Secular Alcoholics Anonymous Groups in Toronto Have Been Kicked Out of AA

I’ve been a member of AA for 20 years in the local fellowship we have here in Sonoma County, CA. In all that time the emphasis has been reliance on some kind of higher power. It has always been up to the individual what they choose to be that higher power. The term “religion” doesn’t seem to apply as the program does not require any dogmatic belief system.

An interesting note about AA. As a part of many courts diversion programs, many are mandating AA attendance as condition of probation, nolle prosequi or dropping of charges. In a number of cases this is now being found a violation of the First Amendment. Here are a few of the relevant decisions:

Id. at 480; Warner, 115 F.3d. 1068; Turner v. Hickman, 342 F.Supp.2d 887, 893-894 (E.D. Cal. 2004); Catala v. Commissioner, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31695 (D. N.H. 2005) (unpublished disposition); Edmondson v. Curry, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 45119 (D. N.H. 2006) (unpublished disposition); Rainesv. Siegelman, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15542 (M.D. Ala. 2006) (using coercion test, court found no violation where plaintiff had secular alternative); Cummings v. Darsey, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4257 (D. N.J. 2007) (unpublished disposition).

I agree. I don’t have a problem with AA “disaffiliating” (is that really a word?) these groups. I just hope that doesn’t make it harder for atheist and agnostic alcoholics to find help. But it seems inevitable that it will.

You’d think AA would want secular associates if for nothing else than to boost their overall success rates.

That is tough. I have an atheist friend who just got out of rehab for narcotics 1 year ago and doing fantastic with his 12-step group. He has made a non-interventionist, monistic type of higher power for himself (found among certain types of Buddhists and new-agers). So their “higher power” is not a theistic higher power — so that makes them “A-theistic”, no?

If we look at the mind as multi-modular, building such a concept (if held loosely) can help create and tap into other sides of yourself — not the sides that messed up before.

No, these groups have not been “kicked out” of AA. They’ve been “delisted” from a particular meeting list in a particular city, which is very very different.

There is an increasingly active and vibrant atheist presence in AA, including an online group at atheist-aa@googlegroups.com, and, I believe, an atheists-and-agnostics-in-AA group on FB. These groups have been around for 30 or 40 years, and some of the founding members of AA in the 1930s were lifelong atheists who died sober. Some of their stories are in the freaking AA literature, for crying out loud, including several stories in the Big Book itself.

This is an example of a pathetic Roman Catholic narcissist deciding that he needs to take steps to enforce HIS way of AA, which is actually not how AA works – it’s almost chaotically decentralized. It also strongly resembles the struggle over whether gay-and-lesbian-identified groups could be listed in local meeting guides. That battle was won by the gay-and-lesbian groups, which are now incredibly common. This battle will also be won. It’s part of a greater cultural struggle around public non-theism.

AA is certainly NOT for everyone, and I’m very glad that there are other treatment modalities. But it’s not accurate to say that an atheist can’t be part of AA just fine. The numerous 20-and-30 year sober members of the google group, from many countries and states, are good evidence that one’s “higher power” can be gravity and the collective wisdom of people who’ve struggled with the same problem.

(There’s also a plan to form an atheists in AA intergroup and have a conference in one of the cities that decided not to list the non-theist meetings in their meeting list. Bwahahahaha!)

Also, meetings have names. The NAMES of these meetings were Beyond Belief and We Agnostics, just like the names of some other meetings might be Tuesday Together or No Knitters or Sober Sisters.

Beyond Belief and We Agnostics are still official AA meetings, it’s just that newcomers in Toronto might have a bit more trouble finding them. Probably not even that, though, since the decision will almost certainly be overturned.

I’ll drink to this.

AA (and, I assume, all 12-step programs) has about a 5% success rate. Thats about the same as tackling your addiction with your own willpower or praying to Zeus. Why courts can force people who are ill into flagrantly Christian systems is beyond my understanding. It is clearly unconstitutional. And if you suffer from an addiction, it is almost certainly a waste of your time. Work with a secular doctor.

