Many Unitarians would prefer that their polyamory activists keep quiet

[cbayer]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/on-faith/unitarian-universalists-would-prefer-their-polyamory-activists-keep-quiet/2013/03/22/f3d14eaa-9333-11e2-8ea1-956c94b6b5b9_story.html

By Lisa Miller, Published: March 22

The joke about Unitarians is that they’re where you go when you don’t know where to go. Theirs is the religion of last resort for the intermarried, the ambivalent, the folks who want a faith community without too many rules. It is perhaps no surprise that the Unitarian Universalist Association is one of the fastest-growing denominations in the country, ballooning 15 percent over the past decade, when other established churches were shrinking. Politically progressive to its core, it draws from the pool of people who might otherwise be “nones” – unaffiliated with any church at all.

But within the ranks of the UUA over the past few years, there has been some quiet unrest concerning a small but activist group that vociferously supports polyamory. That is to say “the practice of loving and relating intimately to more than one other person at a time,” according to a mission statement by Unitarian Universalists for Polyamory Awareness (UUPA). The UUPA “encourages spiritual wholeness regarding polyamory,” including the right of polyamorous people to have their unions blessed by a minister.


UUA headquarters says it has no official position on polyamory. “Official positions are established at general assembly and never has this issue been brought to general assembly,” a spokeswoman says.

But as the issue of same-sex marriage heads to the Supreme Court, many committed Unitarians think the denomination should have a position, which is that polyamory activists should just sit down and be quiet. For one thing, poly activists are seen as undermining the fight for same-sex marriage. The UUA has officially supported same-sex marriage, the spokeswoman says, “since 1979, with tons of resolutions from the general assembly.”

more at link

[rrneck]

1. DON'T STAND THERE GAWPIN'

Like you never seen the hand of God before!

The members of Monte Python will prove to be among the greatest sages of out time.

[cbayer]

2. Would YOU rather be doing something other than marching up and down the square!?!?

OMG, that was hilarious.

[kwassa]

3. Where is Lisa Miller getting her growth figures from?

The UU has been under 200,000 my entire life. I was a cradle UU.

this is what Wikipedia says:

The UUA is headquartered at 25 Beacon Street on historic Beacon Hill, Boston, Massachusetts, the historical center of Unitarian Christianity in America. As of 2009, the UUA comprised 19 Districts, 1,041 congregations with 164,656 certified members and 61,795 church school enrollees served by 1,623 ministers.[2] However, as of 2011 the UUA had 162,796 certified members and 54,671 church school enrollees. This shows a decline of 1,860 members and 7,124 enrollees in church school since 2008. The UUA has, for the first time, also reported decline in average weekly attendance to 100,693 people. This is a drop of 1.5% on the 2010 reported figure.[1]

My parents were either atheist or agnostic, but as they never discussed the subject, it is hard to know. They certainly had no spiritual bent. I know my father was distressed by the newish pagan thing, though. He liked no religion in his religion.

edit to add: I think growth lies primarily in new groups that have come to UU, such as the pagans and the polyamorous.

[cbayer]

5. There have been a number of articles in the last year that show growth in the U/U church.

They were posted in religion and a search would probably bring them up.

[kwassa]

7. I'm finding contradictory information on this.

This is what the Unitarians say about themselves.

http://www.uuworld.org/news/articles/183612.shtml

Membership in Unitarian Universalist congregations has fallen for the third consecutive year, with overall membership falling to 162,796 adults from 164,196. In addition, the number of congregations has declined to 1,046, with a net loss of two congregations last year.

Amid the downward-sloping statistics, however, the Rev. Peter Morales, president of the Unitarian Universalist Association, sees reason for optimism. Declines in UU membership have been slight. Declines in other denominations, including evangelical churches, however, have been precipitous. “The evangelical slide is an amazing opportunity,” he said, noting that opinion surveys on social issues, such as marriage equality, indicate that more people are aligned with UUA values. “The culture is moving our way theologically, but not institutionally.”

.................................................................................................................

Three of the UUA’s 19 districts showed a net increase in members last year. The Joseph Priestley District, which includes congregations in Delaware, the District of Columbia, Maryland, and parts of New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Virginia, posted the largest gain, of 91 members. The Massachusetts Bay District, which includes congregations in eastern Massachusetts, grew by 41 members. And the Pacific Central District, which serves northern California, northern Nevada, and Hawaii, grew by five.

Membership fell the most in the Central Midwest District—which includes congregations in Illinois and parts of Indiana, Michigan, Missouri, and Wisconsin—and the Southwestern UU Conference, which serves Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Texas, and parts of Missouri and Tennessee. Each of these districts lost 224 members. The Metropolitan New York District, which includes congregations in parts of Connecticut, New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania, lost 186 members.

Here is the in-depth report.

http://www.uua.org/documents/administration/1104_morales_boardrpt.pdf

[cbayer]

8. And then there is this.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2012/10/01/unitarian-faith-growing-stronger-nationwide/1607243/

Who knows?

[kwassa]

9. I tried to track down the statistic in the USA Today article and couldn't find it.

Anywhere on the website of that statistical organization.

Here is the UUs again on their own membership. Their peak membership was in the late '60s, and as one commentator put it, the population of the US has doubled in this time, while the church membership has remained essentially flat.

https://www.uua.org/directory/data/demographics/281427.shtml

[u4ic]

15. I think the key word is "membership"

Last edited Sun Mar 31, 2013, 09:07 PM - Edit history (1)

At my congregation, there are as many members as 'friends' - those who attend regularly, but don't want to commit to membership. They could be attending for years, and still not want to become an official member. They aren't in the head count.

