This information caught me by surprise and I am a Christian. One thing that always irritates me is how people who don't understand always put "evangelical" in front of the word Christian. All true Christians are "evangelical," just in different ways. Evangelical has come to be an acronym for "conservative" which is really the word that should be used. As a Christian progressive who attends a main line denominational church, I normally don't agree with anything the "conservatives" do but this one seems like a good public service when Oregon has been so hard hit with Meth use. As a parent of a crack cocaine addicted adult child, the more information the better. It may not reduce drug use but it may be helpful for family members and, yes, drug use can be horrible as I have witnessed first hand. It has cost our daughter custody of her only child and us the loss of contact with our grandchild, not to mention the thousands of dollars we have spent to help her get off drugs. Short term treatment programs are not effective and what I consider to be a joke and a complete disservice to the addict and the public because of the expectation that once completed that the problem is 80% licked. Whatever information and insight into kicking the habit, I will watch with great attention and you should also.

I have very mixed feelings on public TV stations donating time on behalf of religious groups. Public tax dollars go to fund these airwaves.

However, the other side of this issue is that I would rather not shoot the messenger because no matter who produces it we can all agree that meth is a horrible problem.

I will not be watching tonight.

"I don't really know what to make of this. There seem to be forces beneath the surface I am unable to perceive. Why have a bunch of private television stations agreed to saturate the airwaves with this documentary? Why is it supported solely by Evangelicals, and why do Evangelicals support this approach? What's in it for the folks who spearheaded the effort to bring it to Oregon?"

I attended the first White House Conference for a Drug Free America in 1988. I have directed several alcohol and drug treatment facilities, both residential and out patient. I can tell you the truth as I am no longer in that line of work -

The war on drugs was never about drugs.

Those who use drugs are treated by out society as outcasts, much like how gay and lesbians have been treated (esp. in the hysteria about HIV/AIDS). There is a part of our society that needs to have outcasts. There is nothing new about this, it goes way back as far as there is recorded history. It is the ugly side of our society.

In fact, it is one of the defining characteristics between what we sometimes call the "left" and the "right". Those on the "right" tend to a conservative notion of preservation of what has been or what is perceived to have been. In that line of thinking, differences from "normal" are threatening. Anyone who is different being a threat is therefore treated as an outcast, or criminalized. On the other side, the "left" tend to see suffering and attempt to provide assistance or help. -- Oddly, that used to be a Christian point of view. Now some call this, "bleeding heart liberalism".

The war on drugs was a deliberate effort to find something else for our military to do after the fall of European Communism. Sending troops to S. America fit well. The side pay off was that an entire segment of the population, who have the disease of addiction (which we do know how to successfully treat), got thrown in jail. Today, well over half of the people in jail are there related to addiction. We now have the highest percentage of people in jail/prison of any country on the planet, even more than were in jail/prison under Stalin. Control of the population, in fact fear of the population, underlies much of the position of the "right".

Scared Straight types of approaches to prevention of alcohol/drug use, DARE programs, and programs like the one on TV tonight (as I currently understand what I think they will be showing) all have been proven to not only fail, but have the counter-effect of encouraging rebellious people to try that type of self-destructive behavior. These things not only don't work, they backfire. But, that is okay with the "right". The core thinking there is "we warned them, so we have done our duty, and if they use drugs, it is there own damn fault, so we can guilt free send them to jail". And that is what our current age considers Christian Charity (twisted ain't it!).

It is as plain as day to me that the mutual desire of control of our society is evident in the political movement of the current "right" and the religious movement on the "right".

Fortunately, the "left" is the counter point.

What I see with this video tonight, is that the fear of the right and the ownership of the media by the right, has reached the point where the line that separates religion, politics, and media is blurred. Is it beyond repair? I expect we will know within 10 years.

Great post Steve, thanks for taking the time.

Well, I just watched the show. It was very slightly better than I hoped.

There was 25 minutes of "scared straight" done fairly well for that type of thing.

There was 1 minute about "treatment works" - way at the end. No actual referral information, but a website and 800 number.

Folks, I don't think this sort of approach can work. People will talk about the show for awhile, but our jails will just keep filling up.

If you really want to do something about drugs, you'd close prison beds, and spend the money on treatment beds.

Here's a crazy idea, if you don't like Crystal Darkness and fell stigmatizing meth is so horrible, why not come up with your own show? This griping about someone trying to fix a problem is really tiring.

Treatment works is nice sounding, but I think treatment is available for almost anyone who wants it, yet we stil have this scourge growing. I speak from personal experience when a user is offered all the free treatment he wanted, he still preferred smoking. Maybe something else is needed.

