The Unitarian Universalist Association's "Democratic Practice" Is Nothing But A Meaningless Sham. . .

But don't take *my* word for it U*Us. . .

Take the word of UUA Trustee Rev. Sarah Stewart as posted to The Web in her Stereoscope blog post entitled:

'Transforming the UUA Commission on Appraisal'

Why appointed and not elected? Isn’t that undemocratic?

The bylaw amendment would create a Commission which was appointed by the Board rather than elected by the General Assembly. The members of all Board committees are appointed by the Board (some Ministerial Fellowship Committee members are also appointed by the UU Ministers Association). Some have wondered if having an appointed committee instead of an elected committee robs the Commission of some of its independence.

In our practice of democracy as an association, there is not much practical difference between appointment by the Board and election by the General Assembly. Since elections (with the exception of Moderator and President) are almost always uncontested, it is simply a question of which group of dedicated Unitarian Universalists recruits the leaders we elect or appoint. Many people help find members for our committees: the Nominating Committee, the Appointments Committee, and the UUA staff all make recommendations. Leaders are affirmed by uncontested vote at the GA or by vote of the elected trustees. Both election and appointment are legitimate, democratically-grounded ways to serve. In our current practice of uncontested elections, even GA elections do not represent a real choice between leaders for our movement. Appointed positions and elected positions are functionally equivalent.

end quote

So there you have it U*Us. In actual practice within the pseudo-democratic Unitarian Universalist Association, there is little or NO real difference between a UUA leader being appointment by the UUA Board of Trustees, or being ever so democratically "elected" by U*Us, since U*U "elections" are almost always uncontested. The only exception to this not so democratic "democratic practice" of The U*U Movement is the "election" of UUA Moderators and UUA Presidents by the few thousand UU delegates during any given UUA General Assembly, but let's not forget that the UUA has set up a system for pre-screening Presidential candidates if not candidates for the position of UUA Moderator. In fact, prior to the 2008 UUA Presidential election there was an effort by UUA insiders to ensure that the candidacy of Rev. Laurel Hallman would be uncontested by anyone. . .