I absolutely, 100 percent agree that AA (the organization) has every right to do this. I do, however, feel that their doing it makes them very small and petty indeed.

If they really want to help people, they should be doing everything in their power to create friendly and comforting groups where everyone feels welcome. If that means having different groups for different people (including those who do not wish to be god-coddled), then that is what they should do.

But again… I absolutely agree… they have every right to do this… people have every right to be jackasses.

Let me make a couple of points to add to this discussion. For one thing, AA is not an organization. It is a loose fellowship of groups. There is no top down authoritarianism. This is both a strength and a weakness, a weakness in that is extremely difficult to change the AA culture – which very much needs changing. There is a growing sense among many AA folks that AA must change or it will die. We will never know how many people have been repelled by the religious content of so much of literature and thinking in AA. As one old timer I know put it, “The Big Book should be bronzed like your baby shoes and relegated to a museum.”

You can tell who’s in the cult just by looking at the comments.

AA is, without a doubt, a dangerous mind-control cult.

My beef with AA is personal as well as philosophical because, prior to her involvement with AA, my mother was agnostic. Then, she got involved with AA and affiliated groups and now she insists that she was helped by a, “higher power.” I frequently point out the suspicious coincidence of this help from, “God,” with her own personal decision to take control of her life, but alas, to no avail. Her brain was thoroughly scrubbed of skepticism.

Nonetheless, she continues to maintain that AA is not religious. But whether we call it religion or, “spirituality,” it’s still purely imaginative nonsense and I think AA is worthy of contempt for slipping it into the drinks, as it were (forgive the pun), of struggling substance abusers. This kind of backdoor proselytism is precisely why I so staunchly oppose faith-based initiatives and the government’s funding thereof.

If looking up AA in the phone book displays AAA (Atheists Alcoholics Anon) right next to it, where is the harm?

If the name AA is a reg. TM then register the new AAA name.
I agree that Beyond Belief is a little confusing – having nothing to do with alcohol.

I hope this is a small step in releasing the stranglehold that AA has on addiction recovery in general. As mentioned above, the best anyone can find out it has about a 5% success rate and they’ve just clarified that they’re explicitly religious. It has no part in court-mandated sentencing and therapy.

I spent 23 years in AA defending myself against bullies spewing hate at me that I would never stay sober unless I found god. That I wasn’t sober unless I was spiritual.

You cannot work the AA program (i.e. the steps) WITHOUT a belief in god. Read the Big Book. It is condescending, demeaning and utterly insulting to atheists.

The meetings open with a prayer and close with a prayer.
The slogans are based upon a belief in god.
I can’t, He can, I think I’ll let him.
Let go and Let god.
There but for the grace of god go I.
If God seems far away, who moved?
I can’t handle it God; you take over.
God is never late.
Man’s extremity is God’s opportunity.
GOD= Good Orderly Direction
Faith is spelled a-c-t-i-o-n.
E.G.O.=Edging God Out
to name just a few.

These are plastered all over the walls of the meeting rooms and the treatment centers.

The entire premise is god has saved me from myself. Does this sound like indoctrination? uh huh If you refuse to do the steps, you are berated as being “in denial” “and I ain’t talking about the river in Egypt” I can’t tell you how many times I heard this. Condescending? uh huh
Where do you think this tactic and technique was learned?

For those claiming that a higher power can be a tree, gravity, a doorknob or anything else, how ridiculous. The BB and the step book consistently and constantly refer to god, the creator Him, with a capital H,. The literature cannot be clearer that you must find god to stay sober or “are doomed to an alcoholic death”

I escaped 3 years ago and am still being bullied by people in AA that it is their way or NO WAY!

AA is dangerous as it has gotten a stranglehold on treatment centers and our court system. We allow it to be used as THE treatment for substance abuse but the treatment is merely “find god”

If you were to go to an oncologist for cancer treatment and he stated that you simply needed to have a spiritual awakening to be treated, you would walk out, (hopefully) But this is exactly what we have come to accept and expect for substance abuse treatment when there are effective alternatives. Medication treatment, behavior mod models etc. But they are scientifically based.

