Comments on: Did Polyamory Get the Pagans (and everyone else) Kicked Out? http://wildhunt.org/blog/2007/07/did-polyamory-get-pagans-and-everyone.html Sat, 07 Nov 2009 14:51:57 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5 hourly 1 By: The Wild Hunt » Amendment That Would Eliminate 6 Sources Defeated http://wildhunt.org/blog/2007/07/did-polyamory-get-pagans-and-everyone.html/comment-page-1#comment-4309 The Wild Hunt » Amendment That Would Eliminate 6 Sources Defeated Mon, 29 Jun 2009 11:28:46 +0000 http://wildhunt.org/blog/2007/07/did-polyamory-get-the-pagans-and-everyone-else-kicked-out.html#comment-4309 [...] but I do think future proposed revisions, and other decisions by the UUA BOD, shouldn’t continue the trend of making Pagans feel unwelcome. Pagans (and other “earth-centered” practitioners) make up a significant portion of the [...] [...] but I do think future proposed revisions, and other decisions by the UUA BOD, shouldn’t continue the trend of making Pagans feel unwelcome. Pagans (and other “earth-centered” practitioners) make up a significant portion of the [...]

]]> By: Bill Baldwin http://wildhunt.org/blog/2007/07/did-polyamory-get-pagans-and-everyone.html/comment-page-1#comment-1038 Bill Baldwin Tue, 17 Jul 2007 22:29:00 +0000 http://wildhunt.org/blog/2007/07/did-polyamory-get-the-pagans-and-everyone-else-kicked-out.html#comment-1038 I've been poly since about 1975, Unitarian Universalist since 1976, Pagan since 1980.<br/><br/>Gee, I hope this isn't all happening because the UUA is afraid of polys!<br/><br/>I don't see that anything in Unitarian Universalism requires UUs to practice monogamy -- or forbids us practicing polyamory if we respect the dignity and worth of our significant others. I’ve been poly since about 1975, Unitarian Universalist since 1976, Pagan since 1980.

Gee, I hope this isn’t all happening because the UUA is afraid of polys!

I don’t see that anything in Unitarian Universalism requires UUs to practice monogamy — or forbids us practicing polyamory if we respect the dignity and worth of our significant others.

]]> By: Lance http://wildhunt.org/blog/2007/07/did-polyamory-get-pagans-and-everyone.html/comment-page-1#comment-1035 Lance Tue, 17 Jul 2007 06:21:00 +0000 http://wildhunt.org/blog/2007/07/did-polyamory-get-the-pagans-and-everyone-else-kicked-out.html#comment-1035 I've been following this discussion since it erupted before GA. At this point, I'm not convinced there is an ulterior motive to the Board's actions. The "block UUPA from becoming an IA" theory is attractive and is getting lots of discussion, but we don't have anything concrete to substantiate it.<br/><br/>I spoke with Gini Courter at GA about the Board's decisions and how it effects CUUPS. I did not get any feeling from her that there is any hidden motive or that UUPA looming on the horizon wanting to become an Independent Affiliate spooked the Board into such a drastic response.<br/><br/>I sincerely hope the Board speaks out more and clarifies the situation with the IAs. I’ve been following this discussion since it erupted before GA. At this point, I’m not convinced there is an ulterior motive to the Board’s actions. The “block UUPA from becoming an IA” theory is attractive and is getting lots of discussion, but we don’t have anything concrete to substantiate it.

I spoke with Gini Courter at GA about the Board’s decisions and how it effects CUUPS. I did not get any feeling from her that there is any hidden motive or that UUPA looming on the horizon wanting to become an Independent Affiliate spooked the Board into such a drastic response.

I sincerely hope the Board speaks out more and clarifies the situation with the IAs.

]]> By: birthingjourney http://wildhunt.org/blog/2007/07/did-polyamory-get-pagans-and-everyone.html/comment-page-1#comment-1034 birthingjourney Mon, 16 Jul 2007 06:25:00 +0000 http://wildhunt.org/blog/2007/07/did-polyamory-get-the-pagans-and-everyone-else-kicked-out.html#comment-1034 "UU churches should as welcoming as ever, its just that the CUUPs organization (along with every other theologically focused affiliate group) is no longer an "affiliate" of the UUA. But that shouldn't be taken as a sign of hostility towards Pagans. I say, visit!"<br/><br/>I have been reading the posts regarding polamory on LT's blog and others. As a polyamorist, I feel the attitude of the UU's from the exclusionary action of the IA's to the downright hostility of ministers and UU commenters makes me feel that perhaps UU churches are not as welcoming as the would like to think. “UU churches should as welcoming as ever, its just that the CUUPs organization (along with every other theologically focused affiliate group) is no longer an “affiliate” of the UUA. But that shouldn’t be taken as a sign of hostility towards Pagans. I say, visit!”

I have been reading the posts regarding polamory on LT’s blog and others. As a polyamorist, I feel the attitude of the UU’s from the exclusionary action of the IA’s to the downright hostility of ministers and UU commenters makes me feel that perhaps UU churches are not as welcoming as the would like to think.

