You have not allowed for comments that suggest we abandon the Revision II and keep our current By-Laws and begin a discussion for a longer period of time with more chance to have repeated give and take.
Perhaps with each congregation obtaining all the comments from other congregations along the way as a means of letting each congregation gain as many sources of opinion as possible before settling on its own.
What is the reason for your amendment idea?
This Revision was called for by the UUA, not the Congregations and its processing is between each congregation or congregational member and the UUA with no established and recognized mechanism for intercongregational input beforehand but only at General Assembly
Have you discussed this idea with your congregation or other UUs?
Yes, the process needs to be extended, specifically allowing for alternatives to be presented next year. This will allow provvide the comission with direction. Then once it’s clear that congregations broadly favor one approach–which is likely to take years–redraft it and submitt a new version that has wide acceptance.
My view is that we should
(1) identify just three or four core values,
(2) expand a description of related values (e.g. justice is commnected to equity, transformation, respect, and diversity, but I would only identify justice clearly as UU value and in a separate, lucid narrative clarify what it means in terms of other values)
(3) make the language clear and inspirtional, and
(4) separately vote on whether to overhaul the role of the UUA (which now is designed to serve congregations, but in the proposal takes on a broader charge which I don’t think they are equiped to undertake)