http://www.freedomforum.org/templates/d ... entID=8479N.Y. county must pay atheist $1 after Supreme Court refuses to hear appeal
The Associated Press
11.16.99
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court yesterday turned away an appeal from government officials who had been ordered to pay a symbolic $1 for requiring an atheist to attend Alcoholics Anonymous meetings that involved prayers and other religious content.
The justices, without comment, refused to hear an appeal in which Orange County, N.Y., probation officials argued that they did not violate the constitutionally required separation of church and state.
The court's action set no legal precedent and does not preclude the possibility that the justices may someday agree to consider the issue in some other case.
Robert Warner pleaded guilty in 1990 to his third alcohol-related driving offense in just over a year. Before his sentencing, he voluntarily began attending Alcoholics Anonymous meetings on his lawyer's advice.
The probation department recommended that the sentencing judge put Warner on probation and require him to continue attending the AA meetings. The judge agreed.
Warner, who said he is an atheist, later asked to be freed from the obligation to attend the meetings. He said they involved group prayers and that members were urged to "turn our will and our lives over to the care of God." A state court agreed to free Warner from having to attend the meetings, but said he would have to pay for treatment at a private facility.
He then sued Orange County in federal court, saying its recommendation to the judge violated his rights and amounted to a government establishment of religion.
A federal judge agreed and ordered the county to pay a symbolic $1 in damages. The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld that ruling.In the appeal acted on yesterday, the county's lawyers said the order to attend Alcoholics Anonymous was issued by the judge, not the probation department. The lawyers added that any religious content of the meetings was incidental to the goal of promoting sobriety.
The case is Orange County Department of Probation v. Warner.
http://www.freedomforum.org/templates/d ... ntID=14537Judge: Alcoholics Anonymous conversations are 'religious communication'
By The Associated Press
08.02.01
Printer-friendly page
WHITE PLAINS, N.Y. — A federal judge overturned a manslaughter conviction, saying conversations among Alcoholics Anonymous participants should not have been used as evidence because such exchanges are a form of confidential religious communication.
U.S. District Judge Charles Brieant said
treating AA meetings with less protection than any other form of religious communication, which carries assurances of confidentiality, is unconstitutional.The entire AA relationship, he wrote, "is anonymous and confidential."
Paul Cox, 33, had been convicted of two counts of manslaughter for stabbing to death Laksman Rao Chervu and his wife, Shanta, in their home in 1988. Cox claimed he was in an alcoholic stupor when he broke into the home, where he had lived as a child. He did not know the couple.
His trial featured testimony — some obtained by subpoena — from AA members who said Cox had discussed memories of the stabbings.
Cox was sentenced to a minimum of 16 years in prison. He appealed, claiming his statements to fellow AA members were confidential and should not have been admitted as evidence.
Brieant said a federal appeals court held in 1999 "that AA is a religion." That conclusion, he said, was reached in a case that said a criminal defendant could not be ordered to attend AA meetings "because of the religious nature of the 12 steps." The 12 steps are tasks AA participants are asked to complete as they fight alcoholism.
In his ruling July 31, Brieant said that, based on AA being considered a religion, disclosures of wrongs to fellow members should be protected by "a privilege granted to other religions similarly situated."
He also cited a state Court of Appeals finding that "adherence to the AA fellowship entails engagement in religious activity and religious proselytization."Brieant stayed Cox's release to allow time for an appeal, which District Attorney Jeanine Pirro said she would pursue.
The prosecutor said the testimony was not privileged because "there was no evidence whatsoever that Alcoholics Anonymous is a religious organization as required by statute, or that another member is a clergyman."
Pirro also noted that the AA testimony did not concern what Cox said in meetings, but rather what he said in conversations outside meetings — a point Brieant did not address.
Cox's attorney, Robert Isseks, said the ruling was "a tremendous and strong statement of First Amendment principles."
A spokesman at AA's general services office in New York, who insisted that his name not be used because he is a member, said today that the organization would have no comment.
He said the ruling "falls under the guidance of our Tenth Tradition, which states that we would have no opinion on an outside issue. Our interpretation is that a court ruling or a medical advance, even though it may have something to do with us, is still an outside issue."
http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199 ... igion.htmlArticle Excerpt
The method of Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) and Narcotics Anonymous (NA), the Twelve Steps [see sidebar], has become, or has nearly become, a state religion -- thanks to transparently false claims that the steps are not religious, let alone the specific religion that they in fact constitute. 'State church' is not defined herein as every American being born into the religion, although this is the definite tendency. A court ruled a government usage of the steps "tends towards the establishment of a state religious faith." The tendency is illegal, even if a state church is not the technical actuality. The name of the religion is Steppism, the unique spiritual perspective of the steps.
