• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Alcoholics Anonymous - Thumbs Up or Thumbs Down?

Up or Down?

  • Thumbs Up

    Votes: 31 68.9%
  • Thumbs Down

    Votes: 14 31.1%

  • Total voters
    45
This is an interesting article about AA. It states; "Peer-reviewed studies peg the success rate of AA somewhere between 5 and 10 percent. That is, about one of every fifteen people who enter these programs is able to become and stay sober." So not only is it cultish and religious in nature, it is also ineffective. If I took my car to a mechanic 10 times to get it fixed and he fixed it on the 10th time, I would be looking for another mechanic. I would not be funneling him business and money like our government funnels business and money to AA programs across the country. If my kid came home from school and got a passing grade for getting 1 out of 10 questions correct, I would pull him out of that school and demand it be defunded. AA is not only a proselytizing tool for religious dogma, it also gives false hope to people who really are in need of help. On top of that, the individuals who run this program are being paid for shoddy work.

The pseudo-science of Alcoholics Anonymous: There’s a better way to treat addiction - Salon.com



Here's the problem with all that you just posted. The overall success rate for treating the addicted is pretty low... probably around what the article states. Addiction and the draw to addiction is one of the toughest mental health issues to treat. However, what the authors failed to note... as did you, is this. Find what the success rate for UNTREATED addicts is and compare the stats you quoted to that.
 
You can be as dismissive as you like, but only the weak minded would not see it for what it is and that its goal is religious indoctrination. I really don't know what other angle I could take in debating the obvious. Once you read the 12 steps that these programs rely on in order to graduate people to soberness. Then I would also point to the factual statistics that state that as high as 95% of the people who attend relapse. Sounds to me nearly as effective as religious dogma as well. I generally don't like to use popular sayings for fear of lacking originality, so I'll change it up a bit. If it walks like a sheep, talks like a sheep, and looks like a sheep, its probably a sheep.

I'm not dismissing. That indicates that what you said has some validity. It doesn't. Your assertion that AA is religious in nature is a position of ignorance. You can't call the sky green just because you want it to be green. This sounds like the complaining of a militant atheist who gets annoyed if the word God appears anywhere in his vicinity. Perhaps you're not, but as you said, if it walks like a sheep, talks like a sheep, and looks like a sheep, its probably a sheep.
 
Firstly, AA is not funded by the governemnt in any way shape or form. Believing that it is demonstrates that you don't know the first thing of what you are discussing. Secondly, as I said in my previous post, the "higher power" can refer to anything one chooses. Anywhere God is mentioned, an alternative can be inserted if one chooses. AA is no more of a religious group then any other support group. Each individual group has it's own personality. Some may be more dogmatic, some more atheistic, some looser, etc... You are correct about the reason for addiction, however you are incorrect about the meaning behind that. Addiction is a coping skill. We all use coping skills to deal with difficult things. Some use coping skills that are healthy and productive. Others use some that are unhealthy and unproductive. This is not a refection on the strength or weakness of the individual, but of choices one makes.

Appeals court says requirement to attend AA unconstitutional - SFGate

A snipit from the article, click the link for full article.
Appeals court says requirement to attend AA unconstitutional

Alcoholics Anonymous, the renowned 12-step program that directs problem drinkers to seek help from a higher power, says it's not a religion and is open to nonbelievers. But it has enough religious overtones that a parolee can't be ordered to attend its meetings as a condition of staying out of prison, a federal appeals court ruled Friday.

In fact, said the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, the constitutional dividing line between church and state in such cases is so clear that a parole officer can be sued for damages for ordering a parolee to go through rehabilitation at Alcoholics Anonymous or an affiliated program for drug addicts.
Rulings from across the nation since 1996 have established that "requiring a parolee to attend religion-based treatment programs violates the First Amendment," the court said. "While we in no way denigrate the fine work of (Alcoholics Anonymous and Narcotics Anonymous), attendance in their programs may not be coerced by the state."
The 12 steps required for participants in both programs include an acknowledgment that "a power greater than ourselves could restore us to sanity" and a promise to "turn our will and our lives over to the care of God as we understood Him." They also call for prayer and meditation.

Courts routinely force people to go to AA as part of fulfilling their sentence. How much more evidence do you need. Even the courts have determined it is unconstitutional on the grounds that AA is considered a religious group.
 
Appeals court says requirement to attend AA unconstitutional - SFGate

A snipit from the article, click the link for full article.


Courts routinely force people to go to AA as part of fulfilling their sentence. How much more evidence do you need. Even the courts have determined it is constitutional on the grounds that AA is considered a religious group.

