AA Alternate for Athiests?

[Joe Blow]

I see AA is very heavily religion based. Are there any good alternates?

[Stuart]

Joe Blow <joe@blow.com> wrote in message
news:0s%Pg.89020$Dk3.80540@fe01.news.easynews.com. ..
> I see AA is very heavily religion based. Are there any good alternates?

What religion is it based on?

[sagetea2000@YAHOO.COM]

A.A is not based on any religion. It is spiritual based(Higher power).
That spirituality is based on your interpertation of what you preceive
as a higher power. That could be anything even a particular meeting can
be preceived as a higher power, especially if it full of people that
give you good advise and are friendly towards you.

[Joe Jared]

On Tue, 19 Sep 2006 23:55:41 +0000, Joe Blow wrote:

> I see AA is very heavily religion based. Are there any good alternates?

It is? Perhaps you found yourself in the bible thumping belt of AA.
There's probably a group of meetings in your area that doesn't thump so
hard.

--
http://www.oretek.com
If you see weird responses, please do not reply to them.
Simply visit http://www.oretek.com/kookwatch/

[Ken]

Joe Blow wrote:
> I see AA is very heavily religion based. Are there any good alternates?
>
>
Joe,

There are a number of secular groups listed at:
http://www.morerevealed.com//misc/orglinks.jsp

Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/library.jsp

[Ken]

Stuart wrote:
> Joe Blow <joe@blow.com> wrote in message
> news:0s%Pg.89020$Dk3.80540@fe01.news.easynews.com. ..
>> I see AA is very heavily religion based. Are there any good alternates?
>
> What religion is it based on?
>

Stuart,

If one hasn't read the literature on the origin of the Step groups, your
question is very misleading because few people remember "The Oxford
Group," a pro-fascist, non-denominational pseudo-christian organization
of the 1920s and 30s of which "the first 100" supposed members of AA
were members of at the time the 12 Steps (a codification of Oxford Group
"spiritual principles for alcoholics") and the Big Book (just one more
piece of Oxford Group literature) were written.

If Joe or anyone else wants a brief introduction to the founding of AA,
which by the way very few AA members have even the faintest clue about,
a good place to start is: http://www.morerevealed.com/mr/newmr_5.jsp .


Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com

[Ken]

sagetea2000@YAHOO.COM wrote:
> A.A is not based on any religion. It is spiritual based(Higher power).
> That spirituality is based on your interpertation of what you preceive
> as a higher power. That could be anything even a particular meeting can
> be preceived as a higher power, especially if it full of people that
> give you good advise and are friendly towards you.
>

Sage Tea 2000,

Your use of "spirituality" only serves to muddy the waters. The Step
groups are their own religion separate and apart from Christianity. The
"higher power" concept is a bait-and-switch to convert new members. You
don't really believe that a doorknob is going to "remove defects of
character," do you?

The meetings for "newcomers" are full of "friendly people" who will
"love bomb" most anyone who walks in the door. Of course, love bombing
is an technique common to most cults like the Moonies, Hari Krishna and
Scientology when working to gain new members.

Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/library.jsp

[Ken]

Joe Jared wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Sep 2006 23:55:41 +0000, Joe Blow wrote:
>
>> I see AA is very heavily religion based. Are there any good alternates?
>
> It is? Perhaps you found yourself in the bible thumping belt of AA.
> There's probably a group of meetings in your area that doesn't thump so
> hard.

Joe,

Just because it isn't Christian (no thumping of the Christian bible)
doesn't mean it isn't religious. AA's "bible" is the Big Book.

Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/library.jsp

[Stuart]

Ken <user@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:87418$4511bae8$4396fd38$29274@DIALUPUSA.NET.. .
> Stuart wrote:
> > Joe Blow <joe@blow.com> wrote in message
> > news:0s%Pg.89020$Dk3.80540@fe01.news.easynews.com. ..
> >> I see AA is very heavily religion based. Are there any good
alternates?
> >
> > What religion is it based on?
> >
>
> Stuart,
>
> If one hasn't read the literature on the origin of the Step groups, your
> question is very misleading because few people remember "The Oxford
> Group," a pro-fascist, non-denominational pseudo-christian organization
> of the 1920s and 30s of which "the first 100" supposed members of AA
> were members of at the time the 12 Steps (a codification of Oxford Group
> "spiritual principles for alcoholics") and the Big Book (just one more
> piece of Oxford Group literature) were written.

