Steve Caldwell has advised me to “do a bit of research first before proposing reform ideas.”
Well, Steve, I followed up on your most excellent suggestion and went to check out the UUA’s venerable bylaws. It seems they total over 25,000 words. There are 25 Articles encompassing almost 150 subsections and 15 Rules sections with 82 subsections. (If my calculations are correct.)
Am I done now? Because now I’m even more convinced I don’t need to read the bylaws.
What harm, specifically, came from suggestions that were already in place? Honestly, I’d like to know.
New reform suggestion: only those who are intimately familiar with UUA bylaws may make reform proposals on blogs. (Won’t someone please think of the children??)
Please advise. As Steve pointed out, some of us need to be spoon fed when it comes to our responsibilities as lay leaders to be familiar with what the UUA puts in print about itself. Plus, that sort of thing is always an edifying read!
So do you think it’s inappropriate for me to suggest that you should do the UUA equivalent of “RTFM” before proposed tinkering with the UUA?
From your blog post, it sounds like you thought that I suggested reading the entire UUA bylaws, rules, etc. I wish you had read my suggestion more closely:
“Anyone who wishes to reform the UUA needs to study the applicable bylaws, rules, and other procedural guidance relevant to the proposed reform first.”
I’m sorry that you misread my suggestion. I never said read the entire thing … just the sections applicable to your suggestions.
I do hope that you noticed the various articles and sections listed in the table of contents for these documents are also HTML links that take you to the section of interest.
For example, the table of contents listing where you see “*SECTION 4.12. UUA STATEMENTS OF CONSCIENCE” is a link that will take you to the applicable portion of the document. There is no need to read the entire document to review this section if you’re interested in the current statement of conscience process.
Take care and good night.
Still don’t know what actual harm has been done…
And if a number of people suggest something that’s technically in place? Maybe it could use a bit more promotion.
In my own bitter personal experience, and rational analysis of other testimony and evidence, what the UUA puts in print about itself is, more often than not, pure unadulterated U*U BS to say nothing of outrageous hypocrisy. The UUA and most of the U*Us that I know have made a total mockery of what the UUA and various other U*U institutions, including no shortage of U*U “churches”. . . put in print about themselves. Just Google – “Robin Edgar” and UUA – and/or – “Robin Edgar” and Unitarians – to see no shortage of evidence supporting my claims that U*Us do a very poor job of actually practising what U*Uism puts in print about itself. . .
Allah prochaine,
The Dagger of Sweet Reason
PB2U*Us