This is an OPINION. Just because a court made this ruling doesn't mean it's accurate. Sounds more like an appeal to authority logical fallacy, to me.
 
This is an OPINION. Just because a court made this ruling doesn't mean it's accurate. Sounds more like an appeal to authority logical fallacy, to me.

Opinions? How much more evidence do you need? Courts around the country are calling it unconstitutional and a religious group. Thats not opinion, thats the arm of the judicial system stating that it is unconstitutional.
Does Mandatory AA/NA Violate the First Amendment? | North Carolina Criminal Law
Three federal circuit courts have held that coerced participation in 12-step programs like AA and NA violates the First Amendment. In Kerr v. Ferry, 95 F.3d 472 (7th Cir. 1996), the Seventh Circuit held that requiring an inmate to attend NA meetings or risk suffering adverse effects for parole eligibility violated the Establishment Clause. The Second Circuit reached a similar conclusion in Warner v. Orange County Department of Probation, 115 F.3d 1068 (2d Cir. 1997), striking a probation condition requiring attendance at AA meetings. And most recently the Ninth Circuit determined that a parolee’s First Amendment rights were violated when his parole officer forced him to attend 12-step meetings as a condition of his parole. Inouye v. Kemna, 504 F.3d 705 (9th Cir. 2007). In the latter two cases the courts found the law sufficiently clearly established to abrogate the officers’ qualified immunity. Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability for civil damages “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 (1982). In other words, Warner and Inouye were able to go forward with lawsuits against their officers for damages for violation of their constitutional rights under 42 U.S.C. 1983. Numerous federal district courts and state supreme courts have reached the same conclusion.
 
Why not force people to go to church who have committed crimes. I mean, its not religious if they replace the words "god" and "Jesus" with other words. I scratch my head at the amount of twisting one must do to their mind in order to really believe that kind of logic.
 
Opinions? How much more evidence do you need? Courts around the country are calling it unconstitutional and a religious group. Thats not opinion, thats the arm of the judicial system stating that it is unconstitutional.
Does Mandatory AA/NA Violate the First Amendment? | North Carolina Criminal Law

That is the justice department giving a name to something based on their OPINION. They read the words and apply their own meanings to them rather than understanding the flexibility in them. I know of plenty of people who attend AA meetings and I know of no one who believes them to be a religious organization in the least. The courts absolutely got this wrong.
 
Why not force people to go to church who have committed crimes. I mean, its not religious if they replace the words "god" and "Jesus" with other words. I scratch my head at the amount of twisting one must do to their mind in order to really believe that kind of logic.

A church houses a religious organization. The organization defines itself as religious and it is designed to worship God... or whatever Gods it chooses to worship. AA is not a place to worship deities. Calling AA a religious organization takes a ton of mental gymnastics.
 
That is the justice department giving a name to something based on their OPINION. They read the words and apply their own meanings to them rather than understanding the flexibility in them. I know of plenty of people who attend AA meetings and I know of no one who believes them to be a religious organization in the least. The courts absolutely got this wrong.

I guess we will just have to leave it there then. I really have nothing more to put forth without repeating myself. I think the programs curriculum speaks for itself. Any non biased, logical person would see that it is heavily religious in nature. Trying to make it less obvious by saying... "ok ok guys, from now on, we will say higher power instead of god", will only convince those who again, are weak minded. But we are not really surprised that the religious be less then genuine when they make their claims of being benign. All one has to do is take a quick look at history to see how conniving and cleaver they can be to those who are not capable of seeing thru it.
 
A church houses a religious organization. The organization defines itself as religious and it is designed to worship God... or whatever Gods it chooses to worship. AA is not a place to worship deities. Calling AA a religious organization takes a ton of mental gymnastics.

Tons of mental gymnastics, do you even know the roots from which AA was born?

Alcoholics Anonymous History: Dick B.’s AA History & Bible Roots

All the pages I have visited clearly state that AA was born out of religious doctorine. Making it more palatable by toning down the religious overtones and wording does not make it any less religious.
 
I guess we will just have to leave it there then. I really have nothing more to put forth without repeating myself. I think the programs curriculum speaks for itself. Any non biased, logical person would see that it is heavily religious in nature. Trying to make it less obvious by saying... "ok ok guys, from now on, we will say higher power instead of god", will only convince those who again, are weak minded. But we are not really surprised that the religious be less then genuine when they make their claims of being benign. All one has to do is take a quick look at history to see how conniving and cleaver they can be to those who are not capable of seeing thru it.