]]> By: Robin Edgar http://wildhunt.org/blog/2007/07/did-polyamory-get-pagans-and-everyone.html/comment-page-1#comment-1033 Robin Edgar Sun, 15 Jul 2007 14:39:00 +0000 http://wildhunt.org/blog/2007/07/did-polyamory-get-the-pagans-and-everyone-else-kicked-out.html#comment-1033 Maybe instead of endlessly speculating about whether or not the desire of polyamorists to "affiliate" with the UUA caused the UUA Board of Trustees to distance itself from ALL affiliated groups U*Us should enter into a genuinely free and responsible search for the truth and meaning behind the reason(s) why the UUA Board acted the way it did. Surely U*Us can write letters to UUA administrators and UUA Trustees requesting an explanation of why they did what they did. I guess the most telling part about all this speculatiojn is the fact that no shortage of U*Us wouldn't put it past the UUA Board of Trustees to distance the UUA from ALL UUA affiliate groups in order to distance itself from a single affiliate group. What does that say about the UUA and U*U distrust of the UUA? Maybe instead of endlessly speculating about whether or not the desire of polyamorists to “affiliate” with the UUA caused the UUA Board of Trustees to distance itself from ALL affiliated groups U*Us should enter into a genuinely free and responsible search for the truth and meaning behind the reason(s) why the UUA Board acted the way it did. Surely U*Us can write letters to UUA administrators and UUA Trustees requesting an explanation of why they did what they did. I guess the most telling part about all this speculatiojn is the fact that no shortage of U*Us wouldn’t put it past the UUA Board of Trustees to distance the UUA from ALL UUA affiliate groups in order to distance itself from a single affiliate group. What does that say about the UUA and U*U distrust of the UUA?

]]> By: Jason Pitzl-Waters http://wildhunt.org/blog/2007/07/did-polyamory-get-pagans-and-everyone.html/comment-page-1#comment-1032 Jason Pitzl-Waters Sun, 15 Jul 2007 13:55:00 +0000 http://wildhunt.org/blog/2007/07/did-polyamory-get-the-pagans-and-everyone-else-kicked-out.html#comment-1032 Cindi,<br/><br/>UU churches should as welcoming as ever, its just that the CUUPs organization (along with every other theologically focused affiliate group) is no longer an "affiliate" of the UUA. But that shouldn't be taken as a sign of hostility towards Pagans. I say, visit! Cindi,

UU churches should as welcoming as ever, its just that the CUUPs organization (along with every other theologically focused affiliate group) is no longer an “affiliate” of the UUA. But that shouldn’t be taken as a sign of hostility towards Pagans. I say, visit!

]]> By: Rev Cindi http://wildhunt.org/blog/2007/07/did-polyamory-get-pagans-and-everyone.html/comment-page-1#comment-1031 Rev Cindi Sun, 15 Jul 2007 13:45:00 +0000 http://wildhunt.org/blog/2007/07/did-polyamory-get-the-pagans-and-everyone-else-kicked-out.html#comment-1031 So am I understanding that UU Pagan groups would be unaccepted? I was looking to visit our local UU church purely because of their acceptance. Should I reconsider this? Would love your opinion on the matter. So am I understanding that UU Pagan groups would be unaccepted? I was looking to visit our local UU church purely because of their acceptance. Should I reconsider this? Would love your opinion on the matter.

]]> By: Steve Caldwell http://wildhunt.org/blog/2007/07/did-polyamory-get-pagans-and-everyone.html/comment-page-1#comment-1029 Steve Caldwell Sat, 14 Jul 2007 20:22:00 +0000 http://wildhunt.org/blog/2007/07/did-polyamory-get-the-pagans-and-everyone-else-kicked-out.html#comment-1029 I've written about this on my blog:<br/><br/>Speculation on UUA Independent Affiliate Decisions<br/>http://liberalfaith.blogspot.com/2007/06/speculation-on-uua-independent.html<br/><br/>Part of my speculation about the decision to reduce the number of affiliate groups is that it is in some ways analogous to the actions taken by public school administrators when faced with the decision to permit gay-straight alliances (GSAs) to form as clubs in public schools.<br/><br/>Some schools have decided to elimiate non-curricular clubs since the legal alternatives are to allow all clubs or no clubs. US law requires fairness in giving all non-curricular clubs access to schools (the law's intended effect was to allow Bible clubs to meet after school).<br/><br/>As Unitarian Universalists, we don't have a law requiring fairness in who can and cannot be an affiliate. But we do have fairness as a religious principle.<br/><br/>My speculation has been the Independent Affiliate rules have changed because our dedication to fairness would give us no way to say "no" without appearing arbitrary and unfair.<br/><br/>With school GSAs, an unfortunate side-effect of banning all clubs is that some students blame BGLT students and their allies as the cause for the ski club and chess club going away.<br/><br/>I would hate to see other Independent Affiliate supporters lay any blame at the feet of the UUPA for these recent events.<br/><br/>It's not wrong for people to ask for a metaphorical place at the table. If asking for a place at the table causes for the table to be taken away, that isn't a fault of the person(s) asking to join the table. I’ve written about this on my blog:

Speculation on UUA Independent Affiliate Decisions
http://liberalfaith.blogspot.com/2007/06/speculation-on-uua-independent.html

Part of my speculation about the decision to reduce the number of affiliate groups is that it is in some ways analogous to the actions taken by public school administrators when faced with the decision to permit gay-straight alliances (GSAs) to form as clubs in public schools.

Some schools have decided to elimiate non-curricular clubs since the legal alternatives are to allow all clubs or no clubs. US law requires fairness in giving all non-curricular clubs access to schools (the law’s intended effect was to allow Bible clubs to meet after school).

As Unitarian Universalists, we don’t have a law requiring fairness in who can and cannot be an affiliate. But we do have fairness as a religious principle.

My speculation has been the Independent Affiliate rules have changed because our dedication to fairness would give us no way to say “no” without appearing arbitrary and unfair.

With school GSAs, an unfortunate side-effect of banning all clubs is that some students blame BGLT students and their allies as the cause for the ski club and chess club going away.

I would hate to see other Independent Affiliate supporters lay any blame at the feet of the UUPA for these recent events.

It’s not wrong for people to ask for a metaphorical place at the table. If asking for a place at the table causes for the table to be taken away, that isn’t a fault of the person(s) asking to join the table.

]]>