I wonder how many present-day members of AA are familiar with Oxford Group.
There's a research project for you Ken.




> If Joe or anyone else wants a brief introduction to the founding of AA,
> which by the way very few AA members have even the faintest clue about,
> a good place to start is: http://www.morerevealed.com/mr/newmr_5.jsp .
>
>
> Ken Ragge
> http://www.morerevealed.com
>

[sagetea2000@YAHOO.COM]

> Your use of "spirituality" only serves to muddy the waters. The Step
> groups are their own religion separate and apart from Christianity. The
> "higher power" concept is a bait-and-switch to convert new members. You
> don't really believe that a doorknob is going to "remove defects of
> character," do you?
************************************************** ***********************************
I did not mention a doorknob. The group can be a higher power in that
the people at a meeting can sometimes help the newcomer cope with their
craving to drink.
************************************************** ***********************************

> The meetings for "newcomers" are full of "friendly people" who will
> "love bomb" most anyone who walks in the door. Of course, love bombing
> is an technique common to most cults like the Moonies, Hari Krishna and
> Scientology when working to gain new members.
************************************************** **************************************8
I have never been lovebombed at an AA meeting. In fact the 6:30 meeting
i attend is full of crusty old coots.
But then everyone has an opinion and I will respect you'r opinion
because that is what you believe.

[Clive Nugent]

Check out the Rational Recovery website, the complete antithesis of AA.
The problem with AA is that they see themselves as the only way,
unsuprising as it was set up by the Christian fundamentalist Oxford
group, the steps were originally known as the steps for moral
rearmament. Also I disagree with the disease model of addiction,
although that's just my opionion. Anyway enough politics. I am trying
to do it without any help at the moment of any kind, and I am
struggling. All my friends drink, which makes it difficult; and two of
them are alcoholic. But if I get home without going in a pub (bar) I
shan't have had a drink, drug or bet today, and that's a start. I think
avoiding people that do the thing one is addicted to is important,
after all humans tend to do what the people they mix with do, and as I
said all my friends drink and I don't want to lose them; maybe you guys
are the answer. Good luck, whichever way you decide to recover.

Michael

[Stuart]

"Clive Nugent" <comfy_sofa@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1158871871.901454.125770@e3g2000cwe.googlegro ups.com...
> Check out the Rational Recovery website, the complete antithesis of AA.
> The problem with AA is that they see themselves as the only way,
> unsuprising as it was set up by the Christian fundamentalist Oxford
> group, the steps were originally known as the steps for moral
> rearmament. Also I disagree with the disease model of addiction,
> although that's just my opionion. Anyway enough politics. I am trying
> to do it without any help at the moment of any kind, and I am
> struggling. All my friends drink, which makes it difficult; and two of
> them are alcoholic. But if I get home without going in a pub (bar) I
> shan't have had a drink, drug or bet today, and that's a start. I think
> avoiding people that do the thing one is addicted to is important,
> after all humans tend to do what the people they mix with do, and as I
> said all my friends drink and I don't want to lose them; maybe you guys
> are the answer. Good luck, whichever way you decide to recover.
>
> Michael


Thanks for the ideas Michael. I respectfully disagree that AA sees
themselves as the only way. If you read the last few paragraphs of the AA
Big Book its clearly states "We realize we know but a little..."

And I am one AA member who would never dismiss the concepts brought forward
by RR or MM.

I just prefer AA, FWIW

Stuart

[Devon]

It sure took a long time for the answer to a simple question. Thank you for
this answer.