Yes, yes, militant atheists whenever they see the word "God" have their hysterics. Any non-biased, logical person would understand that one has to look deeper into an issue to really understand it. Higher power is just that. It can be God, but it doesn't have to be. It's the weak-minded who can't look beyond the word or phrase to understand it's meaning. There will always be people who will attack what they don't understand.
 
Tons of mental gymnastics, do you even know the roots from which AA was born?

Alcoholics Anonymous History: Dick B.’s AA History & Bible Roots

All the pages I have visited clearly state that AA was born out of religious doctorine. Making it more palatable by toning down the religious overtones and wording does not make it any less religious.

How it was born and what it is now are two different things. Giving options to having it have religious overtones or not certainly makes it less religious. You are basing your opinions on your own apparent anti-religious biases.
 
11th day sober, it is for me, guys. :)

May have found a new, really cool sponsor - will keep you guys posted.

Am substituting God for "Group of Drunks" - is working great, for me (that concept, that is).

Feel an abundance of love for humanity and myself as well these days - am coming real close to surrendering, as they say in AA (everyone whom has a significant amount of time in AA knows what "surrender" means).

Have to be to work at noon - music store. Will keep you guys posted on that, as well.

Have a nice day, everyone! :)

And remember: "This is GOD (Group of Drunks). I (we) are going to be taking care of all your problems today, so have a super fantastic day (and be happy)!" :) :D

Thanks.
 
This is a great attempt to appeal to feel goodery gibberish. Feel goodery that I understand. Of course we want people who have addictions to overcome them, and we certainly don't want to put them down for doing so. But the truth is, people who have harmful addictions, have them for a reason. That is because they have an inability to deal with reality. Whatever their situation may be, they find that their addiction gives them respite from dealing with it.

That's a very simplistic and ignorant view of addiction to alcohol. People generally drink to get high, but the difference between Joe who drinks regularly and Sue who drinks regularly, and Joe who becomes alcoholic simply isn't simply that Joe has less ability to deal with alcohol. Every study I've seen indicates genes have a big role in determining who does and doesn't become addicted. If you want to cite studies that show otherwise, please do so.

This is nothing to be necessarily ashamed of, but what AA tries to do is replace alcohol with a religious, cultish doma. Just look at the 12 steps and tell me that they are not religious in nature. The 2nd step alone tells you all you need to know. "Come to believe that a power greater then ourselves could restore us to sanity". Alcoholics Anonymous : Twelve Steps and Twelve Traditions.

I doubt if you've spent any time actually in AA meetings. There is for some people a religious element to AA. But it's not (in my experience) a religious atmosphere, and it's certainly not cultish. At its core, AA is a support group. And as I've mentioned, there are perhaps 30 different AA groups in my area, and they all have different personalities and focuses. If you want to generalize and stereotype the groups, it's just evidence you don't have any idea how AA actually works in real life.

Trying to insert religious dogma into a program that is suppose to be helping these people is simply disgusting in my view. It is kind of the same tactic many Christian organizations use when they are handing out rice to starving kids in Africa and include a bible along with the aid.

Comparing starving people's receipt of food, to what is voluntary participation in a support group, is ridiculous. And what religious dogma is being forced on others in AA? A non-binding suggestion to rely on a higher power of your choice?

That is why I look at AA as help for the weak minded.

That's a non sequitur.

Instead of dealing with the reality of their situations, and speaking frankly about it, they are taught to relinquish themsleves to a higher power in order to become "saved" from the evils of alcohol.

Speaking frankly about addiction IS what AA is all about. More than anything, being brutally honest about yourself, your role in creating your own problems, and how you can address your problems, without regard to what else is going on in your life, is the AA program. You clearly don't have the faintest idea about how it's supposed to work.

When in reality, its not the alcohol that is the problem.

There is no "THE" problem. But for an addicted person, no other problem can be solved until the person gets off the addicting substance and can successfully stay off it. So if any problem is primary, it's obviously the addicting substance.

The steps are in fact ONE way to address all the other problems that contribute to alcohol use. Look at steps 5-10. Alcohol isn't mentioned. So you say 'it's not the alcohol that is the problem' but are apparently clueless that AA recognizes that rather explicitly by focusing most of the steps on problems other than...alcohol!

I think AA programs should be completely dismantled on the grounds that they are religious organizations which are completely illegally funded by the government.

Another non sequitur.

Groups are locally organized by small groups of individuals, and funded entirely by the voluntary and optional donations of those attending. Government literally has NO role in them.
 