People wonder why the success rate is so low? It doesn’t work! The people that stay sober would have with or without AA. They were motivated at the outset and made the decision. Revolving door rehabs? Learn AA for a mere 30K.

Am I angry about this, You’re damn right I am. Not only are we wasting millions of taxpayer dollars on ineffective treatment, we are killing people sending them to useless treatment centers and ineffective programs.

For those atheists in AA- Why not start a secular program?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fj6qXUSA-Co

You people have done the impossible; turned atheism into a religion. Complete with the sins, the high priests, the excommunications, the fears, that are a sad product of your garden variety religions. How can an anonymous organization be a religion; you people have become as ridiculous as some of the fundys down south. Please stop wasting my time with any more emails.

i have strong, negative feelings about the AA cult. my dad participated for years and years, and struggled with the guilt and shame their programs instill. and he learned to control his alcoholism all on his own, *after* he stopped going to AA.

my mother, after their divorce, went to Al-Anon or whatever the program is that is for spouses of alcoholics, and wow, did she come back with all the wrong lessons. that program basically taught her to blame anyone and everyone who drinks for all the problems in her own life. it’s really awful when she starts spouting off the crap she learned in it.

the pseudo-religion of AA is little more than protestant guilt therapy, and if you study the history of the founder and many of the early adopters, it’s clear that “getting right with gawd” is as central to AA as getting sober. i’ve been to many meetings, both with my father and on my own, because “everyone knows” that “AA is the only hope for true alcoholics.”

then i discovered a secular, science based program that uses nutrition and medication to help people control alcoholism. wow, it was like discovering a whole new world. instead of being told what a worthless, immoral, lazy, selfish person i was for drinking, i learned about how genetics, nutrition, and brain chemistry make alcoholism more problematic for some people than others. it was like a huge weight off my shoulders to realize that alcoholism IS NOT A MORAL ISSUE, it’s a medical one.

so i sort of despise AA. it’s a backward, warmed over pseudo-religion masquerading as medical and psychological therapy. and it doesn’t really work for a large number of people, nor should it. atheists should steer clear of it entirely and use science based recovery programs, imho.

@Bob H.:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6bMLrA_0O5I

Too many comments have stacked up for me to feel that my voice will be heard, but here goes:

Some pertinent facts:
I am an out Atheist AA member, sober for 23 years in July.
I have never had to pretend to believe in any gods to be a member of AA.
The steps are optional, the book says so, the book itself disclaims any kind of scriptural authority.
AA is an anarchic organization with no effective enforcement system.
AA has had atheist members from the very beginning (see the 1st edition story ‘Educated Agnostic’ and the 2nd edition story ‘The Vicious Cycle.’
AAs ‘consensus at all costs’ atmosphere has permitted religious infiltration of many AA groups.

Enough of listing. AA literature sits warts-and-all, at the root of the fellowship. The book is replete with errors, misrepresentations, and stupidities. AA is NOT the book. AA defines itself as ‘a fellowship of men and women’ without outside affiliation, this should include religious affiliation.

Toronto intergroups schedule exclusion seems to be based on the presence of altered, group specific literature. If a group conducted Bible Studies, they would qualify for exclusion as well.

One ‘godless-heathens’ group I attent (listed with no fuss in the local directory) does keep the altered version of the ‘steps’ on hand, but they are not posted or proclaimed as being AA material.

AA is vulnerable to Xian infiltration and has no effective mechanism to defend itself, except for members who will stand up for the traditions (e.g. self-support, non-affiliation, group autonomy without affecting other groups, etc. etc.) As an AA member, I owe my loyalty to the newcomer, not to any false image of ‘real’ AA as some sort of generic religious club.

A few years back, suffering from depression and drinking to much, I came to AA. Everyone was so friendly and caring and I was so miserable that I was ready to try anything. It worked for a little less than two years. As I got better, I also got help from a psychiatrist who worked with me to find the right combination of medicine for my depression. Some of that medicine also reduced my craving for alcohol. I was thrilled to be back in control of my life and brought up the idea of medication to help other members fight “relapse”. You don’t have to guess how that came over. Soon after, my sponsor–who could not get me to work step two–accidentally sent me an email that was meant for her sponsor. She though my ideas were crazy and making her crazy. It was all over soon after.

