Responsive resolutions on Article II, Article XV, and African visas

The final texts of the responsive resolutions adopted by the UUA General Assembly during the final plenary session June 28 are now online:

• "Responsive Resolutions on Inclusion: Two resolutions introduced by members of Allies for Racial Equity endorsed the "Inclusion" section of the Commission on Appraisal's proposed revision of Article II (the "Principles and Purposes"), after delegates had earlier rejected the revision as a whole. The first resolution, jointly introduced by the Youth Caucus, urged the Board of Trustees to reintroduce the Inclusion section as an amendment to Article II as soon as feasible. The Inclusion section would replace the current "Non-Discrimination" section. The second resolution called on delegates to embrace the covenant in the proposed Inclusion section individually and in their congregations. Here's the text of the proposed Inclusion section:

  Section C-2.4 Inclusion.
  
  Systems of power, privilege, and oppression have traditionally created barriers for persons and groups with particular identities, ages, abilities, and histories. We pledge to do all we can to replace such barriers with ever-widening circles of solidarity and mutual respect. We strive to be an association of congregations that truly welcome all persons and commit to structuring congregational and associational life in ways that empower and enhance everyone’s participation.



• Responsive Resolution on Article II: This resolution "strongly urges" the Board "to facilitate a continuation and further deepening of the discussion of the Principles and Purposes begun by the review conducted by the UUA Commission on Appraisal . . . throughout all levels of the Association, at least until such time as further revisions to Article II may be presented to a General Assembly."


• Responsive Resolution on Article XV: This resolution grew out of frustration with the rules governing the General Assembly's consideration of the Commission on Appraisal's proposed revision of Article II and asks the Board to review Article XV, which governs the process for amending Article II.


• Responsive Resolution on Barriers to Inclusion in Outreach to African UU and Other Progressive Religious Congregations, which addressed the inequitable way that U.S. visas were handled for UU men and women from Africa. UU women from Kenya applied for but were denied visas to attend the International Convocation of UU Women in Texas earlier this year, but UU men from three other African countries were granted visas to attend the General Assembly. The resolution asks the UUA staff to seek an explanation from the State Department or other appropriate agency.

Resolution calls for inquiry into African visa denials

Dale Hill, from River Road UU Congregation in Bethesda, Md., proposed a responsive resolution in response to President Sinkford's report on his trip to Africa and his introduction of two African UU leaders. Hill observed that both African men had been granted visas by the U.S. government, but that eight African women who had applied for visas to attend the International Convocation of Unitarian Universalist Women were turned down. The resolution asks the UUA staff to make inquiries with the U.S. government about the reasons for rejecting the women's visas while granting the men's. The resolution passed.

(I'm posting this out of sequence; the General Assembly passed this resolution prior to the longer debate about the Mosaic Project.)

Assembly rejects proposal to delay Mosaic Project

Finley C. Campbell, a member of First Unitarian Church of Chicago who called himself an "Old Black Dude, '34," offered a responsive resolution urging the UUA to delay implementation of the "Mosaic Project," an assessment of the ministry needs of youth and young adults of color. Campbell said that the Mosaic report calls for mandatory racial caucusing. His resolution also called for the UUA to declare itself a "multiracial" religion. A long line of opponents argued that the Mosaic report does not mandate racial segregation and that the report expresses the experiences and needs of people of color. The resolution failed by a wide margin.

G.A. responds to failed Article II revision

Delegates brought a variety of responsive resolutions to the final plenary of the 2009 General Assembly in response to the Commission on Appraisal's proposed revision of Bylaw Article II (the "Principles and Purposes").

The Rev. Wendy von Zirpolo, president of UU Allies for Racial Equity and minister from Marblehead, Mass., and the Youth Caucus proposed a responsive resolution that asked the Board of Trustees to offer an amendment at the next possible General Assembly that would replace the current "Non Discrimination" clause (Section C-2.3) with the "Inclusion" clause (Section C-2.4) offered in the Commission on Appraisal's proposed revision of Article II. Delegates had voted down the Commission's full proposal, but expressed frustration that they couldn't vote on specific pieces of the proposal. This responsive resolution would urge the board to offer one of those pieces. The resolution passed.

The Rev. James A. Hobart, minister emeritus of the First Unitarian Church of Denver and a member of UU Allies for Racial Equity, proposed a second responsive resolution that committed delegates to act on the pledges in the Commission's proposed "Inclusion" clause (Section C-2.4) and to report on their congregations' actions before the next General Assembly. The resolution passed.

Elizabeth Yoss of the First Parish of Lexington, Mass, proposed a responsive resolution that asked the Board of Trustees to review Article XV C-15.1, the section of the bylaws that forbids the General Assembly to amend proposed revisions to Article II. The resolution passed.

The Rev. Robert Klein, minister from Little Rock, Ark., proposed a responsive resolution that asks the Board to encourage ongoing discussion about the Principles and Purposes "until such time as further revisions may be presented to the General Assembly." The resolution passed.

Amy Kelly, from First Unitarian Society of San Francisco, proposed a responsive resolution that commends an ad hoc volunteer group to the Board that wishes to continue revising the text that the Commission on Appraisal had offered. This resolution generated considerable conversation about whether an ad hoc volunteer group should be authorized to conduct work for the Association. The resolution failed.