I think that for alcohol related offenses they should be made to bow before the porcelain throne.
I’m no expert on AA, but as I understand it, step 3 of their “12 Steps” is:
Of course, “as we understood Him,” suggests a very generalized faith, but I think it’s fair to call a statement like that theist in nature.
Put another way, would it be appropriate for a public school to mandate a moment of contemplation every morning for “…God as we understand Him?”
Bricker the “as we understand Him” is indeed the wriggle room. Some, as I say, use the group as the “Higher Power” as it were.
Good point. I wonder if it’s been made before?
Since AA only recognizes a “higher power”, defined however the individual wishes to define it for him/herself, I am not sure that that makes them a de facto religious organization, and thus subject to the SOCAS. It’s certainly a lot different than sentencing an inmate to church.
It’s “ceremonial deism.”
Thanks for the cite to Warner v Orange County Department of Probations, Hamlet. According to the case documents on Findlaw
So it would seem the court found that AA was sufficiently religious to offend the establishment clause if attendance were a mandatory penalty. Given this info and the ability to choose between punishments the judge in the OP is offering I would expect the judge in this case is not violating the establishment clause either.
Enjoy,
Steven
Sheesh, Bricker. Forget “Undue entanglement” much? Judges can and do impose all kinds of conditions. For example often a person charged with DUI is ordered not to enter any place where the primary purpose is the sale of liquor. Not convicted, charged. The person can say screw that and choose confinement or bail. The same with the sentencing condition. The person can say screw it and choose the jail time. The judge is not ordering them to worship.
This is not the same as school prayer. AND YOU FUCKING KNOW IT!
AA itself may not be, but groups and individuals can and do take on a religious flavor. I went to one meeting where the Serenity Prayer and the Lord’s Prayer were both ended with “in Jesus’ name, we pray”, and the people sharing might’ve been giving testimony in church, because it was “Jesus” this and “God” that. I wish I could say that these were a few individuals, but I can’t. The group conscience had decided that they wanted a “Christian-emphasis” meeting. After the meeting, people wanted to know where I went to church, and had I taken Jesus as my personal lord and savior. Some went so far as to tell me that, if I didn’t accept Jesus, I’d never stay sober. (Over 12 years later, I’m still sober. Some of these people relapsed.) Because the meeting listing said nothing about it being “Christian emphasis”, I called the Central Office and suggested that this group change its directory listing to reflect that. I don’t know what happened; I never went back to that meeting. And this wasn’t some town in the Bible Belt, it was in West Los Angeles.
I wish I could claim that this group was an aberration, but I don’t think I can, because I’ve been to similar meetings since.
One of the communities I belong to on LJ is for people who are sober without AA. One common theme is people who are turned off because of the emphasis on religion. As a Jew, I can understand where they’re coming from. It’s damned uncomfortable to hear people “testifying” about all the good that Jesus has done for them in their sobriety, and to hear group prayers that would be more appropriate in a church service.
Look. I’m not anti-Christian, and whatever works for these people is what they should do. But there is a fuzzy line between spirituality and religion, and too many people think that their religion should be my religion, which takes away from my experience of recovery.
Robin
I wonder if a Buddhist or Shinto temple would count as “worship services” to the judge.
Why the hostility so quickly? Bricker kick your dog or something? It usually takes Bricker at least 4 or posts before he gets under my skin.
Doesn’t always matter. Unless the probationer (or potential parolee) has a non-religious option available also, requiring them to go to a religious session violates the Establishment Clause. Saying that, since the person can opt for jail time instead of probation, there is no problem, is just plain wrong.
I would guess that, indeed, Bricker can tell the difference between school prayer and conditions of probation. I would also guess that Bricker can follow an argument by analogy, or he could apply the proper constitutional test to a fact situation also. How’s about you?
What it amounts to is church-goers get lighter sentences. Pagans and atheists are treated more harshly. In London, KY, that probably goes for Muslims and Jews, too.
For those who are not offended, what if the judge were a pagan, and sentenced Christians to attend Wiccan services? Would that be OK?
I agree with the complaints. I’m not sure it’s much of an issue in London, KY, though. It has 2,653 men, 96% of whom are white. The chances that there’s a pagan or atheist among the criminal element is rather slim. But still, yeah, wrong is wrong, and this is wrong.
Eh? What does their race have to do with it?
WASPs.
WTF? Now you are saying white=WASP? No white atheists or Pagans? :smack:
So whites can’t be non-Christian, or even just Catholic?
This is roughly my (native) neck of the woods, and I’m willing to say that the pagans, “out” atheists, and non-Christians in general in the entirety of Laurel County, save for a few high schoolers dabbling briefly to shock their parents, could be counted on one hand.
By and large, these are people who believe that “freedom of religion” means that you can choose to go to the Baptist church or the Methodist church. Going to church is just what good people do.
I’ve heard stuff like this about AA for years, and it has never gotten any less stupid. The chair that you sit on? Who could possibly think that the chair that you sit on could be a force capable of helping you stop drinking? Or any of the other things that people say you can use as your “higher power” in an attempt to cast AA as something other than a religious organization?
AA requires a belief that some power outside of you is the only thing that can help you stop drinking. It can’t be something inside of you. I guess it could be your friends and family, but if that’s the case, why use examples like the chair?
I went to a meeting as a medical student. It could not be described as anything other than a religious meeting. Half the people there were lined up after the meeting so that the facilitator could sign their court papers. I think it made the opposite point that it was supposed to make–I was very down on the organization afterwards. I still recommend it to some people, because I often don’t know what else to do, and for some people it can be a good place to start. But I don’t recommend it to everybody, and I am strongly against anyone being forced to go there.
I have to confess that I don’t understand where your anger is coming from here. I read Bricker’s post simply as using a public school perspective as an analogy to argue that AA is a theistic organization (a separate point from whether it’s constitutional for judges offer it as a sentencing option). What am I missing?
A former friend of mine is a Wiccan who’s very big on AA and similar programs. The ones she went to regularly actually were pagan and/or Wiccan, rather than Christian, and this was in southwest Pennsylvania. She even led AA meetings at a gathering I was running a few years ago, and I can assure you the higher power she was invoking wasn’t Jesus Christ. In my limited, second-hand experience, AA doesn’t have to be Christian-oriented, although I can see how individual groups could easily tilt that way, especially in parts of the country where it tends not to occur to people that someone might not be a Christian.
This judge boggles my mind! Look, I’m a devout Christian who’s been through my share of troubles and I do credit God with making it possible for me to get through the worst of them. On the other hand, if going to church alone would have solved my problems, I wouldn’t have wound up in the whole mess in the first place! How is dragging one’s self to church and sleeping through a sermon supposed to cure a serious problem? Has the judge got some personal hotline to Jesus where he can arrange for a miracle cure for each addict who goes to church to get out of jail or rehab, including the ones who are thinking, “Hmmm. Seems like a pretty good scam to me!” Let me see. I have a choice between giving up my freedom, giving up something I enjoy doing, or giving up a few hours on Sunday. It’s not really a hard choice, is it, especially if you don’t want to give up drugs, alcohol, or crime?
Let me see. Christ said to love God with all your mind. Seems to me this is pretty obviously a sin, but this sentencing policy is incredibly stupid!
CJ
No, I’m saying that there are likely only a few, if any, among the criminals in Bumfuck, Kentucky, with two thousand men. Damn, when you people find something to cry about, you turn that Offense-O-Meter all the way up and just alienate whoever the hell passes by. Screw you. And Guin, too. Maybe the judge isn’t wrong after all.