AA was not meant for atheists. One of their books even describes how founding members struggled to accept an atheist and prayed for his relapse. He finally caved when they abandoned him in his relapse–something they would not consider doing to a fellow member.

“They’ve changed them to their own personal needs. They should never have been listed in the first place.”

He says that like it is a bad thing.
If a program can’t adapt to the personal needs of its participants, then it is going to be much less effective in achieving success.

An organization should not be putting its own orthodoxy above the needs of those it is supposedly there to help.

I like these 12 steps better than either set above.
THE TWELVE STEPS FOR DEPROGRAMMING FROM ALCOHOLICS ANONYMOUS
by John

1. We admitted we were powerful– that our lives are not unmanageable.

2. Came to believe in ourselves.

3. Made a decision to reclaim our autonomy.

4. Made a searching and fearless moral inventory of Alcoholics Anonymous.

5. Admitted the exact nature of their wrongs.

6. Were entirely ready to revoke our A.A. membership.

7. Stopped going to meetings.

8. Made a list of all the things that we love to do.

9. Took the time to engage in these activities whenever possible, and made an effort to cultivate new friendships along the way.

10. Continued to take AA’s inventory and when we were wronged promptly admitted it.

11. Sought through communication and contemplation to access our own innate wisdom, seeking to embrace our independence and free ourselves permanently from the bondage of Alcoholics Anonymous.

12. Having regained our personal integrity as a result of these steps,we tried to live our lives according to the dictates of our own conscience, and to choose the path that serves our greatest good.

Enjoy!
-John

http://www.orange-papers.org/orange-links.html
http://www.fornits.com/anonanon/

Just to clarify: In the US there have been 6 Federal Circuit Court of Appeals decisions and 3 State Supreme court decisions regarding the right to a secular alternative treatment program when in a correctional setting. ALL concluded that the 12-Step Program is “pervasively religious” and that a secular alternative must be offered to atheists, agnostics, Buddhists (1 case). 1 case (Warner) was appealed to the US Supreme Court by the Atty. General of NY: certiori was denied [case declined]. A lower (state) court in Indiana ruled that a secular alternative must be OFFERED (as opposed to waiting to see whether the subject objects to the 12-Step referral)or the availability of such is obscured and thus denied. However, the real issue is one of self-empowerment vs. powerlessness. All the alternative programs rely on the former, 12-Steps on the latter.

The secular groups need to re-brand themselves. Maybe we can come up with something that still has the acronym “AA?” Would that be allowed?

“Anonymous Alcoholics?”

Lindsay;

Sorry to pop up like a troll, but this gives me a chance to make an important point.

[all caps] aa is not a treatment center, aa doesn’t run treatment centers, treatment centers do not and cannot use aa as a ‘treatment modality.'[end caps]

The (mis)appropriation of AA material by treatment centers is a major source of creeping religiosity in AA.

Check out:
http://aacultwatch.co.uk/default.aspx
to see some AA members resisting the subversion of AA by creepy nutsos.

I’m 50 and grew up in a drinking environment which carried on into adulthood. I suppose I was a functional alcoholic. I heard about Rational Recovery and read their website in about a half hour and used the quick tools they teach you (rationally) to quit. That was 4 years ago. The book is available at most libraries as well. Simple-Rational-Effective pretty much the opposite of AA.

The two Toronto meetings have been portraying themelves as victims, while they’ve been EXCLUDING most drunks from their meetings. Insisting that meeting participants refrain from mentioning God is exclusive, not inclusive. AA generally de-lists meetings that impose a second requirement on membership. To be considered an AA group, there must be no requirement for membership beyond a desire to stop drinking. The same de-listing action would have been taken by the AA office if those two Toronto meetings had limited attendence to barbers, jockeys, or Communists. Meetings with an additional requirement are special purpose meetings, not AA groups. Special purpose meetings have existed since the 1940s. They’re not impermissable. They just aren’t LISTED as AA groups, because they’re not. AA groups are inclusive, not EXCLUSIVE like those two Toronto meetings that are censuring a viewpoint that differs from their own.

