Shotgun

Well, assuming that you sleep every night.

Am I missing something? I don't know of any AA or NA or CR groups that charge anything for their service. WHO is making money off people's quest for sobriety? Are you talking about LADCs or LPCs that work in a clinic??? I'm not sure how anyone is reading what I wrote to mean that AA or NA is charging anything. I was replying to Squeak, who was talking about others trying to make money from it (mostly in situations where they are trying to convince people not to attend 12-step programs). But yeah, even counselors or rehabs are making money off of other people's quest for sobriety. That doesn't mean that they're scammers though; everyone has to make a living. And people who are offering alternatives to 12-step programs are not necessarily scammers either. We live in a capitalist economy, so people have to make money, but when dealing with a problem such as addiction, that makes it difficult to tell who really wants to help and who just wants your money. And that is one of the good things about 12-step-groups (and other member-funded support groups) - that they are basically free, so the intention is not questionable. (Well, except that some people are convinced that 12-step groups are a big conspiracy to convert people to Christianity, but I don't buy that.)

Well yeah, if they don't believe in god, then they likely don't believe in sin. But that doesn't mean that they don't have a good sense of what is right or wrong. And not everyone needs the threat of heaven/hell to want to do what is right. Anyhow, I didn't mean to hijack the thread to talk about the UU's. I think that the "War on Christmas" has been happening before O'Reilly "invented" it, but that's just a guess on my part.

Well, I'm pretty sure that I've learned it, but it took me almost twenty years.

I've been having vivid dreams pretty regularly, ever since I can remember. Sometimes they're about "normal" things, like having a conversation with someone, and they're so vivid that I have trouble remembering if they really happened or not. And I've been having "awake during sleep paralysis" dreams since I was around 12 years old. Those are usually nightmares, but in the last couple of years (I'm 36 now) I've gotten pretty good at realizing that I'm dreaming and then turning it into a lucid dream. Especially in the last six months or so... My new trick is that, if I suspect I'm dreaming, I'll decide what I want to happen next, which is usually to fly... And then I'll float up in the air and start doing all sorts of cool things. A lot of times I seem stuck in my house, so I'll just float around inside my house. But sometimes I'm able to fly over trees, over the ocean, or over cities, stuff like that. Those dreams are really cool.

Sort of a Mamby Pamby, what ever floats your boat kind of religion. Something that you can really get ahold of. Yeah, I don't really think of UU as a religion, though I guess they call themselves one. It seems to be more of a fellowship of like-minded people, spiritual with a sort of political twist. But the main message that they seem to be carrying is tolerance, and I don't think that's so difficult to get a hold of. And if you prefer the rigid "this is what you must do or you will go to hell" kind of religion, then UU is definitely not for you.

Fair enough. All are to be taught (minus 20 and 21 ) . What's wrong with Unitarian-Universalism? They're about the most tolerant of any religious group (if they're even considered a religious group). Hmm, I'm guessing you meant #22 instead (Scientology)? And yeah, it would probably be a good idea for all people to learn about all the major religions. But I suspect that (for example) in a strict Christian household, the other religions would be taught in a manner of "this is what they believe, but they're wrong." And actually, the Unitarians have really good religious classes for children (and adults too). But their perspective is that most religions are basically trying to reach the same goal, and that none of them are necessarily wrong or right. The only thing they really "preach" about is tolerance.

Yeah, it bugs me that I can't order smaller portions at most restaurants, but I guess they do that so that they can make more money. They don't care if they're dumping most of your food into the trash, as long as you've paid for it. The portion sizes at most restaurants are nearly a full-day's worth of calories (for me anyway), so I usually try to take at least half home for leftovers.

I think the word you mean is "truthiness."

I was just checking the showtimes to see when this movie is on (which I might not have done without all the attention it's been getting! ;-), and I came across this review:

True. I guess my point was that you don't have to have many alternatives to think for yourself regarding a certain religion. Either you believe it or you don't. But yeah, having exposure to many different ideas would provide more to think about. Right, but in the case of religion, they may not see it as ignorance but rather respect for their own god (not looking elsewhere for other gods). I don't know. I personally like to hear as many different ideas as possible, but I can understand that that doesn't work for everyone.

That doesn't necessarily mean that they're not thinking for themselves. (I had never been exposed to another religion when I decided that I didn't believe in Christianity.) Perhaps they've thought about it and decided that they don't want to be exposed to another religion. Yep. So of course they are going to try to discourage it.

And, if you don't mind my asking, what are those reasons? The same reasons that have been stated here, that Pullman is a devout atheist who is trying to teach the kids of the world that there is no Christ or that He is a false prophet. So it's because the movie might teach them something that would contradict what your church has been teaching them? Do you also forbid them from reading books about Islam or other religions that would contradict your church's teachings? (I promise I'm not trying to be confrontational here. I'm really just trying to understand.)

And, if you don't mind my asking, what are those reasons?

And I suppose that is a valid concern on their part. But I only had to read one book to decide that I didn't believe in Christianity, and that book was the Bible. So they can boycott all they want; people will still think for themselves.

The hypothetical question was whether you would still drink it if it was illegal today. (Not whether prohibition is a good idea. I think we all know the answer to that.)

Ok, good. Sorry if I didn't communicate very clearly in that post.

Agreed, but that doesn't mean that you won't be punished for breaking the law, whether the law is just or not. I answered "maybe / not sure." If it was suddenly illegal and a hassle to obtain alcohol, I'd probably think it wasn't worth it, but I'm not sure. Hmm, I don't know. I like caffeine, but not so much that I would be willing to go to jail or pay a huge fine for using it, so I'd probably just give it up.

Nope, I wasn't saying that at all.

That's a good point. (Not saying that's the case in this situation, but something to consider.)

Trying to sell their views of religion through children's books?

And luckily, doing the 12-step thing or being dead are not the only two options for addicts. (Though unfortunately, that is what most treatment programs will tell them.) Dot know about there, but here inOZ, there are many promoted methods of getting and staying clean. If fact a lot of money is made trying to convince people to NOT do 12 step programs. 12 Step programs are not for everyone, but they do work and work they well for those who work it. I agree, Squeak. And I didn't mean for that to sound like an insult to 12-step programs. I just meant that it's a good thing that there are other options available (some free, some not), since the 12-step programs aren't the best solution for everyone. And yes, it's unfortunate that there are a lot of people who just seem to be trying to make money off of other people's problems, but I guess that's one of the drawbacks of living in a capitalist economy. Anyhow, congrats on many years of sobriety.

And luckily, doing the 12-step thing or being dead are not the only two options for addicts. (Though unfortunately, that is what most treatment programs will tell them.)

Do you have a link to the interview that you read? Here's the last one. This is the author in his own words: http://humaniststudies.org/podcast/philippullman.html I was going to post another link to an article, but it is a columnist's take on the author, not his words himself. There are a bunch more if you just search...I can't find the original interview I found of the author speaking about his books and his goals with them. Like I said, the first link, in the author's own words...he's just an angry man spitting at the church. Like there aren't enough of those running around. Thanks for the link. I read the interview, but I didn't get the impression of "an angry man spitting at the church" or anything like that. He made some negative comments about religious fundamentalists, but I doubt that most people would consider the fundamentalists to represent the church (well, depending on which church you're referring to). But I don't think that the tone was "angry" at any point in the interview.

Do you have a link to the interview that you read?