#78 | Margie Storch | Change "sacred beings" to "humans"

Submission 78
Margie Storch
Unitarian Universalist Community of Charlotte

What is your suggestion or idea?

Current: Pluralism. We celebrate that we are all sacred beings diverse in culture, experience, and theology. We covenant to learn from one another in our free and responsible search for truth and meaning. We embrace our differences and commonalities with Love, curiosity, and respect.

Suggestion: Pluralism. We celebrate that humans are diverse in culture, experience, and theology. We covenant to learn from one another and embrace our differences and commonalities with Love, curiosity, and respect.

What is the reason for your amendment idea?

My view is that ALL on earth (not just humans or UUs) are sacred beings. Are flowers diverse in theology? I left out “sacred beings” as some atheists don’t care for that term. We could use “hold reverent” as an alternative. I deleted “in our free and responsible search for truth and meaning” because I think those words fit better in Section C-2.5 Freedom of Belief.

Have you discussed this idea with your congregation or other UUs?

Yes, the Religious Humanists affinity group of UUCC discussed the Article 2 proposals in 2 meetings (March & April 2023). Responses were generally supportive. Everyone agreed including the “free and responsible search for truth and meaning” is a key idea that should be included in Article 2 (but maybe better in Section C-2.5?). Each of the UUCC members were encouraged to submit their ideas individually (as I am) as getting 100% agreement is like herding cats!


humans are diverse in body, experience, belief, and relationship to other forms of creation…

1 Like

I agree with this proposed change, but for a slightly different reason. Sacred is defined as “Connected with God (or the gods) or dedicated to a religious purpose and so deserving veneration.”
The use of that word does not seem appropriate in this context

1 Like

I like your suggestion. I do wonder why we are using humans instead of human beings.


Agree that “sacred” could be layering on a faith in god interpretation, although I like to apply sacred to secular.
All on earth - certainly - and there is another part of the Articles where this is addressed directly
Good observation thanks for making your suggestion.

I too dislike the term “sacred” here. However, the replacement with either “humans” or “human beings” sounds a little strange to my ears. How about simply, “We celebrate that we are all diverse in culture, experience …”

We celebrate that we are diverse in culture, experience and theology. Yes! I arrived at the same sentence as Janet, but without the word all. I can go with either. See #430

I see some of the same problems with the first sentence as you all mentioned.
The wording seems to imply that humans are sacred, while the Interdependence value states that we acknowledge our place in the web of life with humility.
The wording seems to imply that we must celebrate that we are sacred beings as a condition for then celebrating our diversity. Those who don’t believe in or don’t find meaningful the term “sacred beings” aren’t comfortable with this, so that it’s an obstacle to endorsing this value.

1 Like

Will someone from UUCC be carrying this amendment forward to GA? I want to be able to share about it with my congregtion and delegates on Sunday!

Janet, you might want to watch for our amendment. It will be submitted by Priscilla Ortiz, also from UUCLB. LeRae

Is the final wording for this amendment available somewhere? Do you have a Delegate support form or something I could sign?

I signed this document, but this seems to be about Reason. I would also like to sign for this change to Pluraism.

Oh of course. Thank you for the reminder. I’ll get that done this afternoon. We had the movers come today. We’re moving from MA to CA. A little chaotic here.

1 Like

on #430 and here is the link at last

Thank you for encouraging me. I’m sorry I took so long. I didn’t know how to start a second form.
I’m so glad you are a delegate to GA.

Note to authors and proponents of amendments that weren’t prioritized or presented: This forum is closing for comment tomorrow, but our lay-led public Facebook group, Blue Boat Passengers, will remain open for another few weeks for commenting (and still be viewable after that). Those who want to find others to coordinate about the 15-congregation amendment process may use the group to do so while it is open.

Please be sure to read both the rules and the pinned post before posting or commenting in this group.

Thank you.

Blue Boat Passengers: Info & Constructive Discussion re Article II, etc. | Announcement: This group will soon be suspended | Facebook