First of all, to Friendly Atheist, thanks so much for bringing up this topic. In recent years I’ve been more and more involved with the atheism and skeptic movements (and seen Friendly Atheist referenced elsewhere several times), am a member of the Atlanta Freethought Society, and I’ve been appalled at the lack of mention of Alcoholics Anonymous and other 12-step programs in current “mainstream” atheist/skeptic/humanist/secular/whatever-other-label-one-uses communities and discussions.

Tim Farley tweeting as @krelnik mentioned this article on Scientology’s alcohol and drug treatment program called Narconon:
http://www.thefix.com/content/narconons-big-con
but perhaps he doesn’t notice that Narconon has only perhaps 2 to 5 percent of the “recovery/rehab” market, whereas about 95 percent of alcohol-and-drug treatment centers are based on the 12 steps of AA. Skeptics are glad to point out the dangers of cults of various kinds (see Farley’s site http://whatstheharm.net), but without giving the first mention to AA (again, there’s no mention on http://whatstheharm.net nor many other skeptical sites).

I even searched the online archives of Skeptical Inquirer, and I only found THIS article:
http://www.csicop.org/si/show/mystical_medical_alternativism/
which mentions several unrelated things, but ironically enough, criticizes a book on a “secular” version of AA for not being as secular as advertised, and having “new age” terminology. BUT WHAT ABOUT THE ORIGINAL AA, does anyone a Skeptical Inquirer see any problem with THAT???

I’d like to know why AA seems to get a pass among skeptics, but even more, I want to CHANGE that.

That’s my basic rant, and I do hope to inform and stir up the “greater secular community” regarding AA and other 12-step programs, and I hope others will take a skeptical and critical study of them.

Here’s my response to a couple obvious AA members trying to say some things about AA:

“The steps are only suggested as a program of recovery.”

Yes, that’s even the wording in the intro to the 12 steps in chapter 5, “how it works” of AA’s big book. In the same way it is “suggested that when you jump out of an airplane wearing a parachute that you pull the ripcord.” That’s what I heard in many of the AA meetings I attended, clearly saying that the “suggestions” are the only way to stop drinking. As “Bill S.” (he was also active at 8111 and organized the Atlanta Men’s [AA] Workshop) said at NABA decades ago (yeah, I was there and heard him with my own ears), “If you want to quit drinking, we have these twelve suggestions. We don’t have any other suggestions.” I never heard anyone contradict such hard-core AA-is-the-only-way statements. AA has it both ways about “suggestions.” It’s redefinition of the langaage. In AA, when your sponsor gives you a “suggestion,” you can either do it or die a miserable, horrible, drunken death. They’ll gladly tell you it’s your choice.

“Having spent about 9 years in 12-Step groups I can say with certainty that you don’t know anything about how they operate. In fact, I’ve found as much, if not more, resentment and hostility to religion in 12-Step meetings than I do here.”

I can say with certainty that most AA participants DO NOT BELIEVE that AA a religious group, as they’ve bought into the “spiritual, not religious” slogan repeated so often in AA. The resentment and hostility AA members have (OMG, how can they stay sober while having those BAD FEELINGS?) is against mainstream Christianity, the religion most people in the USA are brought up in. AA is “not Christianity” despite its origins, and despite so many meetings being in the basements of Christian churches. So yes, you’re right, and many AA members get uncomfortable when they hear about AA’s Christian origins. They really WANT AA to be “spiritual, NOT religious.” AA’s God supposedly gives “unconditional love” whereas the Christian God only lets you into Heaven if you believe in Him and completely turn your will and life over to His care. Wait, that Christian God sounds a whole lot like…

Well AA instructs members to use a God of their own understanding, so shouldn’t AA use a hands off attitude with anything anyone does with their God of their understanding?

