Best & Barto,
I've been coming here for over a year now, and I've learned a lot from you guys. I respect your views and appreciate your ES&H. I agree that our fellowships have been around long before us and they need no defense. I'm sure I probably came off like I'm defending, but that really wasn't my intention. I just wanted to address some stuff that I recently read in another forum. I mean, if someone else can put forth their point of view, so can I. In NA literature it says, "NA can survive without us, but we cant survive without NA," or something like that. What I found important was that no one in that forum spoke up and challenged what was said. My ES&H includes what I've learned, and my experience doesn't match what was asserted.
Barto, although you may not see the things I addressed as attacks, but I do. To misrepresent NA in such a negative light can't be taken as anything else, IMO. What about the newcomer that may read that garbage? And if someone is upset with the way the treatment industry is miseducating potential members and new members, they should point the finger in that direction instead of saying NA is this way or that way. And once or twice before, we've shared with one another about terminology and semantics in recovery - AA and NA are different, but very similar. The key is understanding instead of trying to be understood (for me).