The United States Supreme Court has let stand two completely separate decisions, both ruling AA "unequivocally religious", and thereby illegal for the applicable government usages. One of those decisions ruled AA "engages in religious activity and religious proselytization." The presence of proselytizing implies that AA is a religion by definition. That the method is an admitted spiritual formula indicates the methodology constitutes a religion.The American Jewish Congress wrote a majestic friend of the court brief in Griffin v. Coughlin, June 11, 1996 before New York State's highest court, the Court of Appeals -- one of the decisions the U.S. Supreme Court let stand.
The New York court further ruled AA "deeply religious" and "intensely religious." An attorney with the Christian Legal Society said that she completely empathizes. Americans for Religious Liberty, which has ministers, rabbis, and Catholic Sisters at the national level, has decided any government usage or promotion of the steps is illegal, as has American Atheists, Inc. The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, in two separate cases before federal judges, ruled private twelve-stepping illegal.
The religious cult Synanon directly grew out of a specific AA meeting. The Heaven's Gate cult of 39 suicides in 1998 in California was outright twelve-step. Alcoholics Anonymous grew out of and was a part of (at least in Ohio), a fundamentalist evangelical Christian cult or sect called the Oxford Group, which was discredited by more mainstream Christianity. That discrediting was before the group's founder's remarks in the 1930s praising Adolf Hitler: "Thank God for a man like Adolf Hitler." So the Oxford Group changed its name to Moral Re-Armament (MRA), which exists today, and which has the same type of hidden agenda as AA: the replacement of democracy with theocracy. MRA admits to wanting rule by God. The question is begged: Whose version of which God?The Church of Spiritual Recovery was a twelve-step church until about four years ago in Columbus, Ohio. The Recovery Church is or was in Auckland, New Zealand. So real cults grow out of Steppism and real churches are founded on it. But it isn't religious?
Conform or die is an official AA position in the pamphlet The 12 Concepts for World Service ((c) 1986). "We know we have to choose conformity to AA's Twelve Steps and Twelve Traditions or else face dissolution and death." If spiritual conformity under life and death pressure is not religious, nothing is. AA writes of "complete defeat." The client of the professional Steppist counselor, the victim of the indoctrination, being defeated by alcohol is not enough for AA. It wants complete defeat as a person, so its phony idea of the person replaces what would be the not-addicted selves within everyone.
The very common argument "The steps are merely suggestions" is frankly a false argument, designed to draw the person further into AA for the purposes of indoctrination. The client who objects to the steps must then endure endless promotion of Stepping at virtually every meeting. The argument is plainly false in actual practice.
Promoting Religion
In the 1969 official AA pamphlet AA's Legacy of Service, AXs co-founder Bill Wilson wrote that proselytizing is the main reason for AA's existence: "Our Twelfth Step--carrying the message--is the basic service that the A.A. Fellowship gives; this is our principle aim and the main reason for our existence."
Even if it were legal for government to promote religion in general (as opposed to non-religion in general), there simply is no such thing. One or another religion always takes offense. And the steps are much too specific - even though broad in one area, containing surrender to God, faith healing, mysticism, proselytizing, confession, and prayer--to even be seriously considered for the impossible loophole. The steps may be referenced on page 59 of Alcoholics Anonymous. AA has rightly downplayed the so-called "flash of light" mystical experience; yet it exists in their doctrine.
Steppism discriminates against Atheism, Agnosticism, and Free-thought. Atheists generally deny the existence of any god or spiritual power, thus they are in violation of the steps. Chapter Four of Alcoholics Anonymous, "We Agnostics," is often touted as evidence Atheists and Agnostics are welcome in AA. However, Chapter Four's very obvious arguing for belief in a god belies this. The chapter insults Atheism and Agnosticism with arguments unacceptable in debate clubs--ad hominem arguments that imply the person is dishonest for not believing.
In Chapter One of Twelve Steps and Twelve Traditions, AA's second basic text, AA suggests alcoholics and potential alcoholics who reject AA drink. This is immoral. AA would rather see people die than recover without it. The great error commonly committed is definitional, confusing living sober with AA membership; these are nowhere near the same thing, granting that many thousands of people believe AA helps them with abstinence. Many people have positive experiences in Steppist groups.
In the second chapter of Narcotics Anonymous and elsewhere, repeatedly the authors wrote "we keep what we have only by giving it away." Steppism perceives proselytizing as necessary for sobriety. One of my opponents argued along the lines that because I was able to resist indoctrination, there is no violation of the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment (from Lemon v. Kurtzman, the 3-pronged "Lemon test" for religious freedom violations of the Constitution). But if I had been converted, there would thereby be no perceived violation because the indoctrination would have been successful!
