When I watch the news or read ads on my Facebook, twitter, ebay,  or any other media input, even when I have conversations with other people…I ask myself ;  What do they want?  What are they really saying and why?  For the last ten years since the onslaught of social media developers have been working hard for powerful people.  They have been finding and perfecting new ways to PROFILE YOU and we the people. What they are doing with this mind power is open to the highest bidder.  Money is power and the powerful want more power.   Just be aware.  Choose your battles, don’t let battles choose you.  The powerful are now armed with the ability to single out huge groups of people to react in the way they want.  These wealthy billionaires can control not only Facebook America but also Facebook Europe, Facebook Russia, Facebook, Twitter, of the entire world.  Sure people will not easily cross moral boundaries but, now it’s evident where which boundaries lie and where they don’t.  Think about what even a small percentage of mind control on global levels can do.   See mind control techniques here.


People Are Often Bitches!

People Can Be Ruthless at Times

With no consideration for the future                                                                       or Karmic Law.  BUYER BEWARE!

So sorry to be negative but I need to vent.  My daughter and me got ripped off by an “Acceptance Now” salesman at HHGregg. Usually the deal on rental/purchase agreements are you pay in 90 days and there is little to no interest.  “Just like Cash” they advertise.  I have purchased from them before and everything went smoothly.  I paid the balance off in time and had little interest.  However that waswit a different sales person.

Continue reading “People Are Often Bitches!”

Is AA Really Spiritual NOT Religious

Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored.

– Aldous Huxley


While our pre-conceived notions are ripped to shreds by Linda R’s factual, and informative article we may take solace in the truth that our rock, AA IS A SPIRITUAL PROGRAM.   This, in spite of the high courts multiple rulings that AA is in fact a religious program.   “Spirituality” is not a contradiction of religion.  And religion does not mean non-spiritual and bad.   One thing for certain, in A.A. we choose, seek, and find our own Higher Power.  Whether it’s by our sponsor introducing God to us or by receiving a revelation and white light experience through prayer and meditation or we simply reconnect with the God of our parents we still make a choice of who our Higher Power is.   Our AA belief system is very different from dogmatic religion in that way.

However, the question has arisen in some of the highest courts of our nation whether or not A.A. is religious.  And it has come up for good reason, the separation of church and state.  Parolees do not want to be forced into a religious AA program  against their constitutional rights.  This separation of church and state is a fundamental aspect of US law, known as the Establishment Clause, and is explicated in the first amendment to the US Constitution, which states

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.”

By Linda R.

Inside AA, one hears members frequently repeat the well-known phrase “AA is spiritual, not religious.” AA takes pride in saying it’s not religious. But what do outsiders, such as the court systems, think about AA’s claim?

In the ten year period between 1996 and 2007, five high-level US courts — three federal circuit courts and two state supreme courts – did take a long and hard look at AA’s claim. Each of these cases involved a person who was being forced to participate in AA meetings, either as a condition of their parole or probation, or while actually incarcerated. These cases reached the highest level of judiciary scrutiny — only one level below the US Supreme Court — because they involved the critical issue of separation of Church and State. This separation is a fundamental aspect of US law, known as the Establishment Clause, and is explicated in the first amendment to the US Constitution, which states “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.”

The parolees, probationers and inmates in each of these cases claimed that the State was using its power to force them to participate in a religious activity. They claimed that AA meetings were religious. Thus, their required attendance was a violation of the Establishment Clause, which requires governmental neutrality with respect to religion and a wall of separation between Church and State.

read more from “aaagnostica.org” by Linda R.



Bottom line- the law makes light of a brutal crime and patronizes rape victims!

For students only

I recently encountered some info about an up-and-coming sex law. It is aimed at college students and administrative policies at colleges starting in California.    If the bill is passed, colleges must use the legislature’s definition of consent in their sexual assault policies or risk losing state funding for student financial aid.


“The legislation, which was introduced as a direct response to the current sexual assault crisis on college campuses, defines consent as an “affirmative, conscious, and voluntary agreement to engage in sexual activity” every step of the way.”

   Quote from affirmativeconsent.com Affirmative consent’ means affirmative, conscious, and voluntary agreement to engage in sexual activity.

