Re: [UUPoly-L] Important development
- To: uupoly-l@uupa.org
- Subject: Re: [UUPoly-L] Important development
- From: "Fehd, Ronald J. (CDC/CCHIS/NCPHI)" <rjf2@CDC.GOV>
- Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2007 16:20:51 -0000
- In-reply-to: <mailman.17.1177689607.29802.uupoly-l@uupa.org>
- References: <mailman.17.1177689607.29802.uupoly-l@uupa.org>
- Reply-to: uupoly-l@uupa.org
- Thread-index: AceI5TU9beg81qOzTXuWz6obPoietAAASFOA
- Thread-topic: [UUPoly-L] Important development
> Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2007 11:43:58 EDT
> From: JasmineGld@aol.com
> Subject: [UUPoly-L] Important development
> "Forum focuses on polygamy woes"
> "By Ben Winslow
> "Deseret Morning News
> "ST. GEORGE ? A town hall meeting brought politicians,
> polygamists, activists and community members together here
> to vent and share their feelings...."
> _http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,660214924,00.html_
> (http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,660214924,00.html)
>
> This article talks about efforts to really talk with each
> other in Utah.
> This development is important to UUPA, because the UUA
> General Assembly will be held in Salt Lake City in 2009, and
> I received advice that UUPA had better be prepared to talk
> about polygamy by the time we get there with an Exhibit Hall
> booth. Further, as the Utah issues begin to make national
> news -- which they *will* if they make any progress -- UUs
> who are concerned about polyamory will take notice.
>
> I encourage everyone on UUPoly to read this article and
> begin to think about how we can talk about this challenging
> issue with our ministers and our
> congregations--similarities, differences, UU response to the
> Utah situation...Especially if you think you might attend GA
> in 2009 in Salt Lake City
I can think of no better book to have in hand,
should I be talking w/Mormons,
than the advise of one of their own:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=seven+habits+of+highly+effective+fa
milies
I think that for too long,
that we have been pointing to each other's practice(s)
and saying,
"Well, probably not exactly like they did it, ..."
Poly seems to me,
-- after ~20 years of thinking and much less of successful practice --
a set of (un?)attainable virtues.
On the one hand it's easy to explain away the 50% divorce rate:
* one or the other doesn't have the commitment
* one or the other doesn't have the skills to commit
Frankly, I am still aspiring to be poly.
"Coach, when will practice end?
and we get to play a real game?"
In my book, the Mormons are the best and worst of poly* examples.
best : they have a community, a society, both emotional and economic
worst: partriarchy %-Q
What do we propose that is as good as?
let alone better?
(Uncle) Ron ... in Atlanta
This archive was generated by a fusion of
Pipermail (Mailman edition) and
MHonArc.