Taking Positions Forum – March 16, 2008 – PART TWO

Attendance: 17 members

 

Catherine: summary of Part One, TUUC SAC guidelines

What are pro’s and con’s of the congregation’s taking positions – mix of opinions, diversity of views here, part of what they love about UU-ism.

How powerful can we be as a congregation in implementing our principles if we talk as one voice?

Need: education, process for decisions, some form of consensus so not alienating people

Do we need to change our current policy?  Expand it?  Clarify it?  Change it altogether?

Described our current policy as a congregation

New part: Clare and the president can make an immediate decision – ex Katrina collection – not likely to be controversial issues.

 

Would like to see us do more analysis and education on UUA issues and studies so that we can integrate them into the congregation and what we do.  Maybe a service, educational sessions, etc.  We need a denominational affairs person for this…

 

ARE events are dismally attended.  This education makes sense to happen through ARE, but would that work.  This sort of education would have to be well attended – must be thought through – how we do it and where?

 

History of church: in early years of church, we took some outrageous positions.  Attendance at meetings of this sort is always the same group.

Way to do it: Sunday services occasionally dedicated to specific issues, different points of view, so that everybody is forced to hear it.  Difficult issues presented, then if people want to get together after the service to discuss, fine.  Then we will all have the same information.  Then, everyone will have heard it and had time to think about it before there is some sort of a vote or decision made based on the issue.  This could be implemented immediately. (Joan)

 

If an issue will come before the entire congregation for a vote, then it deserves an entire Sunday service, not just a Tuesday evening.  Needs to be followed with pro’s and con’s, like in a facilitated discussion after the service.  Could dispense with the stuff in-between, choir practice, etc.  Or discussion could be integrated into the service.  Important thing is that everyone has the same set of information about the issue.

 

Like “stimulating” services – this would qualify.  Say, the first Sunday every month is an issue that the congregation could think about addressing – to where it was in a normal pattern/routine.  Then some of us could avoid that Sunday, if desired.  Like to know what to expect.

 

Some of the issues are not issues on their own, but rather what should we do about it.  We may all agree on a particular issue itself and its outcome, but the actual question is on what specific actions, do we take a congregational position or a SAC action, etc.  So it may not necessarily need a pro and con debate to be a part of the service on that.

 

Space issue – logistics.

We have a historic interest in all kinds of issue.

Hard to get parents out on a weekday evening.

 

When is best???  After the second service?  Between the services – may be the best time but big logistical problems.  (“Coffee & Conversation & Controversy”)

 

Last time we met, there were concerns about specific ways that we might choose what issues to even explore – there a tons of issues that we might take, so how do we begin to choose WHICH issues.

 

Need some sort of arrangement to identify and screen what issues people are in fact interested in taking action on.  We won’t be working on simple majority with these.

 

Just because people are interested in issues does not automatically translate into the congregation doing something as a whole.

 

What is the obvious thing to do?

 

We may also want to have some educational programs WITHOUT thinking about taking a position as a congregation about it.  We need a place to talk about those things.

 

A lot of the issues are about organization – having 7-8 people getting organized about something – table in the lobby to get signatures, arranging a group to a march, etc.

 

SAC guidelines for evaluating social service organizations to support:

Have a single service where the committee asks the congregation to support a few particular organizations:

Has to have a mission consistent with our principles

Has to give volunteer possibilities

Form and annual report is submitted to begin the evaluation process to SAC

Must have someone in the congregation to be the leader/liaison with that organization

 

UU Principles

UUA resolutions and statements of witness

 

Need for a mediator here to pick out from UUA positions and such that these are the things we need to have education about – WE NEED A DENOMINATIONAL AFFAIRS COMMITTEE/PERSON

The last thing we really educated about was global warming when it was a UUA study action issue.  We never took a position as a congregation, but we did pursue a good bit of education and exploration of the issue.

Now there is one every two years (?) – there is a statement of conscious/resolution that is the end result of the education/campaign.  Example of current question: should we become a peace church? (on peace-related study action issue)

 

Global warming issue – there was no controversy or congregational actions that were at stake

Peace issue – could be different…

Does the congregation actually do something?

 

If we go through this process, do we have an expected outcome? (for a study action issue)

Formally, outcome of process is to refine the ending UUA statement which, after accepted, comes with calls for action.

 

Are there a significant number of people in a congregation that actually care about taking an action on a specific issue.  Not just one person, but a significant number of people.

Need a large percentage of the congregation involved.

 

Polling

Topics need to be presented in an exciting and challenging way.  Maybe survey questions passed out during the sermon (was done in the past) – do this for a couple of Sundays to see where the congregation really is.  We have to assess the congregation.  We have to fire them up.  As them what topics they are interested in?  What topics would they like to take action on?  We currently don’t have a “fired up” population – there are not enough people really excited to do something.

 

What about the war, reaching its 5 year anniversary in 2 days.  We as a society aren’t doing anything.  We as a church aren’t doing much – where is the energy?

 

Problems: participation, publicity

 

New current issue: torture – we’ve been asked to have a sign for a month in June

 

Introducing and discussing any of these topics – education is great but we need the question raised of what things can we actually do about it.

 

Signs at demonstrations:

UU’s in general

This congregation specifically

 

UU’s for this issue or that – it’s already happening.  That’s fine.

What about carrying this congregation’s sign in a parade or at a demonstration.

