Category Archives: separation of church and state

challenge to the UUA – reinvent UU ministry


There was a tweet I saw come across my time line last week from @Rev_Mother who stated to fellow UU blogger and tweeter @mattkinsi that she wanted to be put in charge of Faith Development. Kins was appointed to the UUA committee on appointments. Or the committee on creating appointments to appointing committees. I don’t know… irony and name aside, Kins has been noticed by some higher-ups in the UUA and it’s pretty cool that I can say I knew him when. In fact, Kinsi is the only one of my blog peeps who I have actually met in person.

Anyway… so a few days ago I woke up with a fuzz of ideas swimming through my head as I meandered from almost awake to drifting back into a dream state. I began thinking about her statement about a ministry on faith development.

Her statement was a tangent off a bigger discussion that had occurred (actually it’s still happening) which was debating the idea of the UUA focusing on it’s cause de jour coupled with the recent Social Justice General Assembly vice focusing on our salvific message. (i learned that word from Rev Mother. I use it all the time now. 🙂 )

I’m assuming this is what brought on this subconscious/dreamlike thinking the other day. So I began thinking what if there was a ministry on Marriage and Family so that we could not only focus on pushing for legalizing same-sex marriage but also from the pulpit deliver a message that strengthened families and those who are married AFTER they have walked down the aisle whether they are gay or straight.  It may seem like semantics but the thing is we work pretty diligently at getting gay people to the alter but do NOTHING for them or other UUs who are married for that matter, AFTER they are married.

I challenge the UUA to develop a broad set of ministries, such as a  Ministry on Marriage and Family, Ministry on the Holy and Sacred, Ministry on Human Dignity, Ministry on the Holistic Human, Ministry on Stewardship  of the Earth. I challenge the UUA to reinvigorate the move Rev. Sinkford had in reclaiming our religious language and pull away from living by-gone days of being a hippy in the 60s.

These are just ideas for names but the concept is to create a small number of core of ministries where our actions and witnessing are sacred, holy work.  And the culture of our congregations would view it as such because that’s what we would hear and learn while sitting in the pews.  Those who are concerned with inhumane conditions at Joe Arpaio’s tent city would be doing holy work… UNDER the auspices of church/religious inspired language such as “ministry” “dignity” “sacred” instead of simply attending a protest to bring attention to a cause of injustice.

There are a million injustices in the world that should be righted simply because we know as a species what is right and wrong. The thing is when we as a religious people take up that cause to right a wrong it should be because we believe in our heart of hearts, it to be a sacred calling. UUism is a religion with a message of salvation… NOT a social club that meets on Sundays for coffee after protesting inhumane conditions the night before.

Advertisements

March 2 primary results


So there were 1,446,008 votes cast of the approximately 13 million registered Republican voters. Not a very big turn out if you ask me, even with the GOP testing out a few propositions that are telling signs as to whether you’re a “real” Republican or not. (i.e. abortion, God in the town square)

Anyway… you can see the language of the propositions here.

The one that just has me absolutely dumbfounded though is the voting result for this one.
Ballot Prop 4: Public acknowledgment of God

The result was ninety-five percent!  That’s right… 95% of those 1.4 million votes cast voted yes!

Ok. C’mon now. I know y’all think you really want this but you don’t. You really, really don’t want to be Afghanistan in Christian clothing.

Of course there are some who would gladly let go of the 1st Ammendment.
this is painful and embarrassing to watch.

Theocracy in Texas?


Hey kids… I’ve got a GREAT idea!!!  Let’s make Texas a Theocracy!

Apparently the Republicans are testing the waters towards taking Texas in this direction with Ballot Prop 4 in the primary to see how it would go in the general election.

I think I’ll have to file this one in the “be careful what you wish for category”.

I mean c’mon, how are are the right-wing theocratic, Christofascists going to react when it’s reported that a Muslim kid starts the morning prayer at school by saying, “Allahu Akbar. Subhana rabbiyal adheem. Subhana Rabbiyal A’ala. Allahu Akbar.”

I’ll tell ya how… they’ll crap themselves.

