UU FAQ v2.0

[lilithu]

Heyall, namaste.

I am assembling a new FAQ for my website (see my sig) geared towards people who are already UUs but maybe still have questions. It seems to me that there are a lot of FAQs directed at seekers who are considering UUs, but not so much for after you sign the book. If you have a question, let me know and I'll do my best to answer it or direct you to something that can.

To be clear, I am not going to be able to answer questions on the the nature of God, etc. (This is a UU FAQ, after all! ). I'm looking for questions more like "What is General Assembly?" and "What does the UUA do?"

Do people think these are things that UUs even want to know?

Hope yall are well. Ciao.

[Trey of Diamonds]

You could include a list of common acronyms. I think that would be helpful to noobs and vetrans both.

[Kungfuzed]

If the UUA has an official stance on a paticular issue it might be good to list that too. I'm on the email list for advocacy news and the latest one was on slave reparations. I'm not so sure I entirely agree with it. How liberal are UU's expected to be? Is there anything outside of the general principles that a practicing UU is obligated to affirm and promote?

I've still got alot to learn. They're organizing some more roots classes this fall, I've only had one so far on UU history.

[lilithu]

Originally Posted by Trey of Diamonds

You could include a list of common acronyms. I think that would be helpful to noobs and vetrans both.

Good idea! lol

Originally Posted by Kungfuzed

If the UUA has an official stance on a paticular issue it might be good to list that too. I'm on the email list for advocacy news and the latest one was on slave reparations. I'm not so sure I entirely agree with it. How liberal are UU's expected to be? Is there anything outside of the general principles that a practicing UU is obligated to affirm and promote?

Our fifth principle affirms and promotes the right of conscience and the use of the democratic process. Many people just see the democratic process part of that and skip over the right of conscience. But right of conscience is there for a reason. Basically, any and all stances that the UUA takes on a particular issue is determined by the democratic process - delegates from congregations having voted on the issue. BUT, just because the majority has decided one way does not mean that you have to agree... because of the right of conscience. You would, however, have accept that the majority of UUs have decided otherwise and that the association as a whole will act based on that decision.

So you are not obligated in any way to agree with reparations. However, I suggest you learn more about it before you make up your mind. Reparations doesn't just mean paying each person (however that's determined) a certain amount of money. It *can* mean that, but that's not the only meaning, and most of the advocates whom I've heard discuss reparations are talking about systemic changes, not paying individuals money.

For more information on reparations, you can read the links in the email you got. Or if you don't have it, go here:
UUA: Truth and Reconciliation
(Make sure to click on the links in the left-hand nav bar. Otherwise, it looks like there is just two paragraphs on the subject.)

This was the specific resolution that was passed in 2007:
UUA: Truth, Repair, and Reconciliation

For more information on how the UUA (meaning the association of congregations of which your congregation is a part) decides what stand to take on an issue, see here:
UUA: Study/Action Issues & Process

And thanks for the question, I will add it to the FAQ.

[Kungfuzed]

Thanks for the info. It does make a little more sense.

This might be off topic and probably deserves its own thread. I've read through the links and I'm still confuzed on where the UU stands on reparations, specifically what needs to be done. I mean, it's obvious to me that the decendents of slaves are still living with the social and economic consequences of slavery. There's no question that something needs to be done about it, but none of the links provide any real solution. Even HR 40 is just about creating a commitee to investigate the subject and what should be done about it. Nobody seems to know right now.

Really, the only thing I've heard about reparations was from that one episode of Family Guy when Peter found out he was part black and went to a meeting to claim his slave reparations. I had visions of a multi trillion dollar lawsuit paid out to any US citizen who could claim to be black.

[lilithu]

Originally Posted by Kungfuzed

Thanks for the info. It does make a little more sense.

This might be off topic and probably deserves its own thread. I've read through the links and I'm still confuzed on where the UU stands on reparations, specifically what needs to be done. I mean, it's obvious to me that the decendents of slaves are still living with the social and economic consequences of slavery. There's no question that something needs to be done about it, but none of the links provide any real solution. Even HR 40 is just about creating a commitee to investigate the subject and what should be done about it. Nobody seems to know right now.

Really, the only thing I've heard about reparations was from that one episode of Family Guy when Peter found out he was part black and went to a meeting to claim his slave reparations. I had visions of a multi trillion dollar lawsuit paid out to any US citizen who could claim to be black.

Namaste, Kungfuzed.

There are some people who are pushing for giving money to ever person who is the descendant of a slave. But most of the people I know who are advocating for it, are more intelligent than that. The first part of it would be owning up to the truth. Meaning not just that in general there was slavery and it was bad, but that those of us who have benefited directly from slavery would acknowledge it and the responsibility that comes with it. The second part of it would be the money, which would not be paid to individuals but instead be used to create institutional/systemic changes. This would take a lot of thought as to how to go about it most effectively, which is why HR 40 calls for creating a committee.

[Kungfuzed]

Originally Posted by lilithu

Namaste, Kungfuzed.

There are some people who are pushing for giving money to ever person who is the descendant of a slave. But most of the people I know who are advocating for it, are more intelligent than that. The first part of it would be owning up to the truth. Meaning not just that in general there was slavery and it was bad, but that those of us who have benefited directly from slavery would acknowledge it and the responsibility that comes with it. The second part of it would be the money, which would not be paid to individuals but instead be used to create institutional/systemic changes. This would take a lot of thought as to how to go about it most effectively, which is why HR 40 calls for creating a committee.

That sounds like a much better idea. It's easy for people to jump to confusions on this issue.

[lilithu]

Originally Posted by Kungfuzed

That sounds like a much better idea. It's easy for people to jump to confusions on this issue.

Yes. I used to be against reparations for the same reason. I thought just paying each individual some amount of money was not going to solve the systemic problems, yet would make it so that we couldn't address it anymore, since money had been paid. And then of course when you say that you're against reparations, certain people automatically assume it's because you're racist.