So that's it then?
What I was like, "I drank like a fish, fell down. lost a job and family.
What happened, "By the Grace of God I found AA"
What it is like now, "The plug is still in the jug"
I know that is extreme, but not anymore extreme as labeling Addict involvement as the only reason AA Meetings fail.
I find you use a sort of shorthand to make your points, like a magic trick a slight of hand, slight of keyboard perhaps. Nobody suggested even hinted that addict involvement was the only reason, a reason perhaps, one of many. But it is irresponsible, (remember we are responsible), not to try and correct every shortcoming which the traditions and guidelines warn us can lead to downfall.
On the question of drunkalog. I agree entirely, that some members do share the same story week after week and it is boring to me, but when I first heard it I gained something, so I must now allow new members the same opportunity, while at the same time learning to make my own contribution a little more interesting. I believe that we were each given certain gifts in life, some are good singers some good at sports and so on, and some good at speaking, good orators. Not all of us can be the ones who record speaker tapes, and travel to various places to give AA talks, although our ego sometimes might suggest that we could be. It may sound unkind, but some members just don't have the education and exposure to working in an environment that develops confident thoughtful speech. To these we show tolerance, and if we are fortunate to have had better opportunities we thank God for that.
The problem in my view with allowing everybody to talk about 'their day' is related to this, a clever person may give an example of an incident which happened in their day, and very nicely show how AA practice was used to advantage in overcoming adversity, this is fine. But then the not so clever person, or the person who just does not get out enough to have things of interest happen in their day, is going to talk about the sick cat or the lawnmower that wouldn't start, and we can't tell them not to, because they will say we didn't complain when someone else spoke about what happened to them. If we were all professional race car drivers maybe the speed limit could be safely raised to 100mph, since we are not we must put guidelines in place for the good of all, and while AA does not have 'rules' it is fair to suggest guidelines, like try to speak about your ES&H. And the clever speaker mentioned above, usually finds a way to put their ES&H over in a way that never gets stale.
The only requirement for A.A. membership is a desire to stop drinking.
Both here and in the first installment of this thread, reference is being made to the rights of members under tradition 3, things like this were said - “But Tradition 3 also declares that the only thing I need is a desire to stop drinking. It doesn't even have to be an honest desire, it can be Court appointed or such.” I copied that among other items from the first thread when they were posted, but to me the tradition speaks about the requirement for membership, and to those we show true tolerance. When GSO asks local intergroups to help with a membership survey, I don't think they go to meetings and count heads, it's how many members each group has, because it's imagined that every person who has a desire will join a home group. The drug addict or court appointed DUI is quite likely not a member in the way I believe membership is considered, and any tolerance we show them is because we are nice folks.
"Good morning, this is your Higher Power speaking. I will not be needing your help today."