A CALL FOR DENOMINATION-WIDE DIALOG & CONSENSUS BUILDING

A very well written petition and hope it will be signed by all UUAA members.

I’m with Ken on this.

As a life-long Unitarian Universalist, I do my best to treat every individual with respect, regardless of their viewpoints. It is difficult at times, but I do my best. The UUA leadership needs to set this example for all UUs. I support free and open discussion forums within the UUA institutions.

UU Church of Tucson

I am considering joining the humanist group receiving the email announcements of meeting content has been intriguing

As a 35 year member I consider this timely and urgent.

Thank you Ken and Bruce and others for this clear statement of our values.

I'm glad to see this as consistent with the Fifth Principle's commitments to conscience and democratic practices.

I agree with the petition.

This is Aston Bloom again. I just now read all the comments and found that this letter was indeed written after what was then the most recent GA, the one in 2019. Maybe it would be a good idea to have a date at the top. member of UU Church of Tucson since 1998

I'm very happy to see this letter come out because I'm in complete agreement with what you all are saying. I do have a few concerns that I would like to share. The first is that the authors are not mentioned, and I think it's important that they not be seen as afraid to show who they are. The others are more technical, and please know that I'm speaking as a retired teacher who tends to notice errors! Don't take it personally. In the paragraph that starts "We now find ourselves..." there is an incomplete sentence. It begins "We are concerned that an approach..." and continues at some length, but it's not a complete sentence. You are concerned that--what? The next thing is that you mention the most recent GA and the anti-racism agenda. But then you talk about the GA in 2019, when Rev. Dr. Todd Eklof tried to circulate The Gadfly Papers. But you make it sound like this happened at the most recent GA, plus you don't actually say who you are talking about. You don't have to hint at this incident. Bring it out into the open! I, too, am unhappy that the UU World no longer has a letters to the editor section. I don't remember when they took it out, but I do remember that my late partner, the Rev. Rosemarie Carnarius, had a letter printed in that section at least 10 years ago. Yes, we need a forum for us to air our concerns and disappointments with the direction in which the UUA is heading. If you authors can correct the issues I mentioned here, I think it will make this letter even more compelling. Thanks for getting the dialogue started.

Yes to this, Ms. Skagerberg. My reading about Critical Race Theory is that adherents or discussants have a robust dialog going. It'd be good to meet the strong points, including endorsing some, and resist the tendency toward general branding by the political right. Shouldn't be that wrenching to come to some understanding among competing insurgencies, given UU'isms historical track record, its aspirations and its positive actions. I'm not sure where I come down on the denominational governance issues, but endorse the parts of the petition that call for dialog and input, and more dialog. Maybe the professed "anger" in the petition could first acknowledge the deep moral threat of racism, institutionalized or otherwise. It is a threat to democracy generally, without which denominational democracy might itself whither. I wonder there isn't more anger and stress at the existential threat of racist violence from both its direct victims, and to allied activists and recovering bystanders. Public petitions and especially moral indignation is a matter of proportionality, and I find this attempt disproportional, and will not sign it. UU Ann Arbor split in the 1960's over resistance to the Vietnam War. We tested the limits when I joined in the 1980's, in adopting sanctuary for a Salvadoran refugee family -- action that was half of my motivation to join then. Some issues might be worth splitting apart over. But my instinct is not to split. Even if a disgruntled minority of old-school, 1980's UU's won this argument, whatever that would look like, I'm not sure I'd be disgruntled enough to take my ball and bat and go home then, either. There are still so many people I can love, or at least work with here. Can't find it too many other places, jointed with the spiritual sustenance, the song, etc. Maybe in the county Democratic Party precinct organizing group I am immersed in... where I keep encountering allies among UU-affiliated groups and members anyway. I hope I am not

Yes, we need to pull back on this authoritarian trend…

I support the ideas about improving UUWorld to include Letters & Opinion pieces from congregants. It is vital that we operate in a democratic process for development and refinement of our ideological and philosophical issues.

I strongly support a free and open dialog about our search for truth and meaning and the way forward for UUs.

Good idea!

I love my church and the people in it, including the staff. I want it to move toward healing and a beloved community.

Indeed, a very powerful statement. We are headed for a schism. We must stand up for our UU tradition which will soon be unrecognizable.

A well stated call. We need a wide dialog that avoids self destruction and moves UUism down a path that embraces humanity's diversity and our shared search for truth and meaning.

I agree with the tenor of this petition and hope it will not fail to get the right response.