Hostility

Stones85

ZWEI_VIER_ZWEI wrote: »

Thing is...why not just go out and have a pint with them? Deep down, they probably just miss their old drinking buddy. A pint isn't going to kill you, no matter what the Pioneers say.

I can see where you're coming from, and maybe some just missed getting locked with me, but here is the problem, they can stop and say enough, I couldn't. Even if I was working the next morning.

I started getting into fist fights and putting myself in dangerous situations while pissed. Was becoming abusive to people I really cared about while drunk. Began to spend all my money on "mad nights out". It was affecting health, bank acount and work and family life.

Why the Pioneers? I don't see them as a terrible judgemental organisation, having met them they are lovely people and only ask people not to drink to excess, and they abstain and make a personal sacrifice so that others with serious problems can heal and become better or in control.

I joined them because I am making a pledge to GOD, not myself. If I only promised myself I know I would break it in 2 seconds flat. But when you pledge to God to me that has some serious added weight, and rightly or wrongly it makes the whole thing easier to do. AND IT IS HARD!

I've no problem with people drinking, why would I? Unless it was seriously affectingtheir health. I still hit the bars and clubs with the lads and the girls, it's great craic apart from the odd arsehole havin a go.

The Pin; its part and parcel of the Pioneers, I have to wear it, it's part of the promise. I don't see an issue with it.

I guess I started the thread because I was shocked at the overwhelmingly nasty reaction from friends, no matter the reasons. Thought I'd throw it on here to see if it was a common response.

Fanny Cradock

Sam Vimes wrote: »

In fairness this is a thread about hostility shown to non-drinkers and that's exactly what he's talking about. You might not agree with his point and might think he's expressing it in the wrong way but it is the topic of the thread. You're telling him that his opinions on non-drinkers aren't welcome on a thread about hostility shown to non-drinkers

I've informed him that his opinion on non-drinkers isn't welcome if it's not in a Christian context. I would be more lenient if I thought his intentions were sincere, but I don't believe such lenience is warranted if I suspect that each post is actually routed in grievous generalisations and sensationalism.

I'm politely asking you to keep out of this particular end of the discussion as it doesn't concern you. OK?

Fanny Cradock

My initial post was harsh, and I apologise for this. I just happened to find the sentiment of your post startlingly unsympathetic and quite repugnant because of this.

ZWEI_VIER_ZWEI wrote: »

Blah Blah Blah. Blaaaah. This is your favourite line. Yet surely, even a Christian could see that I simply responding to the OP? If I am off-topic, then surely the OP is too, if he is on-topic, then I am. It really is that simple.

"Even as a Christian"? It's probably best that you don't expand on this statement. You are off topic because your initial post bore little relevance to Christianity, whereas the OP's initial post was framed in a Christian context and was, therefore, fine. As I've explained, you have rapidly used up the leeway I would have given if you hadn't posted your opening nasty rant> which lead me to suspect you of posting merely to sensationalise, generalise and cause offence. Such intentions break the 7th rule of the charter and means you are skirting close to some intervention on my part. But if you be nice and tone down your language (it remains possible to keep your point the same) we can all move on. OK?

ZWEI_VIER_ZWEI wrote: »

My accusation was more based on your implicit threat of banning me, because of having an opinion that was different to the prevailing one.

"I don't care much for your opinions, and as a mod of this forum I don't have to entertain them."

I didn't threaten to ban you - implicitly or otherwise. I could simply have given you an infraction or a warning. I have such terrible powers at my disposal. That you automatically assume I was going to ban you probably says more about the outcome you expected you would receive for your words.

ZWEI_VIER_ZWEI wrote: »

Explain why it is deeply flawed...(or don't, if you don't want the thread to be further 'derailed', but if you do, I will happy to debate it with you, this isn't me backing away out of fear of losing an argument.)

I believe that it has already been explained by others. I would suggest meeting former alcoholics and their loved ones and comparing their experiences (usually quite tragic and full of violence) against those who have asparagus addictions. I'm not particularly interested in offering detailed critiques of your analogies, though.

ZWEI_VIER_ZWEI wrote: »

Your Charter says opinions from non-Christians are welcome?

Indeed they are. And I'm glad you have read it. But perhaps a reread is in order.

lugha

Stones85 wrote: »

I guess I started the thread because I was shocked at the overwhelmingly nasty reaction from friends, no matter the reasons. Thought I'd throw it on here to see if it was a common response.

I wouldn’t think your experience has less to do with the Catholic nature of the Pioneer movement and more to do with the appallingly immature attitude we Irish have to alcohol, (an attitude many of our Celtic tiger cubs will pay for with their organs in future decades). I encounter this all the time. I remember listening to a debate once on the possibility of Ireland at some stage becoming an Islamic state. I was amused (and depressed!) to find that a likely prohibition on alcohol emerged as an issue quite early in the discussion! Being a non-drinker in Ireland is regarded as only slightly less bizarre than having a craving for biting the heads of live chickens! Personally I find it reaffirming to see the occasional Pioneer pin as it reminds me that some people can refrain from alcohol and live happy lives.