I am an Atheist who got and has stayed sober in AA. Religion is an outside issue in AA. The steps are written and accepted as they are. The newcomer and the old timer are both accepted as they are. There is no pressure to conform to any deity or religious ritual. All these choices, including atheism, are ENTIRELY one’s personal affair. In twenty-two years of continuous sobriety, I have never been asked what my personal beliefs or lack thereof are…not once. In fact, I find AA to be one of the most zealous guardians of individual freedom and true democratically spirited organizations I have ever been associated with.

We simply don’t quarrel over these matters. AA’s are a society of people in action, constructive action. No debate, no think tank, no rock stars…no argument.

AA is fiercely concerned about helping Alcoholics find their way to a contented, useful life without booze. In that purpose, I have seen people do extraordinary things.

Also, no one speaks for AA. If the Toronto Inter-group makes a decision about whether or not a group actually is an AA group or not, this is a reflection of that local organization, not AA as a whole.

Oh, and in addition to being an active AA member, I am a husband, a father, a business owner, a community activist, a taxpayer, and a lifelong pursuer of liberty and a defender of your right to do so as well. I used to be a falling down, miserable, unreliable, sometimes violent drunk.

AA has only worked in my life for 22 years though… I’d keep an eye on me!

Apparently the leadership of AA, or at least this group, aren’t really interested in curing your addiction. They just want to replace your alcohol addiction with an addiction to unhealthy fantasy stories.

I’m not addicted to anything, and have never been a member of any addiction-recovery process.

I have acquaintances and colleagues who have been in AA and NA, and the above quote is exactly what has happened to them (and, from what I can tell, many many other people).

Now, is an addiction to recovery programs, or an addiction to the concept of a “Higher Power” helping them worse than an addiction to alcohol? In the grand scheme of things, I’d say no. I believe addiction is a disease, and disease causes harm–often great harm–when left unchecked.

But I will say this, and it ain’t gonna make me sound good: 12-steppers annoy the crap out of me. I am truly happy that you are no longer addicted to that harmful substance. I really am.

But you are still an addict. And I just can’t stomach the 12-step mentality. And it makes me feel a bit wretched to admit it, but there it is. I know I have no concept of how horrible addiction is. You are right. I don’t.

I just prefer to associate most closely with those people who are not addicted to recovery. AA is not an organization I support.

I have read all the comments and I am torn… by the truth of much that has been said by those critical of AA, and the knowledge that most of these critics do not speak from personal experience.

Like David F (the last commenter), and others before him, I have 20 years in AA. I’ve been an atheist since the age of 13 long before I picked up my first drug or drink. Today – let’s just say I’m a GNU-atheist. Presently, I’m a board member of one Humanist group, director of a secular coalition, member of most national groups, and attend national conferences. I’m also a psychologist.

I think Toronto Intergroup was wrong to de-list the groups because of Traditions three and four. And, if you don’t know what those are, do some homework and quit flapping your jaws about a program you don’t know much about! At present I am fighting within AA to increase the presence and tolerance of agnosticism and atheism. I don’t run into much resistance, but then I go to whatever meetings I choose, and surround myself with friends of my choice. I sponsor several non-theists – I’m glad to do it, and they are thankful they are not alone.

As David F said:

My sole motivation for this contribution is that there may be a suffering Alcoholic reading this discussion who has the impression that if he goes to AA for help, he will be swept up by some hysterical bible thumper and turned into a mindless non-entity…or worse, a mindless non-entity without a drink!

That is my sole reason for writing as well.

The fellowship has been tremendously healing and supportive, and I’m proud to be a sober, atheist member of AA.

soberatheist.com

John, you are mistaken. Of course the agnostic groups are AA groups. There are “women’s groups” in Toronto on the Intergroup list. For those AA meetings, you should have a desire to stop drinking AND be a woman. There are gay meetings, young people’s etc. So what? They are still AA meetings. 

I love what you say.  And I am NOT an atheist, but AM a very active member of AA, sober for 4 years now thanks to this way of living.  AA of COURSE welcomes all with a desire to stop drinking (“believers” and “non believers” alike), and the steps work AS WRITTEN with no need to revise.  If revised, they are no longer the AA 12 steps, by definition.  Not rocket science.

