Ex-christians and Addiction

[TheRedneckProfessor]

Three years ago today, I began what would become my last drinking binge.  I awoke a week later in the ER, under heavy sedation, with only vague and haunting memories of the preceeding days.  Upon discharge, I immediately checked myself into a rehab facility and never looked back.

 

If you need help, please get it.  If you need to talk, I am here.

[TABA]

I had no idea you were dealing with this.  Glad you got help.  Thanks for sharing.

[◊ Weezer ◊]

21 hours ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

 

  Upon discharge, I immediately checked myself into a rehab facility and never looked back.

 

 

A very wise move!  HANG IN THERE!

[pantheory]

On 3/31/2022 at 11:55 PM, TheRedneckProfessor said:

Three years ago today, I began what would become my last drinking binge.  I awoke a week later in the ER, under heavy sedation, with only vague and haunting memories of the preceeding days.  Upon discharge, I immediately checked myself into a rehab facility and never looked back.

 

If you need help, please get it.  If you need to talk, I am here.

 

I didn't like alcohol as a kid, more like a religious nerd,  so I didn't begin drinking until my early twenties in bars, to play pool and chase women. By my mid-twenties I graduated to a shot and a beer (boiler maker). By my later twenties I had been thrown out of bars several times for being too aggressive. My parents and sisters thought I was an alcoholic but I never drank alcohol at home, because if I had it there I would drink it all quickly.

 

By my early 30's I cut back and mostly drank beer in bars, but still managed to get a DUI. Still little or no alcohol at home. Holiday gatherings at my siblings houses I often drank, and still sometimes still drink too much so they never believed that I drank much less than I used to, even though I told them so.

 

One of my favorite jokes then was to tell my sisters that I don't drink any more. They would say that's wonderful, after which I would say, "but I don't drink any less either."

 

Decades later my adult children all drink too much, but my youngest controls his drinking by mostly drinking beer. He usually drinks on the weekends and is very careful when drinking in front of relatives, which I wasn't. For my older two adult children, drinking is more worrisome because they often drink excessively -- and my oldest becomes delusional sometimes because of it.   My youngest is the only college grad of the 3.

 

I forgot to mention that their mother, my ex-wife, was a pretty bartender that also had bouts of excessive drinking and drug abuse. 

[TheRedneckProfessor]

I was a daily drinker of hard liquor.  Occasionally beer or wine would pass my palette; but my drink of choice was whiskey straight and neat.  I never minded the addiction itself: the added expense, the morning shakes, the nightly ritual.  But once the binges started, and the blackouts, and never knowing if a drink would lead to a relaxing evening or an abrupt wake-up in some seedy hotel in the bad part of town several days later... well, I couldn't live that way. 

 

At the end, I couldn't even work in the lab anymore because I'd always end up getting into the 200 proof ethanol.  Shit'll fuck you up quick and keep you that way.  These days, I'm the manager of the lab I'm working in.  And while we do use lab grade ethanol, I substitute isopropyl wherever possible. 

 

I've recently begun tapering myself off of my beloved dipping snuff.  I'm down to fewer than 10 3mg nicotine pouches per day.  It's not been the most enjoyable experience; but with John, all things are possible.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

The following is an essay I wrote while in rehab.  My therapist asked me to consider what I needed from god, or from a "higher power" in the parlance of 12 step programs.  This was my response, which, I hope, will encourage others who might be struggling with recovery without belief in a god or higher power.  For those unfamiliar, the Big Book, quoted several times during the essay, is the basic text for Alcoholics Anonymous.

 

THE gOD OF MY UNDERSTANDING

 

Page 62 of the Big Book invites me to believe that the root of all my troubles is self-centeredness, driven by a hundred forms of fear, self-delusion, self-seeking, and self-pity. The Big Book then goes on to promise me on page 84, that I will “suddenly realize that god is doing for me what I could not do for myself.” The inherent flaw in this approach to recovery is the shear hypocrisy of it. In a world which is permanently and consistently scarred by evil—school shootings, child sex trafficking, epidemics ranging from HIV to opioids—god seems to do little more than look on with benign indifference. Yet I am compelled to accept that the cure for my self-centeredness is to believe that I am so important to this same god that he will reach down from heaven and touch me personally, just to make sure I don’t have one too many mint mojitos. How much more self-centered could I possibly be than to seriously entertain such an arrogant notion? What form of self-delusion could possibly be more misguided than to trust my sobriety to a god who can’t even protect children from being shot to death in their classrooms? No, the prospect of relying on a benevolent creator, a divine maker, a heavenly father, a god, for the serenity of my sobriety is as ridiculous as it is horrific. “As a celebrated American statesman put it, ‘Let’s look at the record’.”