You know, I know Texas has some idiots in public office but how a dumb ass like Don McLeroy has been in public office of anything let alone education for even one term is beyond me.

So in response to idiots like McLeroy, I went to the polls today, cast my vote and said NO!

and the Dixie Chicks were ashamed to be from Texas?


Well, add The Deist to that list! I just found out that the legislature of my home state did one of the stupidest things in the history of things that state legislatures have done… EVER!

Apparently Texas high schools are now required to offer (as an elective) a class that teaches The Bible. How did I miss this?… it passed two years ago and it begins this school year.

What I am hoping will happen is this will be challenged, defeated and left in church where it belongs. Hello 1st Amendment!

Until then, I suspect what will happen is the students who take this class will fall into one of three categories:

  1. kids who have been taking Bible study in church and are hoping to score an easy A.
  2. objective, smart kids who hope the class will actually teach them something new and will ask about the inconsistencies and contradictions or
  3. stoner kids hoping they can score on the churchy kids.

I am hoping the person who teaches this class is either:

  1. an atheist who knows the Bible inside and out and will bury the kids looking for an easy A.
  2. a fundamentalist who gets stumped by the smart kids and made to look like a dumbass or
  3. the football coach who doesn’t teach a thing except why it’s called a hail Mary.

Ok, in all seriousness, if I could be convinced Continue reading

rehearing Prop 8 in California


From what I understand, the California Supreme Court has 90 days from the hearing that was held on March 5th to decide what it’s going to do in regards to Prop 8 once and for all.

I still don’t understand why letting anyone get married is so offensive to some people. In the video link below you’ll see there is guy “A” yelling to guy “B”, “you’re going to hell!!” It’s at about 1:16. He also calls him “filthy” and other not-so-nice things and wasn’t being very Christ-like although he used the Bible as the basis of his stance.

What does it matter to guy “A”. So what! Why do you care if guy “B” is going to hell.
What does it matter to you. How does it affect you!… guy A?

circular-argument

And another thing… why would anyone want the government telling them what they can or can’t do. I really don’t get it. How does any thinking person think it’s ok for the government to tell someone they can or can’t get married or do anything they want for that matter so long as it doesn’t infringe on the right of someone else right to enjoy freedom and happiness.

I know… you think it just isn’t right. You can’t just redefine a word to include other things. Marriage is one woman and one man, sanctified by God.

You know what… that’s morality. That’s the government dictating to you what is right or wrong. Do you want the government (particularly this Dem-led congress and administration) Continue reading

marriage for none… civil unions for all


Throughout the UU Blogosphere and on my own blog peeps list, I have seen this video popping up. No doubt why. Keith Olbermann’s commentary resonates loudly with liberal thinking people.

But despite his slant, Keith, asks a question which I think should send a red flag up for conservatives.
You see, I’m a bit of a conservative, too. I am a bit of a UU oddity in my political stance. I am a card carrying member of the Libertarian party. Some people call it, the Real Republican party or the Republican Party of Teddy Roosevelt.  I’m not a hard core Libertarian, but I agree with a little more of its platform than the others.

And so I’ve thought about this same sex marriage thing off and on for a few months… letting it kind of stew in mind a little and I came to the same conclusion this guy over at The Little Cog did. There should be no marriage licenses for anyone… civil unions for all. I don’t really get too riled up about many causes except the separation of church and state and the whole marriage equality thing i think can be argued to fall in that realm.

I mean marriage between two people is a religious construct. It is not a governmental institution. Why does the government need to recognize or sanctify (via a marriage license) a religious ceremony.

And so I’m asking you, the rare, politically conservative reader of my blog, does California’s Prop 8 and Keith’s commentary below send a red flag to your political stance.  If not… why?  Because if you truly believe in smaller government, if you truly believe the government should leave you alone, how can you possibly justify the government telling someone it is or isn’t ok to marry

I don’t understand.  Please tell me how you, as a political conservative, think it’s ok for the government to tell you whether it’s ok or not to do something as important as be with the one you believe you should be with.

And to quote Keith… why does this matter to you?