Steve B., I understand your point of view. But I also know there is a huge foster care crisis because of kids removed from meth houses.

Whatever the dark side of Evangelicals may do (think Marilyn Shannon and those church groups involved in the attempt to overturn the law on civil unions), the truth is there are many churches full of good works--from the church groups arriving to help Katrina survivors before there was any effective FEMA response to local civic actions such as finding foster homes for kids removed from meth houses. Sometimes that takes the tactic of appealing to church groups which have stable families able to take in foster kids who don't need a high level of specialized care. How many know the status of foster care in your county?
How many of you have ever been a foster family or known a foster family? Sometimes foster families are needed because kids are removed from abusive/unsafe homes, sometimes it is a case of a single parent dying or something like that.

There is a local group called No Meth - Not In My Neighborhood, there is the "forever home" concept (a house is bought or built where foster kids can grow up, and if there is a problem with the well-trained foster parents then the parents are moved out and the kids stay in the same home and thus have stability), and some of the people involved in these are deeply religious.

I agree with Steve B's general distrust of the "war on drugs" (even some of the Republican presidential candidates are talking about scaling back on all the federalized crimes of the late 1980s and into the 1990s which should be state crimes) but there are some real problems with meth.

And to tar all religious people as Evangelical Christians (Catholics, Methodists, Congregationalists, for instance) when religious people are just trying to solve community problems and many don't agree with the agenda of the Southern Baptist Convention seems like a mistake to me.

Meth is a problem. The people who deal with it on a daily basis (incl. law enforcement and county services of one sort or another) who come and speak to community/neighborhood groups are not just Evangelicals. Sometimes they are just concerned citizens explaining what they see in the average work week.

Maybe you don't like the way the show was produced, but meth is still a problem. And calling attention to it no matter how the show was done sounds like a local television community service to me. What was the last community problem which got that level of local TV attention?

"More treatment until it works or the person is dead. Either way, it wasn't going to get better in prison."

More dead tweeker's sounds good and a 100%, highly cost effective treatment method already exists. A rather inexpensive lead pill administered at high velocity does the trick. Problem solved.

Well, well, well. Every year, local nonprofits spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to purchase air time for their telethons. I guess we've been getting ripped off by the corporate media. Why the special deal for this group? Long ago, the tv stations realized we the people own the airwaves. Nonprofits paid little to nothing. They began charging more and more for telethons. $40K for 6 hrs in the 80's was typical. By the early 90's, they wouldn't sell you the time at all, but wanted your group to pay %150K for $300 worth of 30 second psa's. And now this christian group gets special privileges? Well, well, well.

My children were offered extra credit to watch the show, so we took it in as a family. Immediately we noticed the lack of facts. Where is the information about the horrible chemicals used, and what happens to the brain? A quick reference to "pleasure centers" and then back to the heart wrenching stories. We found it to be a highly manipulative piece, devoid of facts.

My heart swells with pride over the corporate media's usage of our free airwaves for public service.... this show, the Christmas toy drive. Just what merka is all about. yessirree.

One of the links on the side was to an E. Oregonian piece on Kroger

Kroger was the prosecutor who indicted more than a half dozen Enron executives.

...

He said he wants to bring new ideas and new energy to the office and use it as a bully pulpit to deal head-on with major problems plaguing the state, with the methamphetamine crisis topping that list.

Kroger said meth addiction's dirty hands push up other crimes, from theft to child abuse, and the top lawman in the state needs to address that.

"I think the job of the attorney general isn't to shy away from big problems, but to tackle them," he said.

...

"I'm a Democrat," Kroger said, "but I look different from a lot of Democrats. I'm a Marine Corps veteran and a prosecutor."

It will be interesting to see if anyone from the Kroger campaign posts on this topic. Yes, meth is a problem. But no, he's not the only Marine Corp vet in politics--look at Gov. Ted, the former AG.

OK, he has been in the Marine Corps and been a prosecutor. What does he think of the Crystal Darkness show? What does he think about other issues?

I think that all can agree that meth use is a hige problem for our communities and our state. As an employer, I have seen first hand the devestation meth can wreck on a person's life and of the lives around them. I didn't get to view the particular show last night, however this is not the first such documentary and shouldn't be the last.

Given the importance of the message, should we be concerned whether it was produced by a Chrisitian outfit or the 7 Dwarves? Should more treatment be available? Absolutely! The issue with meth treatment is that it attaches directly to the dopamine receptors in the brain and can become physiologically addictive after very few uses. The recitivism rate for users is well above all other drugs. The idea is to stop anyone from ever starting in the first place.

