Like Philo, I was checking out the General Assembly documents. You can get them here.
I noted a cryptic line in the agenda for Plenary (session) III, on Saturday (p. 5): Why the Amendment to Bylaw Section C-2.3 Is Not on the Agenda.
Why, indeed! Or, what is she — evoking Moderator Gini Courter — talking about?
The issue is changing the language of the non-discrimination clause of the UUA bylaws. Protected categories color and sex proposed to become ethnicity and gender, plus language, citizenship status, and economic status.
I would think we’re in slam-dunk territory, but clearly we’re not. Is a legal issue? A polity issue? Too much? Too little? Or, as I fear, it is unmanagable. What would these protections provide? Mean?
Does anyone know?