Tradition and patriotism as regards religious freedom cannot be a matter of trust with Steppists generally, because their first loyalty includes proselytizing. If democracy is a casualty, they won't know it. And AA has even betrayed itself.
Going Against Traditions
AA's second code of ethics, its Twelve Traditions, may be referenced on pages 564-568 of Alcoholics Anonymous. AA has lent its name and endorsement to virtually every alcoholism facility in the nation in violation of 'Tradition 6'. Professional 12-Stepping is absolutely forbidden by 'Tradition 8'. If cooperating with government coercion in signing court slips by AA meetings' secretaries is not a violation of Tradition 11's "attraction rather than promotion" policy, nothing is. The applicable governments are interfering in a big way with religion, in having made AA into something AA denied and denies wanting. The fact that government has induced AA into self-betrayal appears to be a serious violation of the Entanglement Clause of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution (again see Lemon, excessive entanglement with a religion).
The first thing AA members use the professional community for, according to the chapter "Seeking professional help," page 58 of Living Sober ([c] 1975 by AA), is "job-getting." Part of AA's real, hidden, agenda is to join the helping professions to secure and expand its power. AA's proselytizing is very extreme, extending into subversion. Subversion is defined here as usurping the good intentions of government to its own purposes. The 'total overthrow' definition of subversion also applies here.
The goals of the group are placed above the needs and hopes of the client. The group succeeds even if 99% of the people exposed to it get drunk and fail. Abstinence is perceived to be a group project rather than an individual responsibility. Personal responsibility for and commitment to abstinence become conditional and temporary, good only until the next meeting. Thus AA's famous saying, "One day at a time."
AA's view of humanity is negative and defeatist. Other than to be healed by faith, nowhere in the steps is any information given on directly attacking active addiction. Is it legal for government to pay for religious faith healing? The answer of course is no; faith healing should be a private matter. In AA one is powerless, rather than one having power over addiction. AA's position is inhumane and mistaken. Group-based recovery has serious problems, including unhealthy and unnecessary dependency upon others. Meeting attendance implies the problem is unsolved, because the grouper otherwise has no self-interest in attending. AA's definition of what is called a "sponsor" is a guide to the steps. And it is ubiquitous in AA and in much of counseling to hear "Get a sponsor."
Not Religious?
There are three major arguments that the steps are not religious. All three are false, and each is religious! Evidence the first major argument: "It's spiritual but not religious." This is false, as the words have overlapping meanings in context. Spirituality is the experiential side of religion, apart from outward beliefs. One may claim the steps to be spiritual, but it is incontrovertible they are religious. AA is religious in its origins, its doctrine, its rituals, its expository writings, and in its unique definition of alcoholism as a spiritual disease. It is lost on the Steppists, unknown by them, that the Twelve Steps are their religious doctrine, their dogma. Twelve-step treatment turned me from a believer in God into an Atheist.
There might be such a thing as having a spiritual but not religious experience. For this to be the actuality, no other person, or no more than three others, can agree with the belief system. The point is moot. Steppist dogma is just that--dogma. Part of this unique doctrine is you can invent your own spiritual view, have a different name for your god of the steps. Even agreement in this equals religion, because any religion is defined as agreement concerning purported spiritual ideas, no matter how broad any such belief If not, there is yet the overarching religion of the steps.
The second major argument, "It's God as you understand God" is false because it's God as the steps would want you to understand any purported God. The religious nature of the argument is blatant; and not all religions believe in a god. God is mentioned or alluded to (Him) in fully six of the steps.
The third argument "Your higher power can be anything" is incomplete and false, because although 'higher powers' may conflict with one of the steps, it is then only with respect to religion. If more steps are objected to, we then have the kind of thing like a Jew in an evangelical Christian church. So also with a client's invented higher power. A higher power is intended to be a spiritual higher power. The argument further tends to be religious because fetishism--object worship--is religion. Very many in AA mention light bulbs or doorknobs as higher powers.
Coerced to Step
When, as is often the case, judges order people to attend AA or Steppist addiction treatment they are forcing under threat of incarceration--Muslims, Jews, and Atheists to endure Christian evangelism. Yet the problem is much worse because the coerced indoctrination is covert, concealed through the denials of religiosity. Hiding the religious nature of the program and of the fellowship is supported by the powerful coercions of strong group pressure and strong professional authority--and one has no choice! These coercions are in addition to the overt coercions.
Governmental coercions to partake in the Stepping religion that have been ruled illegal by American courts include receiving prison perks for Stepping, and in one case even a driver's license. People lose licenses to practice medicine, law, and other professions unless they Step. Nor would offering a choice that included Steppism be legal, because most counselors would proselytize for AA. Such a 'choice' artificially elevates one religion, Steppism, above all other religions. The official figure from my home State, Ohio, indicates that 30% of available counselors are themselves members of twelve-step groups, although it is probably higher. Such dual relationship with the client would be an ethical violation in other helping professions.