[kwassa]

16. do they financially support the church?

Do they pledge, or tithe?

I think that would be the difference between a member and a "friend".

[u4ic]

17. Yes, most friends do support financially

long term friends definitely - but what I was referring to is the discrepancy between one article stating its growing, and the UUA's position that it's not. Membership vs attendance. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Morales only referred to membership. Perhaps therein lies the difference.

I'm not really up to date with what's happening with UUs in the US, as I'm in Canada.

[MADem]

12. I know they picked up a cousin of mine in the last decade! nt

[okasha]

4. For no particular reason,

this reminds me of a SF Chronicle column from a few years back purporting to be the manifesto of «Unitarian Jihad.» Links are difficult on the Kindle, but you can find it readily by Googling «We are Unitarian Jihad!» The Google will also pull up the Unitarian Jihad Name Generator--mine is Sister Main Gauche of Quiet Mindfulness--should you care to have one.

Do not attempt to ingest liquids while reading this. You'll spray your computer when you laugh.l

[cbayer]

6. Just did some reading on the Unitarian Jihad, but the name generator has apparently

been taken down.

Greatly disappointed!

[Fortinbras Armstrong]

10. I particularly liked

There is only God, unless there is more than one God. The vote of our God subcommittee is 10-8 in favor of one God, with two abstentions. Brother Flaming Sword of Moderation noted the possibility of there being no God at all, and his objection was noted with love by the secretary.

I've been to similar meetings.

[cbayer]

11. Hilarious! Reminds me of some "organizing" meetings during the VN war.

[okasha]

13. Oh, yeah.

I'm basically a leftist libertarian--every time I take that political compass test thingie I get further and further down into the bottom left corner. (In fact, I think I'm currently one square away from falling off it altogether.) Most of the groups I've worked with have been of the same mind and some outright anarchist--no votes at all, just talk to consensus if it takes 48 hours straight. Always accompanied by lots of and ending with . That''s pretty much the NA way, too.

[cbayer]

14. It drives me crazy.

I love process, parliamentary procedure, rather rigid guidelines for meetings where decisions have to be made. Talking and talking and talking to try to get to a conclusion makes me irritable.

I would do very poorly at an Occupy meeting, I think.

But it takes all kinds.

[goldent]

18. So what do people think about polyamory?

Should it be our business? I believe it is illegal in all of the US, and in many but not all countries.

I really don't know much about it. I think a lot of people would say it is wrong, but I'm not sure why. Is it not "natural" for humans, or is it more a cultural issue?

[cbayer]

19. I have mixed feelings.

On the one hand, I think adult individuals who wish to engage in relationships involving more that two people should probably have the right to do so, as long as all are consenting.

On the other hand, the concept has been used to exploit girls and women in the past, and there still exist communities and cultures in which "consent" may be meaningless.

And, if I had a third hand, I don't think they generally work out all the well - at least not in my experience. The drama factor goes way up as soon as you begin to triangulate.

What do you think?

[goldent]

24. I don't think it is healthy at all

and that's about all I have to say about it.

[TreasonousBastard]

20. I suspect it's partly natural behavior, but...

it poses more problems in advanced societies than it solves. We're naturally randy sorts but some control may be worthwhile.

I'm aware of at least one South American tribe that allows all men access to all willing women so that every male member can share the responsibilities of paternity-- nobody knows who the father is, so every man acts as the father. However, people do pair off and there's that jealousy thing that pops up every so often.

In a more advanced society, however, there are property and inheritance questions that pop up, the jealousy thing is always there, and the society becomes larger and more difficult to track who is doing who and how to spread out those paternal responsibilities so things have to be regulated. Modern experiments in communes and such have rarely worked out well.

What has worked out as a reasonable substitute is that in maybe half the married couples at least one screws around with perhaps a steady boyfriend or girlfriend. Not exactly polyamory, but accomplishes close to the same thing.

[cbayer]

21. I recently heard about cultural groups like you describe, where paternity is not known.

It was fascinating.

But I agree with pretty much everything you say about who most modern societies and have never seen a situation in which it worked.

What I think works is the freedom to form deep, personal, but non-sexual, relationships with others that can be allowed because a couple has a deep commitment to monogamy. It's seems more liberating that being able to have multiple sexual relationships ever would be.

But that's just me.

[pinto]

22. Something similar along those lines -

My friend Lois and I are usually included in group events. We often arrive together and leave together. Sometimes it's a simple - pinto, is Lois coming too? or more specific - invitation to pinto and Lois.

Finally someone asked my sister. "I thought your brother's gay? Do he and Lois have a relationship?" She said, "Yeah they do. They've known each other forever and are best friends." LOL.

And it's been that way all through her marriage, her divorce and her relationships afterward. Not quite the same thing, yet a deep, personal, but non-sexual, relationship.

[cbayer]

23. I have had a number of very close gay male friends throughout my life.

I found out early on that I could engage in really intimate relationships without the complications that sexual attraction can bring, and it has meant a great deal to me.

Like you, I was "coupled" with several of these men at various points in my life. I lost my very best friend to AIDS in the late 80's. I miss him terribly still.

I hope to get to meet Lois someday. Anyone who loves you as much as she does is someone I would like to know.