«
»

Should American courts be able to order people into a “faith based” program?


AA (Alcoholics Anonymous) is a spiritually based treatment program. It requires acknowledgement of a “higher power” however you concieve it to be. But, it requires that acknowledgement…

Do you believe it is fair for the court system to mandate a treatment program that is faith based?

Should a secular treatment program be mandated instead, for those in need of treatment who are not religious or spiritual??

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/09/08/BA99S1AKQ.DTL&hw=court+ruling+AA&sn=001&sc=1000

I’m not against mandated treatment, but I am against mandated religion.

  • Share/Bookmark

, , , , , , , , ,

This entry was posted on April 26, 2010, 11:20 pm and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through RSS 2.0. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

  1. #1 by Happykid on April 26, 2010 - 11:45 pm

    Someone told me you could imagine the “higher power” to be your healed self, but I don’t know if that’s true.

  2. #2 by So-crates of R&S!!! (DelFuego) on April 27, 2010 - 12:43 am

    As I understand it, people have a choice as to whether or not they wish to attend AA meetings or some other secular treatment program.

    I think mandating treatment is a good idea.

  3. #3 by pixie_pagan on April 27, 2010 - 1:40 am

    There is a range of drug therapies out there that are more secular and based on pschoanalysis and emotional therapy.

    There is no need to send someone to a faith based programme if they are not themselves of any faith.

  4. #4 by nurdee on April 27, 2010 - 1:52 am

    i think any program that helps get people rehabilitated and not jailed is probably a good one. but there are other programs too.

    lets face it though, if you went to a court-mandated AA program, acknowledging a higher power is the least of your problems.

  5. #5 by Windom Earle on April 27, 2010 - 2:09 am

    I think (although I’m not certain) that people have the option of going to a more secular treatment program. I suppose that may depend on where you live, though.

  6. #6 by Sips With A Fist on April 27, 2010 - 2:56 am

    No they should not. Should the government force Catholics to attend Hebrew schools? Is the condemned Jewish prisoner forced to listen to, and pray with, a Catholic father prior to execution?

    Secular program it is then for those who aren’t religious.

  7. #7 by Maeve S on April 27, 2010 - 3:25 am

    A secular treatment program is a possibility, I meet people who need substance abuse treatment but the preachiness of AA just makes them more adverse to treatment. For those people who must endure a treatment not designed for atheists, the earlier idea suggested here that the “higher power” could be ones best self seems to have merit.

  8. #8 by furiousblue on April 27, 2010 - 3:54 am

    Sure, why not? The government has been completely ignoring the Constitution for many years now (especially the last seven or so). Why stop now?

  9. #9 by raysny on April 27, 2010 - 4:27 am

    The Ninth now joins the Second and Seventh Federal District Courts, the Supreme Court of Tennessee, and the New York State Court of Appeals in calling AA at least “religious in nature” and mandated AA a violation of Establishment Clause.
    http://www.uscourts.gov/courtlinks/

    Every time this has come before a higher court, the final outcome has been the same. The Supreme Court of the United States has thus far refused to hear appeals of these cases, and while this does not make anti-coercion the law of the land, it is nearly so with anyone with the time. money, and energy willing to fight it almost guaranteed a victory.

    AA has about a 5% success rate, but to be fair, no treatment that is forced on people who do not want it is unlikely to work.
    http://www2.potsdam.edu/hansondj/DrivingIssues/1043336820.html
    http://www2.potsdam.edu/hansondj/DrinkingAndDriving.html

Comments are closed.