• They do help

    Yes, it is right to make someone who has been having problems and getting into trouble with the law go to an AA meeting. These meetings do help people overcome drinking, and having this support group may stop the person from doing something to get into trouble with the law.

  • Violation of first amendment rights.

    The Supreme court justice's have already visited this subject back in the 90s. In short, they have concluded that aa has the frame work to support the findings of it being a religion. The vote amongst them was strong enough to conclude that aa is a religion making it law. No one in the United states has to submit to forced attendance to aa.

  • AA has enough of a religious overtone to be considered religious.

    The debate about AA being "Spiritual, Not Religious" has gone on since its inception in 1936 and the publishing of the Big Book in 1939. The facts all point to AA being formed to get prospects from the legal system and against the US Constitution of separation of church and state. AA is actually a new-age religion where you can pray to any god you want, as long as it is a god.

  • AA is a religious organization.

    AA has convinced the public they need to save alcoholics and addicts from an unknown disease that most people quit on their own. Some need help to quit but when ready take that help and do quit. The religious aspect of AA is what drives it to attract people in any way they can promoting themselves as experts. Just like a Mormon going door to door. Thank you. I want to live in a country that is free from religion as well as giving freedom of religion.

  • Positively not the right thing to do.

    AA is a strongly religious program relying on prayer (“communicating with your higher power”), confession and witnessing (“sharing”). It’s an intrinsically religious, faith healing approach---which never works for unwilling, governmentally-mandated attendees. Do some internet research on the religious elements of AA and the many court decisions about that subject and you’ll find countless hours of reading material.

  • No, it should be voluntary.

    Even though healing only happens when one voluntarily enters a healing program, if someone has a conviction based on substance abuse it can be right to send them to AA meetings so that they get a taste of what rehab might be like and might decide then to go voluntarily after that.

  • AA does not work if it is involuntary.

    There is testimony that suggests people who are forced to get exposed to AA meetings stuck with it and have been sober for years. Other people suggest that attending AA due to a court order creates a group of the AA crowd that only attends the required portion. The result is two sides of a room with very different interests. People who want help and want to work the program, and people who don't want help, the just want to work a system that allows their behavior to continue as long as they go to a church six times and stay for an hour.

  • No, forced 12-step programs are ineffective and tyrannical.

    No, it is not rigt to force an individual to attend AA meetings or other 12-step program meetings, especially as a part of a remediation or diversion program through the judicial system. By requiring a belief in a "higher power", 12-step programs are inherently religious, which violates the Constitutional decree of separation of church and state. Furthermore, they instill in the participant the idea of powerlessness, which can be detrimental to someone who has already faced feelings of powerlessness from abuse or exploitation in their past.

  • It is not right to make people attend AA meetings.

    It is not right to force people to attend Alcoholics Anonymous meetings if they are unwilling. AA is not a religion per se, but it contains strong elements of religious faith. In a free country, you cannot force anyone to attend religious meetings, even if they break a law involving alcohol.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.