So, when I complain about politics in the UU church, a common response I get is people saying, always indignantly, "It's not like the UUA is telling people hoiw to VOTE."
No, but right here at the bottom of Sinkford's presidential letter about how "almost all of us" feel on a variety of issues, we get instructions on how to bother our representatives to vote a certain way on a peice of legislation.
Well, I don't know about you, but I feel better.
You know, ironically, I’m not sure how I feel about this. Sinkford has to be very careful when speaking in his capacity as President. On the other hand, it’s hard to dance around and not speak his mind when called to do so. UUs of course are free to agree or disagree with him.
I think he at least tried to be balanced and allowed for the possibility that his position might be wrong; additionally he did use the “many” and “most” caveats quite a bit. Having said that, I am not comfortable with the voting instructions either.
I don't understand why he cannot speak for himself as a man and let his title speak for itself.
Why must he constantly go on about how he percieves the entire denomination, or in this case most of us, feel about things?
Bush, for all my objections to him, is at least saying "This is how I feel about this issue." He's not saying "This is how I assume most of the American people feel on the issue."
I am starting to recognize that there may not be room in our inclusive faith for political conservatives and libertarians.
When the rhetoric of my church leadership becomes the rhetoric of the Democratic party, I guess it means it's time to find a new church.
FWIW, I'm a Democrat. I just don't like being spoken for politically.
Post a Comment