Gosh, it’s a good thing that the AA in my community is nothing like what you experienced. I question everything, and have heard those “certain phrases” challenged again and again. Yes, there are folks who will disagree with me, but they don’t ask me to leave, or to stop coming back, or to shut up. Our main rule here is to limit the length of our “sharing” so that others who want to question, share, and maybe even get sober, can have time to speak also.
Visitors: In our area, our purpose is to get sober, stay sober, and help other alcoholics get sober… so we don’t listen to opinions of visitors while the meeting is going on. They’re welcome to hang out beforehand or afterwards and spout off to those who care to listen. There are plenty of fora for that… it’s called “life”. My time during meetings is focused on sobriety.
I am open to correction, but I was under the impression that AA declines all funding from sources outside the membership.
Is there any evidence that they accept government funds? (They are a 501©(3) tax exempt organization, but that would not preclude them accepting funds from other groups; it only means that they cannot make a profit or engage in election campaigns.)
(I have no opinion on whether AA “is” a “religion.” If so, they are about the only religion (aside from, perhaps, the UU) who accept as members persons of other religions.)
well there may be some confusion on my part about definitions and terms, what is the difference between religious and spirtual, what does sacrament and sacred mean?
the texts in AA are openly known to be written by people who would describe themselves as anything but holy or divine. I’m not sure what the difference between positive affirmations used in psychology and the catchphrases in AA is.
the book says “our book is meant to be suggestive only, we realize we know only a little.”
sure, lots of people take a more religious stance, that’s fine if it works for them. Me, I think it’s a great big noisy beautiful universe and a there’s probably a higher order of organization the homo sapiens
AA is just a kind of group therapy if you will, for alcoholics, it’s really not productive to try and read anything more into it than that. For many it is very successful, and of course there’s no charge compared with the boutique detox retreats for the rich and famous or, uber-hip. Alkies typically end up with literally nothing - having pissed away their jobs, wives, husbands, money, everything. And from what I’ve seen - their non-denominational “generic” form of spirituality is often attractive precisely because it’s not run by any major organized religious group - so atheists get along fine, as far as that goes.
No, not that AA is the “one golden way” but they are adamant that “not taking that first drink” is the key to staying sober - “one day at a time”. They do not believe it is possible for a true alcoholic to “cut back a bit” or drink in moderation, or just at social events, etc. Their core belief is that alcoholism is progressive and it will get worse, not better - unless the drunk swears off alcohol forever, period. AA is not for amateurs - it’s a program for serious, down in the gutter drunks who cannot stop drinking alcohol. You’re right - they do not appreciate those at meetings claiming years of sobriety who have been drinking on the sly, however.
Nothing, especially in the context of this discussion.
A sacrament is a ritual and something sacred is revered and untouchable. You will not deny, I hope, that AA has rituals, and while some groups may permit discussion (such as Another Permit’s) I think it is fair to say that AA has sacred dogma. Of course, many obviously religious groups permit discussion too.
At AA meetings, there is recitation of a text, including the condemnation (it’s not a condemnation, but I can’t think of a better word right now) of those who have tried AA and failed. There is the ritual “sharing”, the common prayer, and the abundant talk of a higher power. I can’t think of it as anything but religious.
I forgot to ask - is it a problem that AA is religious?
These are two different things. Yes, the latter is AA’s core belief, but that’s not what makes it religious. AA is, however, proclaimed as the one way to sobriety, the one that works. I’ve seen no statistics confirming this, but the belief that it is the case is, again, taken as gospel within AA.
I’m afraid I don’t understand this sentence. If you’re talking about my mention of people who came to AA and then kept drinking, I was talking about people who try and fail, not people who keep drinking surreptitiously. AA has invented an explanation for the failures so as to not tarnish their method.
If AA is a religion and Alcoholism is a medical condition and AA has a track record of helping people with that medical condition through it’s religious practices.
Can we conclude that religion has a valid place in medical practice?
Not for me, as I said above.
Do you have a cite for the track record? All figures I’ve heard (and AA publishes them very rarely; the cynic in me thinks it’s because of the following) are at the same level as people trying to quit drinking through other means.
I think it’s a great program - and statistics are typically meaningless anyway, depending on whose ox is being gored. Their “Big Book” is probably the “Bible” of the organization, written by Bill W., way back in the 1930’s iirc. I would highly recommend reading that for anyone who has curiosity about their history or methods, as it is from the horses mouth, so to speak. I should state, for the purposes of full disclosure, that I am not an alcoholic, don’t go to meetings, and will probably drink a hefe as soon as I finish this post. I’ve seen enough destruction by drunks and all that, to thank whatever higher power that I am not.
No I don’t, nor do I plan to look. It was a ‘what if’ question.
Nope, we can conclude that this particular religion has a valid place in medical practices, assuming your premise is correct.
If you “solve” someone’s addiction to alchohol by getting them hooked on crystal meth instead, is that valid medical practice ? The effects of strong religious belief can be ( and are by me ) regarded as a self-generated version of drug abuse, using natural brain chemicals instead of outside drugs - ever hear of religious ecstasy ? Switching from alcohol to religion is just switching drugs, not curing anything IMHO.
Well, then: no. If something, no matter what, has been shown (through proper scientific procedures) to have a desirable effect and have a good track record, then that particular thing has a place, not some huge category that thing may fall into.
It’s a matter of degree, I agree. Still, it’s demonstrably “better” - for everyone involved, I assure you - that hard-core alcoholics abstain from drinking alcohol, it really isn’t a matter of debate.
AA may have favorable statistics simply because at least long term, everyone who participates wants to be there, and wants to stay sober, wants to become or remain a responsible, productive member of society, etc.
Be careful; drinking and driving don’t mix.
well, I can only speak for myself, but I DON’T think it’s fair to say AA has sacred dogma. I was once a homeless alcoholic living on the streets in las vegas and donating plasma to buy booze, now I’m a respected ER nurse with money in the bank, i’m not in any religious ecstasy, I do not have altered brain chemistry, i don’t worship anything and I still think organized religion is hard put to prove they haven’t caused more harm than good. I don’t consider my alcoholism cured, merely in remission. I find the suggestion that I’ve traded addictions to be laughable. to me there is a very real difference between spiritual and religious, as always YMMV
Why not?