Dear friends,

Happy New Year! I am sending you care as we begin another year. This, 2023, is an important year for Unitarian Universalism.

We are currently in a multi-year process to consider changes to our UUA Principles and Purpose. This process formally began in 2020 when the UUA Board appointed an Article II Study Commission. This is a dry name for such important work. The reason is our Principles, Purpose, covenant and Sources are contained in Article II of the UUA Bylaws.

Our seven Principles and six Sources – which we know and love – were adopted in 1985. They offered a substantial (even radical) change from what preceded them. The changes came through years of effort by UU women, particularly the UU Women’s Federation, to push for gender equality in UUism, support for women in the ministry and to eliminate sexist language from our bylaws, hymns, and yes, from the version of Article II passed in 1961 (at the time of merger).

But the changes didn’t just address gender, they made significant language changes that reflected the times. It removed language of God, man, and brotherhood, but also added the language of interdependence and added sources reflecting the growing theological diversity shaping our tradition.

As a lifelong UU, coming of age after these changes, I am grateful. They changed our movement in ways that were important for the success of women leaders, ministers, and for me, as our first elected woman president. These changes, at the time, brought fierce dissent. But more, they inspired excitement and possibility.

Why Review Our UU Principles and Purpose?

In the mid-2010’s, the ground began to shift again – much as it did in response to the women’s movement. The emergence of the Black Lives Matter movement, the election of Donald Trump with his racist and misogynist campaign, and the urgent calls to confront white supremacy culture in our own movement – all of these compelled UUs to ask questions about whether our Principles reflected fully who we are and who we need to be.

By the 2017 General Assembly, there were multiple grassroots efforts to change our Principles. The first was overwhelmingly adopted – to change “prophetic women and men” to “prophetic people” to move beyond gender binary. There was also a proposal to change the first principle from “the inherent worth and dignity of all people” to the “inherent worth and dignity of all beings.” This proposal was ultimately tabled as delegates grappled with the reality that we still had a lot of work on living the first Principle for people. Discussions of the Eighth Principle were also taking place and by 2020, hundreds of UU congregations had adopted it! The Eighth Principle recognized the need to go beyond aspirational Principles to articulate commitments to dismantle systems of oppression – calling us from aspiration to action.

It was within this context that your UUA Board appointed an Article II Study Commission to integrate these conversations and lead a discernment process for our whole Association about our core values, covenant, and purpose. The Board gave the Commission a broad charge to review, change, or reimagine Article II to “enable our UUA, our member congregations, and our covenanted communities to be a relevant and powerful force for spiritual and moral growth, healing, and justice.”

After two and a half years of study and conversations with thousands of Unitarian Universalists, the Article II Study Commission submitted their final report and proposal to the UUA Board for its January 20th meeting. Read the report and proposal (PDF 26 pages). https://www.uua.org/files/2023-01/a2sc_rpt_01172023.pdf

This spring, congregational delegates and the Board can propose amendments to the proposal. Amendments will be considered at the 2023 GA and require a majority vote to be accepted. If any of the delegate amendments are accepted, and if the proposal receives majority approval, then the Article II Study Commission will make any necessary changes to create a final draft for consideration at the 2024 General Assembly. The final proposal will require a two thirds majority vote at GA 2024 to be adopted.

Seven years ago, when I was beginning my campaign for UUA President, I approached the process with an intention to be open to the process while letting go of outcomes. My hope for us as Unitarian Universalists is that we approach this discernment about Article II with similar openness. May we enter our conversations with a spirit of curiosity, holding off attachment to outcomes, and listen with our whole hearts and to the fullness and diversity of voices in our community. May the process itself deepen our understanding of and commitment to our faith.

Yours,
Susan
https://www.uua.org/pressroom/press-releases/why-change-principles

UU the Vote was back in 2022 to help organize, educate, and empower voters across the country.

So I was in a coffee hour zoom break room with the CLFUU (separate from their regular zooms). The conversation was basically about oppression vs liberation and what could that look like for various people. I piped up because as a low income person on SSDI there’s a lot of restrictions that go with different levels of SSI and SSDI. In my case, I basically can’t choose who I get to marry if I get married and the big one that gets everyone stumped is I can’t work but so many hours. The kicker is, that rule only applies if I want to stay in the oppressive lower class of America. I never wanted to be here but despite having a college degree and am relatively smart; most people (even others on these degrading programs); only stick with the oppressive belief that you can’t work too many hours or make to much money on Social Security programs. My degree is in Sociology, so I totally understand what I’m talking about when I say I want to break out of poverty, not be on SSDI and get the opportunity to be middle class or better. I’m sick of living in public housing and other shit. In this break room, two others were also on similar programs. The man was trying to support my goals and understood what I was trying to achieve but the lady who was also on an SSA program was still in the poverty/oppressive mindset of “you can’t make too much money on SSDI, etc”, the man and I called her out, she apologized but nothing got solved because the break room timed out and I was so mad I left the coffee hour. I’ve had similar issues with my local UU basically being classist toward me too. So I don’t know why UU’s don’t encourage their disabled people more to fight the ableism and classist oppression that our US government puts us in. It saddens me how much so many disabled people I live with in my apartment and online who don’t try harder to fight the classism and ableist oppression they’ve been dealt.

I am wondering what “love” means for you.

I am particularly interested in hearing whether or not you think that, in order to love someone or a group of people, you need to be in a personal relationship with them.

In other words, is some level of emotional intimacy necessary in order to love? Can someone “love” abstract groups of people? What does it mean to “love” humanity as opposed to “loving” people in one’s life one actually knows. Should there be two separate words to describe whatever this abstract “love” is and the love that involves an emotional, complex connection with actual known individual(s)?