 

One opinion: more appropriate to do that than having a sign on the property of a church.

Why: it’s different at a demonstration, an event, been organized around an issue; don’t want to see signs when come to church.

At demonstration – the sign says it stands for the people who showed up at the demonstration, but a sign in front of the church means that the issue is for the entire church

At church – a sign is a sign – simple statement, bumper sticker – about a complex issue

But the complexity of the issue is addressed further at a demonstration since there are speakers and dialogue

Sign in front of the church is “false advertising” – this group all agrees about this – I don’t want to be in a group where everyone agrees – does that mean I don’t belong if I don’t agree with that statement.

Sign in front – means that is the only thing we are thinking about – because there are no other sides – excludes other things and focuses on the one thing; at a demonstration – it is already about a single issue

Signs in front of church – one sign leads to lots of signs

Signs in front of church – the silence of the American churches is criminal – we need to have lots of signs, all of the time

 

Is there a policy about whether there is a decision-making policy about where the banner can be carried – not really any dissenting opinions about whether the sign can be carried at a demonstration.  Now, SAC is hooked into things that the congregation – what’s going on with SAC seems to be perfectly appropriate.

 

But SAC has nothing to do with the banner – this is another layer of the question.

Does it need to be approved by the SAC.  What if it is a regular event, or a spontaneous event, etc.  Usually there is not a lot of time for the process to happen.

 

Can it be a messy process by which issues come up – do we need to have something written in stone about how to do it?  Can just start with someone stepping up and suggesting an issue and possible actions and bringing it up?  Can we get consensus around it?  If we had a denominational affairs committee, they could organize a survey, need a poll or something to get a sense of the congregation as a group.  What criteria – where can we have an impact?  Is there something that we can actually do that can make an impact as an institution?

 

POSSIBLE SUMMARY OF PROCESS:

  1. Issue and possible actions is brought up (poll of congregation, denominational affairs, SAC, any interested person, etc)  (WHAT, HOW CHOSEN)
    1. Issue chosen by denominational affairs or SAC – based on survey or poll
    2. Issue brought up by individual and led by that individual
    3. Congregation approached by an outside group (ex: torture sign)
  2. Need a point person or group for the issue and actions
  3. Education – ARE, Sunday services, dialogue about it, Threshold
  4. Approval by Board of Trustees or other body to begin decision-making process
  5. Specific actions are brought up for decision-making process – board of trustees, SAC, congregational meeting
  6. If approved, actions taken.  If not approved, more education or decision to not pursue action as a congregation for too much controversy/non-consensus.

 

Do we have the energy and willingness to make this happen?

We have a large segment of our congregation that just doesn’t hear about this sort of thing.

 

We need inspiration and energy to be effective.  It will take time to get this going.  Once it gets going, it will keep going.  People need inspiration, specifics…

Getting people to move is different – it will take time, it will take a different view of what our roles as UU’s is.

 

Any issues brought up needs to contain specific actions and things to do – just saying “we’re all for peace” doesn’t actually do anything and doesn’t create any excitement – need to say something specific.  It is as important as having an exciting speech.

 

“The powers that be at this church don’t want to hear what I have to say” – was heard from one of our members today.  “This congregation is not open to new points of view”. !!

 

We do have diversity here – differing bumper stickers parked next to each other in the same parking lot.

 

They are very complex issues – Worship Associates – lot of planning goes into the services.

 

Concerned that if we get into a process, it needs to culminate into something.  Service -> card table in lobby with petitions or letter-writing or something.  Must have an active mode attached to any education on issue to be meaningful.

 

Education and seminars – must be careful that it is not attached to an extremely good service, like Darryl Davis.  He was too exciting to be distracted from.  J

 

Another organization: Good at keeping volunteers happy and enthusiastic.  Programs going on, everyone is well-informed about what is going on, newsletter, once a month – meeting held where everyone is kept up to date with what is going on and there are a few focal points.  So everyone feels a part of the community.  Volunteer manager very aware of everyone.  You get a t-shirt.

 

Issues have to be nuanced – they are complex – are we, for instance, turning away people have family members serving in Iraq if we are a peace congregation

Not everyone thinks the same way – must respect that.

 

In the What do you Say course – something missing, maybe as the last component – what does it mean to be a member of TUUC?  Representatives from different committees, but how about a this is what we do on an on-going basis, on an issue and action basis – especially for newcomers.

 

We really really really need a denominational affairs committee that is active.  If we could get enough people to do this, we could really go somewhere.  If we could get something like that going, that worked with ARE, SAC, Worship Associates, to coordinate it all – that is where we need to go.

 

Process to look at this systematically to choose the issues.

 

Would come to a meeting like this any day in place of the Sunday service.

 

Some kind of survey.

 

What is it that separates the church from being different from a social action group?

 

Another group: at end of service, take five minutes and people get to say into the mike what they felt about the service.  How it made them feel.

 

We used to have a sermon discussion immediately following the service.

 

We should look at the League of Women Voter’s because they do it right.  They study issues in-depth, and when a conclusion is reached, members are alerted about possible actions that they can take.  There is good information.

 

Working Assets website

Legislative agenda

UUSJ agenda

UULM agenda

UUA agenda

Local issues

 

Table: Marcia, Joan, Terry, Michelle

Another meeting: in a month or so

 

What are the ethical issues that you would like to see addressed as a congregation?