Please give a brief synopsis of what you agree with.  We can't discuss with a website.

May 4, 2010 -- 4:46PM, Jupiter6208 wrote:

i agree with what Mr. Morales is stating in the article i have posted. what else do you need ? 

Assume I am too lazy to read the article, but am interested in discussing current UU thinking.  Are there a couple of points in the article that you think are important to discuss?

May 5, 2010 -- 10:44PM, RevDorris wrote:

The prime quote of the article.

"I think the difference is religion. Really. Religion. The key to the future for every single congregation and for Unitarian Universalism as a movement is whether we can “get religion.” If we “get religion” we will thrive. We will touch lives and change the world. If we don’t, we will decline."

Focusing on what we love, is how he defined religion.

If the UUA does not focus on love, love of humanity and love of God, it will decline.  If the UUA gets this religion it will touch lives and change the world.

The successful UU churches I have attended focused on religion in the old sense of binding together.  Taking an admittedly odd collection of theists, ex-anythings, atheists, new agers, and sundry others and finding a way to create a community from them.  Love is basic, but the community must be more than love of ____.  It is what we think about, what we find important and unifying, it is what creates the we.   

Please Welcome Thomasina-eve- 

to the UU boards and to  beliefnet.

Thanks for joining us.

May 6, 2010 -- 1:26PM, Thomasina-eve- wrote:

It is an important challenge that Peter is giving.  The question though is not just saying yeah he is right but, more what are we going to do about it?   Yes, there are some UU churches that do this right but, what of the many that do not? 

I think two things get in the way of doing it right.  

One is the issue of God.  A church where God is a four letter word, will have no we to rally around.  I say this as an atheist who has found atheistic UU churches to be almost uniformily failures by Peter's standards.  A church where God is a mandatory belief might as well forget UU and join the UCC.  The leaven of the non-believer is missing.

The other thing I have found dysfunctional is UU"-".  Either you are a UU with traditions from a former faith, or just go back home and be a liberal"-".

I say these things respectfully as a guest, since they are some of the reasons I no longer identify primarily as a UU.

By the way, any relationship to a good internet friend on the old boards who signed her posts as Thommy?