 

In the interest of simplicity, it is not necessary to list off all of the forms evil might take in this world; it is enough to simply point out that each is an indictment against a god who purports to be both omnipotent and loving. I have mentioned a few—school shootings and such—to which an entire litany of wars, rumors of wars, famine, pestilence, tragedy and tribulation could be added. But it is not so much my purpose to demonstrate god’s supreme guilt in the mishandling of his own creation, as it is to demonstrate that god is simply not worthy of trust, not to mention love, respect, or worship. I will therefore center my remarks around only one form of evil which is prevalent—even epidemic—enough to be representative of evil in general: namely child sex trafficking: and, more specifically, the rape of ten-year-old girls.

 

When most people think of children, and especially little girls, words such as innocent, beguiling, and innocuous often come to mind. In part, this is due to the purity of youth unstained by the corruption and lasciviousness they will later find in this world. It also touches a part of each of us with the sting of nostalgia for the long-lost days of our own innocence. Indeed, to look upon young children going about the business of playing, pretending, and delighting in their youth is to become, if only for a fleeting moment, children again ourselves. How, then, could there exist in this world an evil so malignant, a violation so virulent, as to steal from such children the very innocence of their souls?

 

In short, it exists because it is not prevented.

 

Is god benevolent? Is god omnipotent? One might be tempted to believe so, based solely upon the word of a well-intentioned preacher, a soft-spoken grandmother, or even a passing glance at the sacred text. But a closer examination of the problem of evil demonstrates clearly that god cannot be both all-loving and all-powerful. In this regard it is helpful to ask a few questions. Is god able to prevent the rape of ten-year-old girls, but not willing to? If so, then he is not all-loving. Is god willing to prevent ten-year-old girls being raped, but not able to? If this is the case, then god is not all-powerful. Is god neither able nor willing to protect the innocence of ten-year-old girls? If he is, then he isn’t a god at all, and certainly not worthy of trust, respect, and worship. Finally, is god both able and willing to prevent the rape of innocents? Then WHY does it happen?

 

This brings us to the proposition of free will and the expedient excuse that god has given each individual

 

the ability to choose between good and evil of their own volition. God is conveniently exculpated on the grounds that he refuses to violate the free will he has given us. Again, though, under scrutiny, we find that god is not exculpated; but rather, he is inculpated. He is complicit in that he is complacent. The hard truth is that in the case of a ten-year-old girl being raped, somebody’s free will is necessarily going to be violated. If god is going to absolve himself by refusing to violate the free will of the rapist, then god is allowing the free will of the victim to be violated by an evil man. What sort of god is that? A loving one? The same could be demonstrated by any act of evil brought about by the free will of iniquitous people. God refuses to violate the free will of a school shooter, while ignoring the free will of the victims, who would rather live, if they had their way. Carried to the extreme, it is evident that god would rather watch six and a half million Jews die than to have violated the free will of one Adolf Hitler. In refusing to violate the free will of some, while ignoring the free will of others, god invariably places himself on the side of evil. And if god favors evil, is he not also evil himself? How can such a god be trusted?

 

One might now attempt to defend god by claiming that his ways are not our ways, that god has a plan which we cannot understand and that he moves in mysterious ways. Unfortunately, here again we find that god cannot be both benevolent and omnipotent. If god’s plan is for ten-year-old girls to be raped, then god is anything but all-loving. If, on the other hand, god’s plan is for ten-year-old girls not to be raped, but his plans are constantly undone, thwarted, by the free will of evil men, then god cannot be all-powerful. In fact, if his plans are so flimsy and tenuous as to be defeated by mere mortals, then he is not any kind of god at all. Again, I am compelled to ask: How can such a god be trusted? It is far simpler to believe that, if a god exists, he either doesn’t have a plan for anyone, or he has no more idea what he is doing than I do when I’m in my whiskey. What use is such a god?