"Clive Nugent" <comfy_sofa@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1158871871.901454.125770@e3g2000cwe.googlegro ups.com...
> Check out the Rational Recovery website, the complete antithesis of AA.
> The problem with AA is that they see themselves as the only way,
> unsuprising as it was set up by the Christian fundamentalist Oxford
> group, the steps were originally known as the steps for moral
> rearmament. Also I disagree with the disease model of addiction,
> although that's just my opionion. Anyway enough politics. I am trying
> to do it without any help at the moment of any kind, and I am
> struggling. All my friends drink, which makes it difficult; and two of
> them are alcoholic. But if I get home without going in a pub (bar) I
> shan't have had a drink, drug or bet today, and that's a start. I think
> avoiding people that do the thing one is addicted to is important,
> after all humans tend to do what the people they mix with do, and as I
> said all my friends drink and I don't want to lose them; maybe you guys
> are the answer. Good luck, whichever way you decide to recover.
>
> Michael
>

[Clive Nugent]

Look, I don't want to get into a big debate, but in the big book it
says that AA should include everyone that suffers from alcoholism.
Alcoholism, drinking problem, habitual drunkeness are all words for the
same thing - you know you have a problem when you know that your life
would be better without drinking alcohol than with your drinking
alcohol; it does not matter what you call it. That means that AA want
everyone like this to be a member. To me that means they see themselves
as the only way, and anyway I have enough experience as an ex-member of
AA to know that in practice they see themselves as the only way.
Enough. I had a drink yesterday, but I did not get drunk; and I am
going to have a break from it for a month, have a drink with a friend,
and then quit. Sober today.

[Stuart]

"Clive Nugent" <comfy_sofa@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1159030285.795779.318630@m73g2000cwd.googlegr oups.com...
> Look, I don't want to get into a big debate, but in the big book it
> says that AA should include everyone that suffers from alcoholism.
> Alcoholism, drinking problem, habitual drunkeness are all words for the
> same thing - you know you have a problem when you know that your life
> would be better without drinking alcohol than with your drinking
> alcohol; it does not matter what you call it. That means that AA want
> everyone like this to be a member. To me that means they see themselves
> as the only way, and anyway I have enough experience as an ex-member of
> AA to know that in practice they see themselves as the only way.
> Enough. I had a drink yesterday, but I did not get drunk; and I am
> going to have a break from it for a month, have a drink with a friend,
> and then quit. Sober today.

Well if you look at the Chapter entitled "More About Alcoholism", you might
find that in there they make an important distinction between "problem
drinker" and "alcoholic". In the AA book although they appear similar, they
are not the same. The "problem drinker" according to the BB definition is
someone who can generally quit or moderate on their own, or with some minor
help, given a sufficiently important reason to do so. The "alcoholic" is
someone who can't quit or won't, even when there is sufficient reason.

For that reason, if you carefully re-read Chapter 3, you will see that AA
suggests that NOT everyone with a drinking problem is a candidate for AA. In
fact it is very clear in there. AA is for alcoholics, not necessarily for
the "problem drinker"

Go back and re-read it. You will see what I am saying.

Don't make assumptions about AA. You are, and you are quite incorrect my
friend.

[Clive Nugent]

Stuart wrote:
> "Clive Nugent" <comfy_sofa@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1159030285.795779.318630@m73g2000cwd.googlegr oups.com...
> > Look, I don't want to get into a big debate, but in the big book it
> > says that AA should include everyone that suffers from alcoholism.
> > Alcoholism, drinking problem, habitual drunkeness are all words for the
> > same thing - you know you have a problem when you know that your life
> > would be better without drinking alcohol than with your drinking
> > alcohol; it does not matter what you call it. That means that AA want
> > everyone like this to be a member. To me that means they see themselves
> > as the only way, and anyway I have enough experience as an ex-member of
> > AA to know that in practice they see themselves as the only way.
> > Enough. I had a drink yesterday, but I did not get drunk; and I am
> > going to have a break from it for a month, have a drink with a friend,
> > and then quit. Sober today.
>
> Well if you look at the Chapter entitled "More About Alcoholism", you might
> find that in there they make an important distinction between "problem
> drinker" and "alcoholic". In the AA book although they appear similar, they
> are not the same. The "problem drinker" according to the BB definition is
> someone who can generally quit or moderate on their own, or with some minor
> help, given a sufficiently important reason to do so. The "alcoholic" is
> someone who can't quit or won't, even when there is sufficient reason.
>
> For that reason, if you carefully re-read Chapter 3, you will see that AA
> suggests that NOT everyone with a drinking problem is a candidate for AA. In
> fact it is very clear in there. AA is for alcoholics, not necessarily for
> the "problem drinker"
>
> Go back and re-read it. You will see what I am saying.
>
> Don't make assumptions about AA. You are, and you are quite incorrect my
> friend.

