Mom kicks California and Florida in the butt
I'm a bit of an unchurched Unitarian, but occasionally they do something that makes me proud. Sure, they're a small denomination, but they are irritating enough to catch the ire of most fundamentalist leaders and the affection of Matt Groening (in a sort of "aww, ain't they cute" way). In my memory, they've always supported the rights of LBGTQ couples.
Video of my mother at http://www.uua.org/events/generalassembly/2008/112314.shtml in Plenary Session IV at about 4hours 8 minutes, and Plenary VI at 35 minutes. Note the applause and unanimous vote count.
The democratic process is as close to a spiritual sacrament as they can get, and every year they get together to practice it on a nation-wide level. This year they met in Florida, and as mot of these things go, the agenda was put together beforehand and the resolutions had been put together by committee to be read by the attending.
If something emerging does not get put on the agenda in time to be read, it is attached as an "Immediate Witness" rider. My mother is generally against such things because they can ride a wave of populism without much thought as to the consequences, and it can rather squelch debate.
But the one that came up this year, my mother spoke for. California and Florida have measures on their ballots for a constitutional ban on gay marriage. As a denomination, the UU's voted to oppose such measures and throw their resources at these attacks on LBGTQ unions.
Because: Unitarian Universalists affirm and promote the inherent worth and dignity of every person;
Whereas: The Unitarian Universalist Association, its member congregations and individual Unitarian Universalists have repeatedly affirmed their commitment to justice, equality, compassion and civil marriage for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered people;
Whereas: The proposed Florida Marriage Protection Constitutional Amendment stating, “Inasmuch as marriage is a legal union of only one man and one woman as husband and wife, no other legal union that is treated as marriage or the substantial equivalent thereof shall be valid or recognized,” will appear on the November 2008 ballot in Florida;
Whereas: The State of California, in response to the recent ruling by the state Supreme Court that overturned its ban on same sex marriages, is expected to have on its November 2008 ballot a similar initiative, stating that, “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California;”
Whereas: Other states may have similar so-called marriage protection measures on their 2008 ballots;
Whereas: The amendment will also negatively affect heterosexual couples in committed relationships outside of marriage; and
Therefore, be it resolved: The 2008 UUA General Assembly:
urges member congregations; to oppose the Florida Marriage Protection Constitutional Amendment, the California Initiative, and any similar ballot measures in any other state;
urges individual Unitarian Universalists to contact family and friends who live in and/or vote in the affected states to inform them of these amendments and to encourage them and their friends and family to vote ‘No’ on them; to write letters to the editor, and to support those organizations and coalitions presently working for their defeat; and
urges the Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministries for Florida and California and congregations, clusters, and districts in all affected states to use this Action of Immediate Witness to oppose the Florida Marriage Protection Constitutional Amendment, the California Initiative, and other similar 2008 ballot initiatives.
Video of my mother at http://www.uua.org/events/generalassembly/2008/112314.shtml in Plenary Session IV at about 4hours 8 minutes, and Plenary VI at 35 minutes. Note the applause and unanimous vote count.
The democratic process is as close to a spiritual sacrament as they can get, and every year they get together to practice it on a nation-wide level. This year they met in Florida, and as mot of these things go, the agenda was put together beforehand and the resolutions had been put together by committee to be read by the attending.
If something emerging does not get put on the agenda in time to be read, it is attached as an "Immediate Witness" rider. My mother is generally against such things because they can ride a wave of populism without much thought as to the consequences, and it can rather squelch debate.
But the one that came up this year, my mother spoke for. California and Florida have measures on their ballots for a constitutional ban on gay marriage. As a denomination, the UU's voted to oppose such measures and throw their resources at these attacks on LBGTQ unions.
Because: Unitarian Universalists affirm and promote the inherent worth and dignity of every person;
Whereas: The Unitarian Universalist Association, its member congregations and individual Unitarian Universalists have repeatedly affirmed their commitment to justice, equality, compassion and civil marriage for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered people;
Whereas: The proposed Florida Marriage Protection Constitutional Amendment stating, “Inasmuch as marriage is a legal union of only one man and one woman as husband and wife, no other legal union that is treated as marriage or the substantial equivalent thereof shall be valid or recognized,” will appear on the November 2008 ballot in Florida;
Whereas: The State of California, in response to the recent ruling by the state Supreme Court that overturned its ban on same sex marriages, is expected to have on its November 2008 ballot a similar initiative, stating that, “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California;”
Whereas: Other states may have similar so-called marriage protection measures on their 2008 ballots;
Whereas: The amendment will also negatively affect heterosexual couples in committed relationships outside of marriage; and
Therefore, be it resolved: The 2008 UUA General Assembly:
urges member congregations; to oppose the Florida Marriage Protection Constitutional Amendment, the California Initiative, and any similar ballot measures in any other state;
urges individual Unitarian Universalists to contact family and friends who live in and/or vote in the affected states to inform them of these amendments and to encourage them and their friends and family to vote ‘No’ on them; to write letters to the editor, and to support those organizations and coalitions presently working for their defeat; and
urges the Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministries for Florida and California and congregations, clusters, and districts in all affected states to use this Action of Immediate Witness to oppose the Florida Marriage Protection Constitutional Amendment, the California Initiative, and other similar 2008 ballot initiatives.