Sinkford's latest article in UU World really pissed me off.
So why is it that we are totally in favor of keeping religion out of schools when evolution is the question, but when the subject is sex ed, our church is supposed to behave as a political force to get what we want taught in the schools?
Are we correct? Of course we're correct. Of course I believe in comprehensive sex ed. If a bunch of individuals (UU or otherwise) want to fight for that or give money to organizations that will, they have my blessing. That's not the point. The point is that the UUA is not a lobbying group and has better things to do.
I, for one, am standing on the side of spending our energies growing the damn denomination rather than wasting what little credibility we have campaigning for things we will have no effect on one way or another.
In his letter Sinkford writes "Our leadership in the fight for marriage equality has been sustained and effective," which is a bizarre sentiment coming from a man who lives in a country where gay marriage is illegal everyplace but Massacusetts and 20 states have laws explicitly banning gay marriage and in many cases anything that even SOUNDS LIKE gay marriage.
Sinkford writes "As I told the General Assembly in June, the UUA now has the capacity to advance multiple issues at the same time."
Can we make growing the Unitarian Universalism an issue then? It's not sexy like lobbying, but if we do it right, someday, maybe a politician will actually care about what the Unitarian Universalists think about an issue.
Until then, while there are on 217,000 of us in a contry with 300 million voters, I promise you, nobody does.