 

This brings us to the fundamental question: What do I need from god?

 

Simply answered, nothing.

 

I need absolutely nothing from god. However, even if there were something god could do for me, it is abundantly clear that he would either not be powerful enough to do it, or he would not be loving enough to try. Or both. God is therefore a waste of energy and prayer is a waste of effort. It is futile and meaningless for me to turn my will and my life over to the care of a fantasy who clearly cannot be trusted with it. And I cannot willingly seek to improve my conscious contact with an entity who stoutly refuses to improve his own conscious contact with the rest of my brothers and sisters here in this shared humanity.

 

This leaves me in a rather peculiar predicament, to wit: how to get sober without the help of god “as I understand him”. So long as this disease and its symptoms are described in terms of the spiritual, any practical, rational solution seems as impossible as it does improbable; for if addiction is truly a spiritual malady, then its cure must also lie within the spiritual realm. But what if addiction were a disease of personality? What if the symptoms of use, abuse, and dependence were actually the manifestations of a broken Self? To frame it in psychological terms, suppose that the nature of this disease is nothing more mysterious than a struggle between my Lower Self and my Higher Self (spiritus contra spiritum); or, to use terms more scientific, between my primal brain and my rational brain. Doesn’t our own literature suggest such a personality-based affliction when it describes us as Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde?

 

If we look past the spiritual “woo” which has shrouded the physical and mental nature of our illness, then the solution becomes much more practical, much less mysterious. It simply becomes a matter of reconnecting with my higher, “truer” Self. Naturally, such a reconnection would likely involve the adoption of such things as honesty, willingness, humility, and courage as personality traits toward which

 

one’s Higher Self should strive. Perhaps even a sort of faith in the integrity of one’s True Self would be required. Thus, from a functional standpoint, the Twelve Steps would still be applicable, with the main difference being that it is the Self performing the work, rather than a god. Put another way, “I will suddenly realize that my Self is doing for me what I could not do for myself.”

 

To further explain my meaning, AA sponsors, colleagues, and counselors have often encouraged me to imagine the kind of god in whom I would like to believe and trust for my sobriety. I have been instructed to envision what qualities of characteristics such a god should have—traits such as compassion, integrity, strength… an ever-present help in times of trouble. It has even been suggested to me that I conceive precisely what it is I need from god. But Occam’s Razor compels me to favor the more simplistic option, with all things considered. If I can imagine such a god and trust in him to help me do the work, would it not be simpler to imagine my Self as having the same qualities and then simply do the work to become that Self? Why should I not strive to become a truer version of my Self—a person of integrity, courage, humility, and strength—rather than trust in a sky fairy who may not even exist? After all, insofar as my flawed senses are able to perceive, I at least have demonstrable corporeal form, unlike god, whose greatest miracle in modern times has been appearing as an image in a grilled cheese sandwich.

 

What is the Self? Is it not the culmination of my thoughts, words, and deeds?

 

Of necessity, the ecosystems we observe in nature evolved as models of balance and harmony, where predator and prey alike have adapted to suit their respective niches. As products of the same evolutionary process, is it any wonder that the path to serenity lies in living in harmony, first within ourselves, and then with one another? But in order to effect this balance within myself, I must first bring my thoughts, words, and deeds into harmony with each other. What is dishonesty if not a fracture between my thoughts and words? And how can I offend another if my deeds act in concert with my thoughts? I am a member of the human race, the culmination of millions of years of evolutionary progress, the process which created the balance and harmony observed in nature. The deepest desire of the True Self, described in the promises of AA, is to live and walk within that balance and harmony.

 

I therefore need nothing more than my Self. To look for contentment from any other source outside of myself is to search in vain for something I will not find, whether that source is a bottle, a needle, another person, or even a god. Omnia mea mecum porto—I carry with me all my things. I AM ENOUGH. Nothing more is required than a simple prayer:

“John,

Grant yourself the serenity to accept the things you cannot change,

The courage to change the things you can,

And the wisdom to know that YOU are the difference.”

 

[walterpthefirst]

I am most impressed by the honesty of your essay, Prof.

 

Would that we could all be so honest with ourselves.

 

Your lower case 'g' is also noted.

 

If it's not too much like prying, may I ask what the response was when you presented this to the therapist?

