Ask those that had a bad experience from it. The demand that one needs to appeal to a higher power is especially damaging. But I doubt if you would understand why.
BTW, I am asking those who had a bad experience from it. I'm asking you. I'm trying to understand what that is exactly, but you've not answered back.
But to take a look at what you just said here about the "demand that one needs to appeal to a higher power is especially damaging," in what way is that damaging? In my experience with AA, most make it very clear that the "higher power" can be anything, and for most agnostics and atheists, they see the AA group itself as the "higher power".
I take higher power to mean essentially, anything or anyone outside of yourself and your own efforts, which historically has proven unsuccessful in combating the addiction, unaided, and
alone. It's doesn't really need to be that much more lofty than that. So it is essentially, "
ask for help". That's all it needs to be to get the ball rolling.
I can understand, unlike what you seem to assume, how that there are those, which include myself, who have a certain "allergy" to the notion of God as "He", or some traditional theistic view. And I'll immediately recognize that that language is strewn throughout the literature.
So in that sense that 2nd person deity of Christianity language appears in the AA material. But at the same time, with great purposeful effort it deliberately says "as we understand God". It's not preaching a certain view, but "make it be what you want it to be for yourself that you are comfortable with".
I am able to soften that "he" and more God as a person idea of God by recognizing the period of time in American history when it was written. For the time, it was quite outside traditional religious views, and I'd say it was quite remarkable for the time as the first, real "spiritual but not religious" or SBNR group out there. In fact, that's what I see it as more than anything else. It's a program of mental hygiene that uses the spiritual path of good psychological health in a non-religious way. It's a therapeutic
SBNR program, not a "Christian group".
So, what I hear you saying is that it sounds like they are preaching and raming the idea of God down the throat of agnostics and atheists, or even those like me who have a certain allergy to the traditional theistic idea of an antrophomorpic deity. But based upon what they themselves say, and what members themselves say, and the diversity of non-believers, atheists, and agonistics, and non-theists who are part of it say, do you still feel they are demanding you believe in the Christian God?
The only thing I can think of is that you don't care for it seeing itself as a spiritual program? That spirituality is seen as the same thing as 'believing in God" in a traditional theistic way? Can you help me understand your objection better?