> The thing that has always bothered me about the 12-step program is that the end goal seems to always be abstinence, at least in the context of alcoholism.
This is where religion reflects cultural technology that gets lost in the secular translation.
Secularists vastly overestimate man’s control over himself and his world. Most people lack the impulse control to partake in their vices responsibly. That’s why most Americans are fat. We have a world surrounded by temptation—snacks available everywhere—and we tell people to partake responsibly but they can’t do that. Most people don’t have that same relationship with alcohol or cigarettes, but for the many people who do it’s unrealistic for them to think they can just drink responsibly.
> Secularists vastly overestimate man’s control over himself and his world.
I'd prefer if you didn't generalize here, especially since there is no "secularist bible" that lays out what "secularists" believe (or do not believe).
There's a book that describes what Christians believe about the life of Jesus Christ, and is used by most Christian priests to illustrate and reinforce their homilies and lessons to their lay folk. The same book is widely read by many denominations of Christians as a source of insight into the religious intent of Jesus Christ, even if the conclusions they draw from it may vary.
There are also other books written by both lay authors and those with theological credentials that seek to describe what a "good" Christian should believe and do, though to be fair, none of them are universal across the Christian faith (*).
No such work exists for "secularists".
(*) though fair enough, even "The Bible" doesn't entirely meet that standard given disagreements between both the high level denominations (Orthodox, Catholic, Protestant) and the subdivisions within each.
Because the Bible is not a single book but a complex arrangement of at least 66 books (Roman Catholic Bibles include another seven books that Protestants do not recognize) written over many years by multiple authors, the question concerning versions can be complicated.
One major division is stems from Old Testament versions; Roman Catholic Bibles are all derived from the Septuagint version (3rd Century BC translation of original Hebrew scriptures into Koine Greek) of the Old Testament, whereas Protestant Bibles returned to the original Hebrew texts.
There are over 450 known versions of the Bible in English alone.
While there are estimates of several thousand distinct christian dennominations, the *major* categories are Catholic (50.1%), Protestant (36.7%), Orthodox, including Eastern and Oriental communions (11.9%), Other (1.30%).
I don't mean to nitpick, I grew up in one of the last "remote areas" of the planet and we were inundated with missionaries (when listed (now not) we had at least a hundred different types of christian mission here) that all had beliefs that only superficially appeared similar.
One wing of my larger extended family is fractured by a run of Christian brothers and sisters all raised catholic, all with military service, and all progressing to different barely compatible denominations and scarcely talking since.
> No such work exists for "secularists".
Secularists also have at least 66 books to draw on for morals, ethics, and common human values. It's debatable whether a book is even required to act with cooperation and respect with most others.
The ubiquity of fat religious Americans with no impulse control suggests that religious vs secular is perhaps not the right reference frame to examine this particular issue. Your argument about abstinence being the most practical solution for some people is a reasonable one, no need to join the bandwagon and also make it a pointless culture war issue.
I'm not making a culture war point, I'm comparing philosophies in secular terms. It just so happens that, in America, religious people tend to focus on abstinence and secular people tend to focus on responsible enjoyment.
Most American denominations do not treat food as sinful, so the prevalence of fat religious Americans isn't a rebuttal to my point. If you look at denomations that do, the statistics are quite remarkable. Mormonism, for example, is a remarkable cultural technology: https://www.deseret.com/2010/4/13/20375744/ucla-study-proves....
Another example would be New England congregationalists, who have an ethos that "food is for fuel, not for enjoyment." We have many retirees from that demographic in my town and they're all unusually thin and healthy.
So healthier, happier, and with more economic opportunities. All from a group of religious minorities who live in a desert with no natural resources. Quite remarkable.
> who live in a desert with no natural resources. Quite remarkable.
Almost as remarkable as your ability to completely invent something, and then present as a fact. It is similar to how you claimed Trump has a concrete policy of abandoning unfounded foreign policy engagements 2 weeks before he invaded Venezuela on charges the DOJ now admits were fake [0].
The state itself debunks your claim, from geology.utah.gov: "Utah has abundant and diverse energy resources including conventional fossil fuels, unconventional oil shale and oil sand resources, and areas suitable for renewable resource development" [1].
Site selection magazine also disagrees [2].
Utah Business disagrees, too, specifically: "Utah is blessed with abundant natural resources, many of which have played a critical role in shaping our economy" [3].
Another one: "In 2019, Utah remained one of the top 10 U.S. states for metals and industrial minerals production, with continued active exploration" [4].
Pretty much. Even to the non-religious, when you look comparatively at secular (which heavily overlaps with: leftist) cultures vs religious ones, one can't help but surmise that the goal was to open the gates to being as degenerate as a creative mind can come up with.
Still, I concede your point that buggery and physical child abuse at an industrial scale isn't especially creative and just the usual dull grind played out again and again.
This is where religion reflects cultural technology that gets lost in the secular translation.
Secularists vastly overestimate man’s control over himself and his world. Most people lack the impulse control to partake in their vices responsibly. That’s why most Americans are fat. We have a world surrounded by temptation—snacks available everywhere—and we tell people to partake responsibly but they can’t do that. Most people don’t have that same relationship with alcohol or cigarettes, but for the many people who do it’s unrealistic for them to think they can just drink responsibly.