 

Thank you,

 

Walter.

 

 

 

 

[◊ Weezer ◊]

3 hours ago, walterpthefirst said:

 

If it's not too much like prying, may I ask what the response was when you presented this to the therapist?

 

 

Same question.  And i also congratulate you on your honest answer.

 

When working on the psych unit at the hospital I had several none belivers who were in required drug/alcohol treatment, with the same dilemma.  I  suggested they use the "collective consciousness" (or wisdom) of human beings as their higher power, just to get the counselor off their back.  That the "power" was in the belief that "god" would handle it.  Just as you said, the power was in the believer.

 

Almost every person who has been in any kind of addictionl/mental health/etc treatment has had a part of their "self" taken away (or denied) from them in some way.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

11 hours ago, walterpthefirst said:

If it's not too much like prying, may I ask what the response was when you presented this to the therapist?

 

7 hours ago, Weezer said:

Same question.  And i also congratulate you on your honest answer.

I'd like to be able to spin a yarn for y'all fellas about how the therapist was so impressed that she asked me to take over and lead some of the group sessions and everybody clapped and nobody ever drank or used drugs again.  Unfortunately, that's not how it happened.  This particular therapist took a very traditional, purist approach to the 12 steps.  She told me that I needed to think things through a little more, because I was just angry at god and that if I didn't find a higher power of some kind, I'd end up drunk again.  She even said that, in her experience, people often reject the idea of a higher power just so they'll have an excuse to continue in their addiction.  Finally, she advised that I should read the chapter to the agnostics in the Big Book and consider carefully what it said.  I responded that I had already read that chapter, multiple times; and that, for me, it simply presented a modified version of Pascal's Wager predicated upon the false dichotomy that either god existed and would help, or he did not and we were doomed.

 

I'm sure in her mind, she just just dropping some "hard truth" on me.  But, in my mind, it all rang as hollow as the "Turn or Burn" dissertations we get here in The Lion's Den.  She seems to have missed the point that, in my sobriety, my higher Self would be the equivalent of a higher power; and that looking for fulfillment from sources outside of myself was what had landed me in rehab to begin with.

 

Fortunately, another therapist had sized me up differently (dare I say "more accurately?").  This one introduced me to Refuge Recovery, a meditative approach to sobriety based on practical Buddhist philosophy.  And also Smart Recovery, a self-management program rooted in psychological empowerment.  Both of these are completely agnostic in their approach to recovery.

 

I had already taken an interest in Buddhist philosophy as early as autumn 2018; and had seen the potential there as a means to overcome my addiction.  So the practical guidance I received from this other therapist was an immeasurable help.  The Smart Recovery approach also appealed to the scientist in me.  Between these two approaches, I cobbled together a practical plan of action to beat my addiction and recover my true Self.

 

 

[TheRedneckProfessor]

8 hours ago, Weezer said:

Almost every person who has been in any kind of addiction/mental health/etc treatment has had a part of their "self" taken away (or denied) from them in some way.

If my entire experience with addiction, and with working with other addicts, could be distilled* into one summary sentiment, this would be it.  I wish this was understood more, not just by society in general, but by the psychological community and those who purport to aid us in recovery.  We are not the destructive, selfish losers we're made out to be.  We are not the criminals and dead-beats we're described as.  We're just people who got broken and lost our way somewhere along the path.  We are searching for something we don't even realize is missing; and often, we don't even realize we are searching.  We've lost our Selves.  Hell, many of us never had a Self to begin with; and that is what started us searching.  We are often more confused by our behavior than anyone else is.  We are told that our behavior is self-destructive; but how can we destroy something that we don't even have? 

 

In my case, I can now understand that my Self was robbed from me through childhood indoctrination and the ideas that my life was not my own, that I must sacrifice, that I should decrease so that christ might increase.  The endless cycle of craving=>use=>release=>guilt began at the altar as early as my Sunday School days.  This combined with the abuse of my narcissistic mother, as well as a genetic predisposition toward addiction from both sides of my family, left me with little chance.  And all of us have similar stories, which is why we tell the newcomer to focus on the similarities and not the differences.

