Amendment 20 to Article II - Proposed by Leslie Peet

Bold underlining indicate insertion ; [brackets indicate deletion.]

32 We covenant to dismantle [racism and] all forms of systemic oppression to support the worth and dignity of all. We support the use of

I think I understand what you’re trying to do, and I believe it works pretty well within the Justice Value.

I don’t know how to fix the way I feel about repeating the “worth and dignity” language from the Equity Value. Or maybe it’s important enough to repeat?

I hope that the work to bring the value of justice to a finished form will be something we can work with to covenant to end all oppression.

Until black and brown people stop experiencing the highest rates of opression, of all forms, calling out racism as part of justice is justice. I will abide by the delegates and, for myself, will not be for amendments 64, 20, 16 and 17, because they remove “racism” ahead of the call to end oppression. I appreciate the intent to not single out a form of oppression.

I do see the point that amendment 17 makes - and will consider a word other than dismantle, although I think dismantle can take many forms, even for historically more “conservative” religious traditionalists.

Note to any supporters of any amendments that did not pass or were not prioritized. This site will be locked on Tuesday. Our lay-led public Facebook group, Blue Boat Passengers, created for discussing Article II and GA, will remain open for commenting a couple weeks longer (and still be visible for viewing as a public record afterwards).
Blue Boat Passengers: Info & Constructive Discussion re Article II, etc. | Announcement: This group will soon be suspended | Facebook

Anyone who wishes to use the Blue Boat Passengers group for finding each other and coordinating to do the 15-congregation amendment process may do so while the group remains open (must follow group rules, so please read them and the pinned post before commenting in the group.).

Here are some comments about the 15-congregation amendment process, from Donald Wilson, who used to be on the GA Planning Committee:

"“Unlike how the amendment process was run for this GA (ie at the discretion of the moderators and board), the process you’ve mentioned is bylaw and subject to little to no interpretation. I wouldn’t wait however. You need to get the petition from the UUA Board Secretary in the next couple weeks, and you have to have it turned Into the Board before February 1st.”

“If one congregation has a thought, send an email to 50 others and say “we are discussing X. What do you think?”
That is also the kind of thing that we have District and Regional assemblies for, both in person and virtual.
That is also the type of thing your religious professionals should be talking about at their regular meetings with their colleagues like minister Association chapter meetings.
It is the responsibility of your board president and other trustees to be deeply aware of the affairs of your closest congregations.
You discover by being in relationship and talking to one another.
You coordinate by email and phone call, same as we have for the last quarter century.”

“You don’t even have to have a congregational vote. You just have to get their board to sign off.” ETA: You must check this–rules vary by congregation. Also, look for the UU Governance Lab group on Facebook to connect with Donald Wilson directly.

Also, a comment from another member who was participating on Discuss:
“Some of us are connecting on Slack, mainly to remain in contact with others interested in specific amendments or the amendment process in general at GA 2024.”…/zt-1y0pvelub-YVxUFoPpTrZ…