Rational Recovery ®

I was very disappointed, actually startled, to hear the mother of Tiffany Souers call her daughter’s alleged murder, “…a very sick man.” Mrs. Souers’ naive, gentle comment demonstrates how deeply held the disease concept of evil has become since the recovery group movement injected its pernicious doctrines into mainstream thinking. It is proper to say that the suspect, Jerry Buck Inman, may be presumed innocent until proven guilty, or that he has only allegedly committed murder. A parent of a murder victim, however, would probably find it difficult to restrain a presumption of guilt, especially when he is seen to have bat tattoos on his neck, shaven head, and a lengthy record as a criminal sexual psychopath. It would be very easy, under the cloud of emotion, to make a judgment that the suspect is guilty.

Mrs. Souers seems to suspect that even if Inman is guilty of murder, he is innocent, suffering from some disease or sickness that compelled him to strangle her daughter with her bikini top. I sincerely hope that Mrs. Sours will consider that the man who killed her daughter is not only a criminal, but also an evil man. That way, she may experience the authentic horror and outrage that fits the truth of what has happened to her daughter.

I am speaking of the white-hot outrage that cries out within us when someone has maliciously caused us intolerable loss, violating our very soul. To paint an atrocity as a disease symptom, making an evil man appear to be a sick man, protects the guilty from justice and emancipates evil in society. It also prevents healing of a painful wound by using the anesthetic of denial instead of the antibiotic of anger. Anger vented will fade and dissipate, and will leave its permanent shadow over what was lost, but failure to render moral judgment of offenders results in vacant grief, a sadness that becomes an undertow of depression resulting from unexplained, unaccounted, intolerable loss.

If you want to see and hear dark undertones caused by denying authentic anger, visit an addiction recovery group, where the members have parlayed their common immorality, self-intoxication, into a disease symptom. They say anger is also a symptom of the same disease. They profess being happy, joyous, and free, but a look around the room will show a group of depressed people, mostly still intoxicating themselves or afraid they soon will, trapped by their refusal to judge their use of intoxicants as immoral conduct. The anger of the addict-in-recovery is suppressed as though it were an evil spirit, even though the anger is for their loss of identity, their loss of freedom, and their loss of dignity.

All who are in recovery suspect that the bondage of recovery is not a natural, necessary, or even plausible outcome of addiction. They see but deny that the recovery group is an eddy of commiseration where the substance abuse or problem drinking of the newcomer is cultivated to take root and become chronic addiction.

If the self-intoxication of addicted people isn’t immoral, but a disease symptom, then what must one do to defeat addiction? The answer, based upon powerlessness over disease, is, “Turn it over!” That is, one must relinquish one’s identity, freedom, and self-determination and accept the rules of recovery, which very closely resemble the mandates of addiction itself. Little wonder, the preoccupation of groupers with “resentments.” It hurts to be bamboozled out of your freedom and dignity for not trusting one’s native values and beliefs.

I think Mrs. Souers knows that Innis is an evil man who should be condemned to death, but in the light of media attention, she came out with political niceness that has been brought to us by the harbingers of disease, the recovery group movement. It was there, in church basements, of all places, that the seeds of innocent evil were planted decades ago. It was there, in the panoply of recovery groups claiming innocence from all kinds of vice, sin, immorality, and corruption, from which the invasive growth of recovery mythology has seized our social service system, our entertainment industry, and mainstream thinking.

It sounds to me like Innis is Tiffany’s murderer, and if convicted, I hope he is offered no rehabilitative services. He is not sick, nor is he diseased, nor does he have a treatable condition. He is a bad person, an evil man, who should be confidently hanged by the state by his bat-tatooed neck for all to see. I hope Mrs. Souers will pour out her hate toward the evil man who stole her most precious love to satisfy his animal desire. Her hate and anger will not make her whole, but will at least place a moral judgment on the head of her daughter’s killer.

This entry was posted on Wednesday, June 7th, 2006 at 6:27 pm and is filed under Rational Recovery. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.