who has written extensively in opposition to the disease concept of alcoholism.

As I said, I've learned a lot in this debate. Thanks for being the catalyst for that.

Oh, and Basshole -- I never said that we should treat all addicts alike. Alcoholics are using a legal substance, which, if obtained legally, violates no laws. Drug users are breaking laws in their acquisition and possession of illegal substances. Alcoholics are not criminals unless they commit a criminal act; abusers of illegal drugs are criminals by definition. The two are NOT equivalent.
 
#126
soulgeezer said:
Basshole -- I never said that we should treat all addicts alike. Alcoholics are using a legal substance, which, if obtained legally, violates no laws. Drug users are breaking laws in their acquisition and possession of illegal substances. Alcoholics are not criminals unless they commit a criminal act; abusers of illegal drugs are criminals by definition. The two are NOT equivalent.
Click to expand...


Aren't they just sick?

BTW, I didn't mean to imply you said we should treat all addicts alike...I merely cited your position stating that if we are to call ONE addiction a disease, then by that logic, ALL addictions are a disease....and by extension of THAT reasoning, I have said that to treat one "disease" but punish the other with jail, and offer NO treatment is inherently unfair...and apparently a number of folks do agree with me on that point.
 
#129
soulgeezer said:
They're all sick (keeping in mind the many possible definitions of that word); but, they're not all criminals. And, the criminals should be treated as criminals.
Click to expand...

But punishing them only as criminals, and not treating the illness at the root of their drive to commit these "crimes" does nothing to rehabilitate them, and they are bound to fall back into addiction, and resume this horrible "crime wave" of putting drugs into their OWN BODIES.


soulgeezer said:
Or, maybe, they should just get off the drugs and take up drinking! :D
Click to expand...

I think we need to either help everyone with their addictions, or help no one. The hypocrisy is simply ridiculous.
 
#130
Basshole said:
But punishing them only as criminals, and not treating the illness at the root of their drive to commit these "crimes" does nothing to rehabilitate them, and they are bound to fall back into addiction, and resume this horrible "crime wave" of putting drugs into their OWN BODIES.

I think we need to either help everyone with their addictions, or help no one. The hypocrisy is simply ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Dude, you're putting words in my mouth. I never addressed the question of treatment. I only spoke about punishing criminals.

In fact, I think treatment should be (and, I believe it is) available to incarcerated addicts. So, we agree on that point.

kserg said:
That thread was awesome! Best thread ever! good Sig...
Click to expand...

:confused:
 
#131
soulgeezer said:
Dude, you're putting words in my mouth.
Click to expand...

Where? Honestly, this is not my intent.


soulgeezer said:
I never addressed the question of treatment.
Click to expand...

I never said that you did.


soulgeezer said:
I only spoke about punishing criminals.
Click to expand...

And I countered that perhaps rehab would be a more fair, compassionate, and consistent alternative to encarceration.


soulgeezer said:
In fact, I think treatment should be (and, I believe it is) available to incarcerated addicts. So, we agree on that point.
Click to expand...

Well, I think the drug laws are hypocritical. If all addicts are merely suffering from a disease, it seems rather inhumane to send any of them to prison, instead of offering help.
 
#137
Basshole said:
OMG, Geezer, you have no idea how much Yvonne Craig looks like my GF in that pic (although I swear she isn't green)....but, my GF seems to identify more with being a Vulcan.
Click to expand...

Duuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuude!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Your girlfriend looks like Yvonne Craig??????

I bow down before you; you are...

The luckiest bastage on Earth! ;) :D
 
#140
Agreed!

Cool, let's turn this thread into star trek piss contest too... :smug:

So far Geezer is up, but only until basshole shows the pics... Once it is a fact that basshole dates girls because they look like Orion slave girl, Marta (Yvonne Craig) is confirmed via picture, the title will be challenged to vote...
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back