This is an interesting article about AA. It states; "Peer-reviewed studies peg the success rate of AA somewhere between 5 and 10 percent. That is, about one of every fifteen people who enter these programs is able to become and stay sober." So not only is it cultish and religious in nature, it is also ineffective. If I took my car to a mechanic 10 times to get it fixed and he fixed it on the 10th time, I would be looking for another mechanic. I would not be funneling him business and money like our government funnels business and money to AA programs across the country. If my kid came home from school and got a passing grade for getting 1 out of 10 questions correct, I would pull him out of that school and demand it be defunded. AA is not only a proselytizing tool for religious dogma, it also gives false hope to people who really are in need of help. On top of that, the individuals who run this program are being paid for shoddy work.

The pseudo-science of Alcoholics Anonymous: There’s a better way to treat addiction - Salon.com

Here's a quote from your source:

court-mandated attendance, which began in the late 1980s, is today a staple of drug-crime policy. Every year, our state and federal governments spend over $15 billion on substance-abuse treatment for addicts, the vast majority of which are based on 12-step programs.

The article conflates two different things. One is court mandated attendance at AA meetings. That costs state and Federal governments $0.00. Literally nothing. If the court mandates that a person attend AA for 90 days, he or she attends meetings and can donate $1 per meeting or more, or donate $0. Either way, the meager cost is on the attendee and not on government.

Sometimes the court mandates treatment in state or federally funded treatment programs. A local 12 step based charity is funded in part by VA funds. But those are treatment centers or programs, and that is different than "AA." The VA send us as many as we can take because the charity does a better job and has better outcomes than any of the other alternatives available in this area.

If you want to lament that there aren't more treatment options out there, I'm fine with that. I also believe we'd be better off with more options. Clearly many people aren't helped by AA. I'd love them to have 6 or 30 other programs to choose from. That's not a problem with AA.
 
I guess we will just have to leave it there then. I really have nothing more to put forth without repeating myself. I think the programs curriculum speaks for itself. Any non biased, logical person would see that it is heavily religious in nature. Trying to make it less obvious by saying... "ok ok guys, from now on, we will say higher power instead of god", will only convince those who again, are weak minded. But we are not really surprised that the religious be less then genuine when they make their claims of being benign. All one has to do is take a quick look at history to see how conniving and cleaver they can be to those who are not capable of seeing thru it.

The alcoholic who has the courage and will to get sober is anything but 'weak minded' whatever that is. To assume that it is a 'weak mind' that becomes alcoholic or who attends AA is a woefully ignorant attitude about what AA is, what alcoholism is, or what religion is. It requires a great deal of courage, self awareness, and intelligence to break the addictive cycle.

And, if I was to sit down and write down the top 50 organizations that are religious in nature, AA would not be among them. I have never been to an AA or Al-Anon meeting, gathering, convention or whatever EVER in which religious faith was discussed. It just isn't done. A number of the recovering addicts/alcoholics who have posted in this thread are not 'religious' people--some say they remain agnostic or Atheist. And that is fine. They are just as welcome at an AA meeting as anybody else and nobody tries to 'convert' them at least in that setting.

Many alcoholics do put their faith in God as a spiritual being and confess that, but they do not, at least in the AA setting, try to push who or what God is to them onto anybody else. The 'higher power' is simply an acknowledgment that the alcoholic is powerless over alcohol and he or she acknowledges he/she needs help to break his/her addiction. It is no different than admitting that the person is powerless over cancer or heart disease or diabetes or any other deadly affliction and reach out for help to get well.

Non alcoholics drink to relax, socialize, sometimes to get high. The addict drinks or uses to feel normal--the addiction causes him to feel extremely uncomfortable, anxious, miserable when he is deprived of it. And one more time, nobody intends or wants or plans to be alcoholic any more than anybody intends or wants or plans to get cancer or to be diabetic. But for a substantial number of people who consume alcohol, it does happen just the same. Not because they are weak-minded, but because they are susceptible to the disease.
 
Oh and for those who say follow the money in AA? You don't have much to follow. The hat is passed for small donations to pay for the space or buy the coffee or whatever, but no donation is mandatory to attend the meetings.
 
Oh and for those who say follow the money in AA? You don't have much to follow. The hat is passed for small donations to pay for the space or buy the coffee or whatever, but no donation is mandatory to attend the meetings.

True! And the funny thing is AA groups would have to refuse a government grant because of the prohibition against accepting outside contributions.