 

But to add further insult to the injuries we've so harrowingly endured, we're then shunted into these 12 step programs where we're told that we are sick and diseased; and the only cure is for us to blame ourselves (steps 4-9) and trust god for deliverance (steps 2,3,10,11).  Is it any wonder that the vast majority of us drop out of these programs and relapse within the first year?  Don't get me wrong; I'm glad 12 step programs exist.  I'm eternally grateful that Bill W. and Dr. Bob put in the time and energy to get the ball rolling for guys like me.  But society, and especially the criminal/judicial system, needs to stop looking to 12 steps as some kind of magic cure-all, given that the latest research shows that less than 30% ever achieve long-term sobriety.

 

I am thoroughly convinced that finding my Self, or at least realizing it was missing, was the only thing that could have ever gotten me sober.  I am equally convinced that loving, nurturing, and being my Self is the only thing that will sustain me in long-term sobriety.  Yes, I recognize that there is a glaring inconsistency between my conception of Self and the Buddhist view that there is no Self.  I reconcile this by viewing my Self as simply the point of contact between my consciousness and the eternal oneness of reality and existence.  I want that point to be as it should be; and knowing what it should not be gives me sufficient points of reference to make a productive start.

 

 

 

 

 

 

*No pun intended

[◊ Weezer ◊]

9 hours ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

 

I am thoroughly convinced that finding my Self, or at least realizing it was missing, was the only thing that could have ever gotten me sober.  I am equally convinced that loving, nurturing, and being my Self is the only thing that will sustain me in long-term sobriety.  Yes, I recognize that there is a glaring inconsistency between my conception of Self and the Buddhist view that there is no Self.  I reconcile this by viewing my Self as simply the point of contact between my consciousness and the eternal oneness of reality and existence.  I want that point to be as it should be; and knowing what it should not be gives me sufficient points of reference to make a productive start.

 

 

You have some excelent insights.  Have you considered going into one of the professions?

 

The purist attitude of AA/etc was what I and our psych patients saw a lot of of.  And it wasn't until later in my career that it occured to me how the doctrine of original sin and turning eveything over to god played such a large role in our "christian" society, and why people are depressed and turn to addictions in the first place. 

 

What put me onto the problem was the thinking of Dr. William Glasser who wrote the book REALITY THERAPY in the 1960s.  He says a very important basic mental need for everyone is to feel worthwhile.  And the foundation for that is to be safe, loved and nurtured unconditionally as a small child.  And early neglect can be as bad as abuse when it comes to creating problems later in life.  Then as a child grows older they need to gradually take on responsibility of taking care of themself, and then eventually passing on that "nurturing" (respect, or whatever you want to call it) to others.  Then as an adult It takes giving back to society, as you are able to do so, to be worthwhile.   

 

That made sense, and it occured to me that the doctrine of original sin is a self fulfilling prophecy that undermines feeling worthwhile, and gives the "religious police" a job for life.  And requires more professional policemen, counselors, etc.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

19 hours ago, Weezer said:

You have some excelent insights.  Have you considered going into one of the professions?

I have thought about it.  I think being a counselor at a rehab center would be an awesome job for me.  Alas, changing careers doesn't really fit into my life right now.  But I have plans to visit the rehab again this summer to share my experience, strength, and hope with the patients there.

[walterpthefirst]

Professor,

 

I think that what impresses me about your account is that you had sufficient self belief when it mattered.  Before you began any therapy and while you were in the grip of your alcohol problem.  Sufficient self belief to choose your own way, rather than the way offered to you.

 

 

Thank you.

 

Walter.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

3 hours ago, walterpthefirst said:

Professor,

 

I think that what impresses me about your account is that you had sufficient self belief when it mattered.  Before you began any therapy and while you were in the grip of your alcohol problem.  Sufficient self belief to choose your own way, rather than the way offered to you.

 

 

Thank you.

 

Walter.

Hmm... maybe.  At the time it felt more like desperation, in the midst of which, I at least knew what would not work.  And the overwhelming need to be free pushed me towards a willingness to try just about anything else besides what I knew would not work.

[walterpthefirst]

22 hours ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

Hmm... maybe.  At the time it felt more like desperation, in the midst of which, I at least knew what would not work.  And the overwhelming need to be free pushed me towards a willingness to try just about anything else besides what I knew would not work.

 

Well, knowing what wouldn't work and then sticking to your guns at a time of crisis is something I consider to be admirable. Professor.