Stepping on the Young
Many young people abuse alcohol or drugs, but moderate or quit as they mature. Twelve-Stepping them is inappropriate, and much worse. Stepping is a life sentence in actual practice. The very often-heard remark is "The first thing I notice about people who relapse [resume drinking] is they quit going to meetings." One is expected to be an AA member for life. A great weakness of AA is it provides no way of leaving it. That which is needed is information on how to recover from AA's fabricated definition of "recovery," meaning not questioning, and practicing, the steps. Recovery should be defined as abstinence or moderation.
Religious cults sometimes tend to make up their own meanings for words. AA is hardly the kind of religion like just going to church on Sunday; as courts have ruled, it is "intensely religious." We "tried to practice these principles in all our affairs" [from the steps]. It is exasperating to tell the truth about AA, because of its excellent, though completely undeserved, reputation. Twelve-stepping young people is child abuse, even granting many Steppists have good intentions. Intention is not effect. Because drunkenness is expected if anyone leaves AA, AA trains some people to be powerless over alcohol, a self-fulfilling prophecy.
An article in the September 24, 1999 edition of the American Psychological Association Journal reported group interventions for troubled adolescents can backfire. This isn't the only such study. The thoughts of likeminded people gain strength from such a group of people--thirty people together in one room for an NA meeting, many of them actively using drugs, some of them actively dealing drugs, and most of them wanting drugs or they wouldn't be there in the first place! Addicts have given their opinions Narcotics Anonymous is the best place to deal drugs!
AA, also Al-Anon and Narc-Anon, Steppist groups for family members, replace traditional family values with their values. The destruction of family values can be perceived in the codependency movement, most of whose members are also members of 12-step groups. Common human caring has been perverted to be like a disease symptom. It is important to realize the drastic invasiveness of Steppism. Even familial love is degraded.
AA members commonly claim being abstinent without working the steps is not sobriety, rather a "dry drunk" in the sense the person still craves alcohol or is agitated. But cravings diminish with some sober time; so some AA members crave. And the claim is mean--the method is above questioning....
http://open.salon.com/blog/bonnie_russe ... a_religionAppeals court says requirement to attend AA unconstitutional
Bob Egelko, Chronicle Staff Writer
Saturday, September 8, 2007
"Alcoholics Anonymous, the renowned 12-step program that directs problem drinkers to seek help from a higher power, says it's not a religion and is open to nonbelievers. But it has enough religious overtones that a parolee can't be ordered to attend its meetings as a condition of staying out of prison, a federal appeals court ruled Friday.
In fact, said the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, the constitutional dividing line between church and state in such cases is so clear that a parole officer can be sued for damages for ordering a parolee to go through rehabilitation at Alcoholics Anonymous or an affiliated program for drug addicts.
Rulings from across the nation since 1996 have established that "requiring a parolee to attend religion-based treatment programs violates the First Amendment," the court said. "While we in no way denigrate the fine work of (Alcoholics Anonymous and Narcotics Anonymous), attendance in their programs may not be coerced by the state."
The 12 steps suggested for participants in both programs include an acknowledgment that "a power greater than ourselves could restore us to sanity" and a promise to "turn our will and our lives over to the care of God as we understood Him." They also call for prayer and meditation."
(It was a 3-0 ruling)
The case had its beginnings after a Buddhist with a drinking problem, rejected as a condition of parole a requirement he attend AA meetings.
The Buddhist claimed AA was a religion. AA claims it's generic spiritual, not religious.
However, in certain parts of the country AA meeting leaders will openly request,
"We ask you not share unless you have taken Jesus Christ as your spiritual savior."
Which is another way of saying, "Give me that old time religion!"
In case you are unaware of the far reach of the 9th Circuit, below is a handy map.
http://articles.sfgate.com/2007-09-08/b ... eals-courtAppeals court says requirement to attend AA unconstitutional
Religious content of program violates rights, court says
SAN FRANCISCO
September 08, 2007|By Bob Egelko, Chronicle Staff Writer
Alcoholics Anonymous, the renowned 12-step program that directs problem drinkers to seek help from a higher power, says it's not a religion and is open to nonbelievers. But it has enough religious overtones that a parolee can't be ordered to attend its meetings as a condition of staying out of prison, a federal appeals court ruled Friday.
In fact, said the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, the constitutional dividing line between church and state in such cases is so clear that a parole officer can be sued for damages for ordering a parolee to go through rehabilitation at Alcoholics Anonymous or an affiliated program for drug addicts.