I don't need to reread it, I have been to enough AA meetings to know it
off by heart. The term used in AA's big book is the hard drinker that
can quit on their own not problem drinker. If someone called me an
alcoholic, I should say what does that mean? Someone whose only hope is
AA? Then no I am not an alcoholic. Someone that can't handle alcohol
yet is still addicted to it then yes, I am an alcoholic, but in my
opinion I shall stop being alcoholic when I quit drinking. Alcoholic,
person with a drink problem, drunk: different words for the same thing;
and AA say everyone like this should go to them. Noone in an AA meeting
would tell someone you are not an alcoholic you can moderate or quit on
your own, neither would they say this won't work for you try something
else. For what it's worth RR are just the same.

[Stuart]

"Clive Nugent" <comfy_sofa@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1159034938.788578.296350@k70g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
>
> Stuart wrote:
>> "Clive Nugent" <comfy_sofa@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:1159030285.795779.318630@m73g2000cwd.googlegr oups.com...
>> > Look, I don't want to get into a big debate, but in the big book it
>> > says that AA should include everyone that suffers from alcoholism.
>> > Alcoholism, drinking problem, habitual drunkeness are all words for the
>> > same thing - you know you have a problem when you know that your life
>> > would be better without drinking alcohol than with your drinking
>> > alcohol; it does not matter what you call it. That means that AA want
>> > everyone like this to be a member. To me that means they see themselves
>> > as the only way, and anyway I have enough experience as an ex-member of
>> > AA to know that in practice they see themselves as the only way.
>> > Enough. I had a drink yesterday, but I did not get drunk; and I am
>> > going to have a break from it for a month, have a drink with a friend,
>> > and then quit. Sober today.
>>
>> Well if you look at the Chapter entitled "More About Alcoholism", you
>> might
>> find that in there they make an important distinction between "problem
>> drinker" and "alcoholic". In the AA book although they appear similar,
>> they
>> are not the same. The "problem drinker" according to the BB definition is
>> someone who can generally quit or moderate on their own, or with some
>> minor
>> help, given a sufficiently important reason to do so. The "alcoholic" is
>> someone who can't quit or won't, even when there is sufficient reason.
>>
>> For that reason, if you carefully re-read Chapter 3, you will see that AA
>> suggests that NOT everyone with a drinking problem is a candidate for AA.
>> In
>> fact it is very clear in there. AA is for alcoholics, not necessarily for
>> the "problem drinker"
>>
>> Go back and re-read it. You will see what I am saying.
>>
>> Don't make assumptions about AA. You are, and you are quite incorrect my
>> friend.
>
> I don't need to reread it, I have been to enough AA meetings to know it
> off by heart. The term used in AA's big book is the hard drinker that
> can quit on their own not problem drinker. If someone called me an
> alcoholic, I should say what does that mean? Someone whose only hope is
> AA? Then no I am not an alcoholic. Someone that can't handle alcohol
> yet is still addicted to it then yes, I am an alcoholic, but in my
> opinion I shall stop being alcoholic when I quit drinking. Alcoholic,
> person with a drink problem, drunk: different words for the same thing;
> and AA say everyone like this should go to them. Noone in an AA meeting
> would tell someone you are not an alcoholic you can moderate or quit on
> your own, neither would they say this won't work for you try something
> else. For what it's worth RR are just the same.

Sounds like you are lot like me, being "right" is very important to you. You
got the debate part down real well. If you were really sharp, you might have
pointed out the bit about the "hard drinker" is actually in Chapter 2:)

Sounds like you are experiencing difficulty in the quitting part. Its an
SOB, I know.