The same issue has now arisen in Indianapolis AA.  The Indinapolis Intergroup Service Committee has delisted the local “We Agnostics” group, for changing the steps and “affiliating” with an outside organization by having its meeting listed on a site for agnostics and alcoholics in AA.  As soon as the group learned of the committee’s displeasure, it began using the original steps in its meeting format.  The “affiliating” issue is a red herring – its merely public information. Gay groups are listed on gay sites, and small town newspapers list meetings.  Forunknown reasons, the service committee has persisted, despite the group reverting to the original steps.  Representatives of the groups are challanging the decision.  I appreciate the comments here.  The IG should permit this group of alcoholics to be listed in the directory, and acted beyond its authority, IMHO, in delisting them.  The 1946 article by Bill W. is particularly helpful.  Hopefully we will sort this issue out here. 

Replying to Atheist in AA

The assumption that I have often encountered in researching the issue of AA and religious proselytizing is that it is a product of AA’s choice as a unified body.  This is a common misconception of those who have only a cursory understanding of AA’s real structure, purpose, and history.  The AA General Service Representative whose letter you quoted addresses some of this misconception by reminding the addressee that AA groups have no business trying to govern each other.

I have encountered many people whose experience with AA is through captive groups, those that have muddled their purpose with that of an institution, such as a treatment center, a prison, or a church.  These institutions, hearing something about the success of AA, take it upon themselves to form groups and call them AA.  No matter what they call it, that’s not AA.  AA is made up of people who came together entirely of their own choosing, for no other purpose than to stay sober and help others do the same.  Its purpose isn’t to cure people of anything, and it makes that clear.  It isn’t to make people believe in God, despite the use of the word.  AA’s purpose isn’t ever to make anybody else do anything, period.  It’s to choose for ourselves what we want, what we will do, what we believe or don’t believe as individuals, but with the precedent of those who have successfully recovered before us.  If people in AA are going around telling other people what to do, instead of sharing what they did to stay sober themselves in the hope that it might help someone, then they are not acting on the principles of the AA program.

I’m a Pagan in AA, and I won’t lie:  I get very tired of the God word being used, and the references to Christian teachings.  If it weren’t for the fact that I’ve found my own way of making the program work for me, I wouldn’t recommend it to anyone.  In fact, I don’t.  I just enjoy it for myself, and welcome people who come through the door, hoping that something I say or do might help them.  If not, then I recommend that they keep trying, keep looking, and keep coming back if nothing else seems to work.  If they die because they were scared I was going to try to convert them to worship Athena, then that’s their own fear getting the best of them.

#
by Bill W. in the 1946 Grapevine:

“Any two or three alcoholics gathered
together for sobriety may call themselves an AA Group. This clearly implies
that an alcoholic is a member if he says so; that we can’t deny him his
membership; that we can’t demand from him a cent; that we can’t force our
beliefs or practices upon him; that he may flout everything we stand for and
still be a member. In fact, our Tradition carries the principle of independence
for the individual to such an apparently fantastic length that, so long
as there is the slightest interest in sobriety, the most unmoral,
the most anti-social, the most critical alcoholic may gather about him a few
kindred spirits and announce to us that a new Alcoholics Anonymous Group has
been formed. Anti-God, anti-medicine, anti-our Recovery Program, even
anti-each other— these rampant individuals are still an AA Group if they
think so!”

Love your post! Agree 100%.

I love your post. I created a blog called http://www.leavinaa.com 
There is also alot of activism going on to expose all of this. 
on the orange-papers forum you may want to join in . You will be welcomed.

I stopped drinking 25 years ago. I did it on my own. With AA all I would be doing is going from one addiction to another.
Ray you said it all. Thanks

TraditionOur tradition carries the principle of independence for the individualto such a apparently fantastic length that,so long as there is the slightest interest in sobriety, the most unmoral,the most antisocial, the most critical alcoholicmay gather about him a few kindred spirits and announce to usthat a new AA group has been formed.Anti-God, anti-medicine, anti-our recovery program, even anti-each other –these rampant individuals are still an AA group if they think so! – Bill Wilson