 

Thank you.

 

Walter.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

1 hour ago, walterpthefirst said:

 

Well, knowing what wouldn't work and then sticking to your guns at a time of crisis is something I consider to be admirable. Professor.

 

Thank you.

 

Walter.

Ah, well now, gun-sticking is something I know a little something about.  I'm as stubborn as I am obstinate, which, I'm sure, comes as no surprise to anyone here. 

 

"Torocephaly" is the medical term, I believe.

 

I appreciate your appreciation, though; I don't take it lightly. 

[Samuel]

It’s interesting that going to 12 step meetings was where I came out. But it also was important to me because the seriousness that people sought a higher power was real on a level that broke church for me. The supposedly bestest church ever that I was born into, that prided itself on its fundamentalism, just couldn’t ring true to me after spending a lot of time hearing people’s struggles. The higher power wasn’t true, but people’s pain was. I don’t know how I’d re-evaluate that journey if I had to look at it again. Maybe it was too much dwelling on the dark where people’s lives were breaking. I do crave meaning after religion. 

 

It was hard to find anywhere in society in America that people were taking their lives and struggles seriously.
 

[TheRedneckProfessor]

2 hours ago, Samuel said:

It’s interesting that going to 12 step meetings was where I came out. But it also was important to me because the seriousness that people sought a higher power was real on a level that broke church for me. The supposedly bestest church ever that I was born into, that prided itself on its fundamentalism, just couldn’t ring true to me after spending a lot of time hearing people’s struggles. The higher power wasn’t true, but people’s pain was. I don’t know how I’d re-evaluate that journey if I had to look at it again. Maybe it was too much dwelling on the dark where people’s lives were breaking. I do crave meaning after religion. 

 

It was hard to find anywhere in society in America that people were taking their lives and struggles seriously.
 

I would never disparage the 12 step approach; as I know it works for a number of people.  It does not work for me, though; and I have no issue explaining the reasons why (the higher power concept being only one of the many).  When it comes to pain, in my experience, the 12 step approach does not probe deep enough to get to the root of the pain.  There is the pain that we cause; and there is the pain that has been inflicted upon us.  Both require attention; but the 12 steps seem to only focus on the pain that we caused, with steps 4-9 dedicated exclusively to the subject.  That's 6 steps, half of the program, focused only on taking responsibility for the pain we have caused. 

 

Absolutely nothing in the program allows us to deal with the pain that was inflicted upon us; and, often, that is the initial source of our defects of character.  As they say, hurt people hurt people.  And if the source of our defects is in childhood trauma and abuse (as it usually is), we can make all the amends in the world without actually getting down to the root source of our addiction.  The problem is often that the behavior from others, the way others treat us, becomes so natural and familiar that we don't recognize it as toxic.  We don't realize that the way we are treated is often as destructive as the way we have treated others.  Much like the immune system does not recognize cancer as a dangerous invader because it is made up of our own cells; so it is that we don't recognize toxic behavior from others because it is just a "normal" part of how we were raised or how we've always been treated.

 

We have to allow ourselves healthy boundaries; even if that means cutting close friends and family out of our lives altogether, if they are a triggering source of toxicity.  The 12 step approach would have us stop at making amends with those people, which, in the case of a narcissistic, manipulative, gas-lighting individual would more often than not give that person even more control over our lives.  In my opinion, we do need to make amends for what we've done; but we also need to learn to hold others accountable for what they have done to us.  This includes healthy boundaries that can be summed up in the golden, platinum, and palladium rules:

• Do unto others as you would have them do unto you (golden)
• Do not do unto others as you would not have done unto you (platinum)
• Do not allow others to do unto you what you would not do unto them (palladium)

This is where I find an advantage in the Buddhist approach in Refuge Recovery (Dharma Recovery).  The 8-fold path is all about taking personal responsibility.  While we are not responsible for another person's actions or words, we are ultimately responsible for how we allow another person to treat us.  Having right relationships, right thoughts, right actions, etc. also means allowing ourselves to speak the truth to others irrespective of the previous nature of the relationship we had with them.  It gives us permission to tell our abuser to either stop the abuse or fuck off.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

5 years...

[TABA]

31 minutes ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

5 years...

Congratulations!