[Joe Jared]

On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 15:17:36 -0700, Ken wrote:

> Joe Jared wrote:
>> On Tue, 19 Sep 2006 23:55:41 +0000, Joe Blow wrote:
>>
>>> I see AA is very heavily religion based. Are there any good alternates?
>>
>> It is? Perhaps you found yourself in the bible thumping belt of AA.
>> There's probably a group of meetings in your area that doesn't thump so
>> hard.
>
> Joe,
>
> Just because it isn't Christian (no thumping of the Christian bible)
> doesn't mean it isn't religious. AA's "bible" is the Big Book.
>
> Ken Ragge
> http://www.morerevealed.com/library.jsp

By your definition, moderation management is a religion too, as is
_______________ for dummies.


--
http://www.oretek.com
If you see weird responses, please do not reply to them.
Simply visit http://www.oretek.com/kookwatch/

[Joe Jared]

On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 15:10:18 -0700, Ken wrote:

> If Joe or anyone else wants a brief introduction to the founding of AA,
> which by the way very few AA members have even the faintest clue about,
> a good place to start is: http://www.morerevealed.com/mr/newmr_5.jsp .

2 guys got together and found that by working together they stayed sober.
It caught on.

--
http://www.oretek.com
If you see weird responses, please do not reply to them.
Simply visit http://www.oretek.com/kookwatch/

[Joe Jared]

On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 15:15:30 -0700, Ken wrote:

> Your use of "spirituality" only serves to muddy the waters. The Step

That's why the phrase "of our understanding" is commonplace. So what'd
god do to you, anyway? Praying to a deity of one form or another,
meditation, sitting quietly with your thumb up your butt, all qualify as
spirituality. Spirituality is each individual's definition and on that
basis, I have no right to criticize each person's methods.


--
http://www.oretek.com
If you see weird responses, please do not reply to them.
Simply visit http://www.oretek.com/kookwatch/

[Ken]

sagetea2000@YAHOO.COM wrote:
>> Your use of "spirituality" only serves to muddy the waters. The Step
>> groups are their own religion separate and apart from Christianity. The
>> "higher power" concept is a bait-and-switch to convert new members. You
>> don't really believe that a doorknob is going to "remove defects of
>> character," do you?
> ************************************************** ***********************************
> I did not mention a doorknob. The group can be a higher power in that
> the people at a meeting can sometimes help the newcomer cope with their
> craving to drink.
> ************************************************** ***********************************

SageTea,

Just because _you_ didn't mention a doorknob here doesn't mean it isn't
mentioned in AA. Sure, one can make AA members their "higher power" or
"God." Still, if one works the Steps, no higher power will work except
for the Rescuing Deity of the Step Groups.

>> The meetings for "newcomers" are full of "friendly people" who will
>> "love bomb" most anyone who walks in the door. Of course, love bombing
>> is an technique common to most cults like the Moonies, Hari Krishna and
>> Scientology when working to gain new members.
> ************************************************** **************************************8
> I have never been lovebombed at an AA meeting. In fact the 6:30 meeting
> i attend is full of crusty old coots.
> But then everyone has an opinion and I will respect you'r opinion
> because that is what you believe.

Then perhaps you have never been to a "newcomer" meeting.

Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com

[Ken]

Joe Jared wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 15:17:36 -0700, Ken wrote:
>
>> Joe Jared wrote:
>>> On Tue, 19 Sep 2006 23:55:41 +0000, Joe Blow wrote:
>>>
>>>> I see AA is very heavily religion based. Are there any good alternates?
>>> It is? Perhaps you found yourself in the bible thumping belt of AA.
>>> There's probably a group of meetings in your area that doesn't thump so
>>> hard.
>> Joe,
>>
>> Just because it isn't Christian (no thumping of the Christian bible)
>> doesn't mean it isn't religious. AA's "bible" is the Big Book.
>>
>> Ken Ragge
>> http://www.morerevealed.com/library.jsp
>
> By your definition, moderation management is a religion too, as is
> _______________ for dummies.
>

Joe,

I doubt that there is even one member of MM that considers whatever book
or books they have to be "spiritually inspired" nor do members
describe any book that MM uses as their Bible. Nor is MM about finding
_any_ God. That is an outside issue. The core of the Step groups, the
12 Steps, are a conversion process to belief in the bizarre
micromanaging rescuing deity of the Step groups.

Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/library.jsp

[Ken]

Joe Jared wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 15:10:18 -0700, Ken wrote:
>
>> If Joe or anyone else wants a brief introduction to the founding of AA,
>> which by the way very few AA members have even the faintest clue about,
>> a good place to start is: http://www.morerevealed.com/mr/newmr_5.jsp .
>
> 2 guys got together and found that by working together they stayed sober.
> It caught on.
>

Joe,

Well, that is certainly repeated a lot in meetings, but it is a far cry
from what actually happened.

But of course AA doesn't like it's members to know their history, so
members rarely do.

Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com/library.jsp

[Ken]

Joe Jared wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 15:15:30 -0700, Ken wrote:
>
>> Your use of "spirituality" only serves to muddy the waters. The Step
>
> That's why the phrase "of our understanding" is commonplace. So what'd
> god do to you, anyway? Praying to a deity of one form or another,
> meditation, sitting quietly with your thumb up your butt, all qualify as
> spirituality. Spirituality is each individual's definition and on that
> basis, I have no right to criticize each person's methods.

Joe,

No, the phrase "of our understanding" is also used to confuse matters.
"Higher Power" in the Step groups is a bait-and-switch to convert not
only atheists and agnostics to belief in the 12-Step Micromanaging
Rescuing Deity, but also people of other religions to practice Oxford
Group "spiritual principles" as codified in the 12 Steps.

The God I grew up with not only _gave_ people their wills and lives but
healed the sick and raised the dead. The 12-Step god wants people to
turn over their wills and lives and is only good for remission "one day
at a time" for what is essentially a bad habit and that only if one is
obedient to "the program," e.g. prays in the Oxford Group matter, makes
daily confessions, wallows in Powerlessness, makes group members their
God and etc.

Ken Ragge
http://www.morerevealed.com

[Clive Nugent]

> Sounds like you are lot like me, being "right" is very important to you. You
> got the debate part down real well. If you were really sharp, you might have
> pointed out the bit about the "hard drinker" is actually in Chapter 2:)
>
> Sounds like you are experiencing difficulty in the quitting part. Its an
> SOB, I know.

All I said was AA say they are the only way, which you know damn well
to be true. Why deny it? Possibly because alcoholics do recover without
the help of AA. I know I shall :) Sober today.

[Joe Jared]

On Sun, 24 Sep 2006 01:26:52 -0700, Ken wrote:

> _any_ God. That is an outside issue. The core of the Step groups, the
> 12 Steps, are a conversion process to belief in the bizarre
> micromanaging rescuing deity of the Step groups.


That's an interesting perception, but not one I share with you. You might
have found yourself surrounded by people who taught it that way, or like
many who participate in Rational Recovery may be playing the one up one
down game, where AA is bad and therefore RR must be good. In any event,
it's not an argument I chose to participate in.

--
http://www.oretek.com
If you see weird responses, please do not reply to them.
Simply visit http://www.oretek.com/kookwatch/

[jamielogger@yahoo.com]

On Tue, 19 Sep 2006 23:55:41 GMT, "Joe Blow" <joe@blow.com> wrote:

>I see AA is very heavily religion based. Are there any good alternates?
>

When I first joined AA I thought I would have a problem because I do
not and will not have anything to do with Christianity. I do believe
in a God, but not the Christian religion, nor the bible. I believe
the Christian religion is one of the biggest scams in history, and it
has caused more wars and violence throughout history than any other
reason.

It did not take me long to verbalize my stance on this matter, at a
meeting. I was told that I can choose anything as a higher power, and
I did just that. Well, actually I already had my spiritual beliefs
and thus my higher power. I felt much more at ease after that. Over
the years I did have a few bible readers start preaching to me, but I
told them flat out I was not interested and I do not follow the bible.
Most just left me alone after that, but there was one who presisted
and was trying to convert me. I finally told the guy I was here for
sobriety, NOT RELIGION. I clearly stated that I do not believe in
Christ, Christianity, or the bible, and I never will. I asked him to
get out of my face with his religion. He took the advice, and we
never spoke again.

Jamie