Gmoney

I'm finding it really strange how, as my mom would say, "People throw a rock and then hide their hands." She'd also say, "If you let a person talk long enough, they'll tell on themselves every time." Ahhh...the wisdom of elders.

I mean, there are those here at SR who will whine about the use of certain signatures and claim that said signatures are anti-AA, but turn around and throw darts at NA in almost every post they make. They also claim to not be an "elitist" but consistently offer up comparisons of how their program (AA) is better than NA.

I, for one, do not have to mention AA (or any other fellowship) at all in order to make a point about NA. Comparisons and AA put-downs aren't needed for me to be pro-NA. As an NA member who has found recovery in the program and fellowship of NA, I find this sort of subtle (and sometimes, overt) NA-bashing very distasteful and unneccessary.

Here are a few points I'd like to address in this forum because I didn't want to respond to them in the forum in which they were asserted:

[1] In the NA 12 Traditions, where it says, "The Twelve Traditions of NA are not negotiable," the words "not negotiable" are not written in bold OR capitalized letters. It is my understanding that this phrase means that the 12 Traditions of NA shouldn't be ignored or avoided. I also interpret the phrase to mean that the traditions say what they mean and mean what they say. They should not be passed over or not considered. They were created for a reason (to assist the fellowship in avoiding problems). And just like other fellowships, NA's Traditions do not eliminate the need to "face difficulties as they arise."

[2] NA does not "demand" anything of anyone...not even the use of what is called "NA Language." The "Clarity Statement" that is often read in groups throughout the NA fellowship is a suggestion, not a demand or command. Many of the critics apparently overlook the ending that says, "This statement is offered in the spirit of NA unity and not meant to rule, censor or dictate your behavior." I guess it's easy to miss the part in Tradition One that says, "No one can revoke our membership or make us do anything that we do not choose to do," eh?

[3] Recovery in NA is not about staying "sick and suffering." Just because we, in NA, don't go around referring to ourselves as "recovered" doesn't mean we live in fear or are constantly looking over our backs anticipating a relapse. It has been my experience to observe that, regardless of which program one claims, no one is exempt. If being "recovered" (or claiming it) meant lifelong protection against relapse, none of those who claimed it would have...but many did. That isn't anti-AA,NA,CA etc.. gibberish, it's a fact. Relapse is a reality - it can and does happen, NO MATTER HOW LONG a person has been abstinent. To assert that referring to oneself as "recovering" is equivalent to perpetual sickness and suffering is not only anti-NA, it's illustrative of minimal understanding of the NA program. Nowhere in NA literature does it state that our disease is anywhere doing push-ups, yet NA does say that we are never cured and we do recover.

I don't have to be anti-AA to be pro-NA, but I guess some folks have to be anti-NA to demonstrate how "pro" they are of their own respective programs. What I see is difference, not inferiority or superiority.

TFLMS,
GarryW