One local group was confronted with what to do with a bequest ($5,000 as I recall) from a woman whose husband attended a particular meeting for decades before he died. She directed the money go to that named group, but they couldn't accept it as it was from a clearly outside source - a person who wasn't a member of AA. And there wouldn't have been any use for the money if they had accepted it. I suppose they could have donated it to the church where they met, but there was no staff to pay, or bills that weren't met by the regular donations from attendees. At any rate, the group didn't get a penny. Not sure what happened to the bequest.
 
You obviously don't understand the concept of AA, of recovery, or of addiction. You didn't "quit". No one does. It's not a crutch. It assistance to remain in recovery from a serious disorder.

And as far as it being a "Christian recruitment" group, the only folks I've ever heard who've said that are militant atheists who really don't understand AA. The "higher power" doesn't have to mean a deity. I can give several examples of people who I knew who used something completely different as their "higher power". AA often gets criticized for using "God", but there are meetings that omit the higher power from it's literature.

I would be interested to hear about this
 
I was required to attend an AA meeting as part of a school assignment in one of my psych courses. I don't agree with all their steps but it does help people. Alcoholism is an addiction, I wouldn't classify it as a disease in the sense that you have no control over it. However, once addicted it's easy for sober people to relapse and it is a significant mental and physical process to quit drinking.

It might not be the best program, but when I went the people seemed extremely welcoming, helpful, and those attending were getting support with many being sober for many years due to the support they get from AA. If it helps alcoholics quit drinking and turn their lives around I'm all for it.
 
Firstly, I'll respond in any way I choose. Secondly, I thought you were leaving. And thirdly, why do you want to know?

Lol...two things;

One - since you apparently will not answer even a simple question and since I believe you stated earlier that you have counselled people then I am going to assume your answer is 'yes - you have counselled people on various addictions for profit'.
If that is true, then you are incredibly biased on this subject as you are deriving income from it.

Two - I gotta tell you; and I mean no offense; I have known MANY counsellors and shrinks (personally, socially and professionally), and you have about the worst attitude i have ever seen. You are exceedingly defensive, rude and I'll-tempered in your responses in this thread to ANYONE who dares disagree with you.
I hope for the sake of those that you counselled that this attitude is confined to the Internet and that you handle yourself with far more patience and professionalism in the real world.


We are done here - for now

Good day.
 
Lol...two things;

One - since you apparently will not answer even a simple question and since I believe you stated earlier that you have counselled people then I am going to assume your answer is 'yes - you have counselled people on various addictions for profit'.
If that is true, then you are incredibly biased on this subject as you are deriving income from it.

Two - I gotta tell you; and I mean no offense; I have known MANY counsellors and shrinks (personally, socially and professionally), and you have about the worst attitude i have ever seen. You are exceedingly defensive, rude and I'll-tempered in your responses in this thread to ANYONE who dares disagree with you.
I hope for the sake of those that you counselled that this attitude is confined to the Internet and that you handle yourself with far more patience and professionalism in the real world.


We are done here - for now

Good day.

And you are being civil, non defensive, open, accepting in this post?

Among those who have giving their own thoughts and witness as members of AA or Al-Anon, who has been more accusatory, defensive, rude, or uncivil here? Them? Or the ones trying to accuse or denigrate AA?
 
Lol...two things;

One - since you apparently will not answer even a simple question and since I believe you stated earlier that you have counselled people then I am going to assume your answer is 'yes - you have counselled people on various addictions for profit'.
If that is true, then you are incredibly biased on this subject as you are deriving income from it.

LOL. So we shouldn't listen to surgeons when the topic is surgery because surgeons derive income from doing surgery? I'm not sure what your point is, but someone deriving income from something doesn't disqualify their opinion on their profession. In most cases, we'd consider such people who devote a career to a certain endeavor informed experts.

And the problem is what you and others have done is recount your own personal experiences and then condemned AA/NA as a whole based on that. What it demonstrates is the program didn't work for you, but we're all glad you've managed to overcome your problem other ways. It does work for others, and there is no need to condemn a program that simply does work for many others.

Two - I gotta tell you; and I mean no offense; I have known MANY counsellors and shrinks (personally, socially and professionally), and you have about the worst attitude i have ever seen. You are exceedingly defensive, rude and I'll-tempered in your responses in this thread to ANYONE who dares disagree with you.
I hope for the sake of those that you counselled that this attitude is confined to the Internet and that you handle yourself with far more patience and professionalism in the real world.

We are done here - for now

Good day.

From where I sit this has been a pretty civil discussion, CaptainCourtesy included.
 
Back
Top Bottom