Again I didn't watch this one because I was unaware of it being televised. Many other such programs on this subject have run commercial free in the past.

Bucknum said:

"Scared Straight types of approaches to prevention of alcohol/drug use, DARE programs, and programs like the one on TV tonight (as I currently understand what I think they will be showing) all have been proven to not only fail, but have the counter-effect of encouraging rebellious people to try that type of self-destructive behavior."

Interesting comment Mr. Bucknum. Where is the peer reviewed research paper or other reference supporting your claim. I'm interested in your comments and would enjoy learning more about what you just said.

Thanks.

I am so amused by the oh-so-thinly veiled religious bigotry that permeates so many of your posts.

"Progressive" bigots are nauseating.

I think the Evangelicals have started to see the light.

They used to condone meth as "their" drug, on the grounds that people who rotted their brains through tweaking would be more likely to become Conservative Republicans. Now that the drug is causing the new Republicans to die and neglect their children to the point of death, they've decided the cost isn't worth it.

kevin, congrats on 19 years of recovery! that's inspiring, and your perspective on this invaluable.

I watched the show last night. It did not impress me -- mostly talking heads offering information I already had. I don't think it will discourage many kids from trying meth. In fact I sometimes wonder if shows of this type that feature interviews with recovered addicts don't send the wrong message. Kids watch them and think, "See -- he/she was an addict and he/she is okay now." They don't see the hell those addicts went through before recovery.

amused: >>I am so amused by the oh-so-thinly veiled religious bigotry that permeates so many of your posts.

amused: >>"Progressive" bigots are nauseating. jeff: >Would you care to document that, oh anonymous commenter?

<hr/>

Jeff, he just did. The documentation is self evident. Re-read the post and comments, and you will find your documentation.

Bigotry comes in conservative, neo-conservative and progressive flavors. The problem with bigotry is that people only see it in others, never in themselves.

”My question isn't so much why they produced this documentary, but how they managed to saturate the major media markets in Oregon in a coordinated effort. There's some part of this that we're not hearing, and that makes me uneasy.”

Gee, let me think, it could be:

1. a dark, Machiavellian conspiracy by evil conservative religious extremists seeking to control the media, or

2. a legitimate effort by broadcasters to address a societal ill.

Which do you pick?

Kevin, I think you are right--great comment on the UCC and the Unitarians.

A couple of places on washingtonpost.com (EJ's Precinct which is a blog, as well as a column), EJ Dionne writes about changes in the religious right--incl. a minister who would have become the new head of the Christian Coalition except he wanted to take it in a new direction and the people in charge of hiring didn't want that. There are efforts to deal with issues from AIDS to the environment, and to end the culture wars. One minister even said God loves everyone, and doesn't see them as liberals and conservatives.

And I loved this line:

They are, IMHO, modern-day Pharisees.

Maybe it was "subliminable" or maybe I just missed it, but I didn't see any religious content in the show at all.

"More treatment until it works or the person is dead. Either way, it wasn't going to get better in prison."

How forward thinking. The state way doesn't work, so the solution is just to do it more. Unfortunately a lot of addicts need to be forced to stop using regardless of treatment. Maybe you have a better idea than more of the same?

Torridjoe:

"More treatment until it works or the person is dead. Either way, it wasn't going to get better in prison."

Sure it will -- prison should be a great place to kick a crank addiction. Seeing as crank should be hard to get in prison, and all.

If you can get crank in prison, that should be a fairly easy problem to solve, as well.

Curt

I consider myself a self-realized Christian....I don't go to church on a regular basis. But what I get out of the Bible is do unto others as you would have done to you. Human spirituality, with or without Jesus, should lead us to want to help others. This TV program was doing what we as humans should try to do for each other, lead them away from self-destruction and crimes against others.

I don't really care who spreads the message, as long as the addict's kicking of the addiction is not subject to accepting any particular religious doctrine. If faith in God or belief in Jesus or any other religion is something helps with the rehab, something accepted without coercion...that's personal choice.

The Salvation Army has a long history of helping others... often focusing on the most downcast and disenfranchized of our society. Why should we criticize another group for reaching out?

And BTW the only little shiver of concern I got from the program was the fact that ANY one message, movement, or credo could dominate the airwaves. That's kind of scary.

I have no insight on why or how some religious groups were able to saturate our major media markets, but I read an interesting review of Garry Wills’ book Head and Heart: American Christianities that may be pertinent to some of the discussion within this thread.