What ‘Affirmative Consent’ Actually Means

 A proposed bill in California that would require college students to obtain explicit consent before proceeding with a sexual encounter is sparking controversy over whether that standard can actually work in practice. The legislation, which was introduced as a direct response to the current sexual assault crisis on college campuses, defines consent as an “affirmative, conscious, and voluntary agreement to engage in sexual activity” every step of the way. There are some concerns that’s much too broad.

 The Affirmative Consent Standard

 The Affirmative Consent Standard states that the person who initiates sexual contact must receive a VERBAL YES (affirmative consent) from the other person before engaging in any sexual activity — and that consent must be ongoing throughout the sexual encounter.

  “No Means No” Isn’t enough. We Need Affirmative Consent Laws to Curb Sexual Assault. “

End of the pro affirmative consent viewpoints


 What Recovery Farmhouse thinks of this potential Campus Law

I think Cathy Young hit the nail on the head when she said: “this approach to sexual safety is absolutely out of touch with reality.”  I ask,  what will we do carry a tape recorder during our sex or a video to prove that we got the YES YES AND YES from our adult sexual partner so we don’t get charged with rape.

Consensual sex is not the problem what these people (at affirmativeconsent.com) are essentially trying to do is fix something that’s not broken and profit from it a-long the way.  They are totally side-stepping any real solution to forced sex.  Even worse they are making lite and emotionally minimizing  a literally deadly and serious topic as if it were some kind of fun game toy.

I overheard John Chauncey the brain storm so called “activist” behind the idea up close and personal on July 13th, 2015.  He wasn’t ashamed to say aloud so the whole room could hear that the reason he started his activist movement is mainly because he wants to be a millionaire.   Which hey, I want to be a millionaire too but I am not hiding behind some do-gooder facade that I can’t relate to at all.  Yep he wants the money and he is using the law, legislation and his new website to do just that.    He is riding on the backs of real rape victims as if he can relate to their horrible plight trivializing and insulting what deadly violent rape is really about.

Check out the t-shirts and condom kits for sale on his site.  He is not a rape victim, his hearts clearly not in the cause and if it were, I think his approach would be much different.

Just a couple possible scenarios, this pending law could be so easily manipulated to be used by the disgruntled and rejected girl-friends or the girl who willingly had sex, gets pregnant then has to prove to daddy she was raped.  No problem her sex partner didn’t bring his tape recorder with him, you got him by the gonies.   Subsequently she can very easily ruin not only her baby-daddy’s education but his up and coming career as well  thanks to this handy new law.  This is one of those rules that will be used against the innocent rather than the guilty.

This legislative ideal is immature even by recovering addicts standards and we usually have stunted our emotional maturity from the point we started our using.

The up side?

For an addict to communicate with their sexual partner is an emotional plus in the growth category.  We encourage our newcomers in AA to mutually define their relationships and to keep communication open in all relationship categories.  However, once hormones are flaring body language is more than enough.  Understanding when a man or women wants to be with us is simple body language 101 come on law-makers.  There are no clearer words than a women who pulls you closer or pushes you away.    The problem is rarely if ever truly this: “I misunderstood her body language my dad taught me that no means yes.”  Right!  Clearly even the lowest IQ can feel and understand well sexual rejection, no words are needed for that.  Even two adults who speak different languages can communicate and understand well what they are saying to each other during romance.  No dialect is needed much less a tape recorder and over-communication.

Rejection hurts and it penetrates us all the way to our soul.  We often carry it around for life.   So how is it these people think that it’s a lack of communication that is the cause of the campus rape crisis?  Really?  Oh gee judge I raped her because I mis-understood her, seriously?  Ok granted there are those that would use this defense in court but is there anyone that would believe it?  So why on earth do they see communication as a solution to rape?

The only students that would abide by this campus law would never rape a women anyway.  Its like invoking a law to announce at the bank entrance that no potential bank robbers will be permitted to carry weapons beyond the door.  And then making each law abiding citizen sign an affidavit at the door that they won’t bring weapons in.

Discipline is the only thing that a rapist understands.  Fear of being locked up and losing it all, a rapist understands that.  Security and strictly enforced rape laws will work.  This mamby-pamby affirmative consent rule will most likely end up being the most ridiculous and made-fun-of legislation since the laws forbidding Bingo games to last more than 5 hours, or the law in N. Carolina against selling one’s eyeballs.  Yep there’s one in every crowd.