Alcoholics Anonymous is NOT a cult

Thank you for your response. I saw where it said that the list could help determine if there was cause for concern. Webster defines concern as 1 a matter; affair; 2 interests in or regard for a person or thing; 3 reference; 4 worry. So clearly, concern does necessarily mean that there is danger. This is not a debate about atheists or whether atheists can get sober in AA, because they can, and they have. It is not that I am avoiding some of my opponent's questions; I just believe that they are irrelevant to the debate. I would like to use this round wisely and continue to focus on arguments that will demonstrate that AA is not a cult. I am not sure what my opponent means that one of the main points of 12 step programs is admitting that you are helpless against the Higher Power. The first step is "We admitted that we were powerless over alcohol – that our lives had become unmanageable." Alcohol is the foe here, not the Higher Power. AA is based on the 12 Steps. If a group were to reject the 12 Steps and adopt a different approach, it would not be AA. There are plenty of secular rehabilitation programs that use the 12 Steps as part of their recovery programs. For example, there are three state operated programs in North Carolina: The McLeod Center, the Black Mountain Treatment Center and Billingsly Detox. My attitude towards Christianity is the same as it is towards AA. As a whole, they are not aggressively recruiting or engaging in extreme evangelization; there is not the use of brainwashing, members are not financially or emotionally exploited, there is not false/deceptive teaching…therefore, as a whole, they are not a cult. Rebuttal 2: Again AA is not a religion. My opponent stated that Raelism "utterly failed" as a cult when the checklist is applied. I do not agree. I think Raelism is a cult, and make that argument after assessing the group with the checklist. But since we are not debating whether Raelism is a cult, I will not get into that. I hardly feel that my opponent and I "clearly represent a larger group" with regard to what the phrase "Higher Power" means. Although my Higher Power is based on my Christian beliefs, I respect and realize that the phrase Higher Power could mean many different things; therefore I do not jump to any conclusions and attempt to represent a larger group. I am baffled by what my opponent means when he says that the "majority of the human race that has the means to suffer from Alcoholism, is religious." My opponent stated that it was a fact that "the majority of people who hear the word Higher Power will believe it to be pointing to the word God." What evidence does he have to back up this claim? In the last round, my opponent explicitly stated that not every single person would instantly pair God to Higher Power. But then he said that it was a fact that "the majority of people who hear the word Higher power will believe it to be pointing to the word God." I ask you, what evidence do you have to back up this claim? I have provided many different possible answers for what the term Higher Power could mean. This is a debate on whether AA is a cult or not. AA is not an organized religion. All my examples of possible Higher Powers were legitimate. My opponent focused on the ones that were of varying religions. What about the examples of using the acronym G.O.D = Good Orderly Direction or Group of Drunks. These have worked for many members who could not or would not swallow the word God. Again, AA states that they are not allied with any sect, denomination, politics, or religion. They are not endorsing a particular religion. That is what cults do; they worship a diving being, a specific divine being as appointed by the cult. If AA member 1's Higher Power is based on their Christian upbringing; AA member 2's Higher Power is based on their Jewish beliefs; AA member 3's Higher Power is the group of drunks; AA member 4's Higher Power is based their Hinduism beliefs, AA member 5's Higher Power is Nature; AA member 6's Higher Power is based on Buddhism; AA member 7's Higher Power is Science; AA member 8's Higher Power is Reasoning and Logic; AA member 9's Higher Power is mathematics; etc. Obviously, I went above and beyond to demonstrate that there is a wide variety of "Higher Power" and that AA does not appoint a particular one. Members choose who their Higher Power is. AA meetings are not a place for "a particular form or system of religious worship" (Oxford English Dictionary). If AA said that one Higher Power was the best one, and insisted on a particular way to worship, then yes I would say that AA was indeed a cult. However, AA is only concerned with members finding a Higher Power that works for them. AA meetings are a place for alcoholics to get together to talk about their problems and to talk about recovery. It is a place for members to "share their experience, strength, and hope." In the beginning, "it became customary to set apart one night a week for a meeting to be attended by anyone or everyone interested in a spiritual way of life. Aside from fellowship and sociability, the prime object was to provide a time and place where new people might bring their problems" (AA, p. 160). I wish I had opted for a 5 round debate, but I am coming to an end. I have assessed AA based on the 15 items of Dr. Lalich's and Dr. Langone's checklist, the checklist that I used to define what a cult is. Their checklist was sufficient in determining criteria for cults. By using their checklist for characteristics to define what a typical cult looks like, I was able to demonstrate that AA is not a cut. I also applied the Oxford English Dictionary's definition and showed that AA does not push a particular of religious worship. Alcoholism affects many people, including the alcoholic and the people close to them. AA has been around for 74 years and will continue to help alcoholics to achieve sobriety for probably many years to come. Our society has witnessed some devastating results from particular cults. Perhaps, there have been some individual AA groups that have acted cult-like. Do I believe that it is possible for individual AA groups to adopt AA principles and apply them to the extreme...yes. I would say that these are of course possibilities. In researching for this debate, I found an academic article written by Nick Summers entitled "A Struggle Inside AA," about an AA group called Midtown in the Washington, DC area. Apparently, a young woman reported on some of the common practices at the Midtown. She said that the group's embrace was smothering to her. Her sponsor was assigned to her and told her to cut ties with anyone that was not part of Midtown. Someone told her to stop taking the medications she was taking, medication that was prescribed by her doctor for bipolar disorder. Some of the newer members were expected to do tasks for senior members. There was apparently some pressure to date and have sexual relationships only within the Midtown group. When concerned members discussed leaving Midtown meetings, they were told that they would surely drink again. Many of the Midtown members rented homes from other members and "many found work through contacts in the group" (Summers, 2007). If I were to assess Midtown based on Dr. Lalich's and Dr. Langone's checklist, I would most undoubtedly argue that Midtown was a cult. However, I do not feel that Midtown is practicing the traditional AA program. They have hijacked the AA name and are using it to their advantage. I would like to thank my opponent for his time and energy and participation. For my first debate, I would say that this was a rather pleasant experience. I look forward to my opponents closing arguments. Summers, Nick "A Struggle Inside AA." Newsweek 149.19 (2007): 46-48. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 20 Oct. 2009.