More thoughts on General Conference

Some thoughts from ShannonB, a transgender activist at General Conference. I don't know if she was working for Reconciling Ministries Network. She attended committee sessions where many gay concerns were first discussed.

In committee, the vote on the "incompatibility" clause was 13-6 in favor of getting rid of it (and replacing the entire 161G paragraph). This committee vote included helpful comments by a delegate from Congo (speaking through a translator). He was called back to the microphone twice to confirm he was voting for the change.

The vote to approve the committee report was 517-416 against. The full GC wasn't buying. Debate lasted 2.5 hours. One delegate said they should follow Wesley's simple rules, including "Do No Harm." A primary author of the adopted text (which kept the "incompatibility" clause) said GC should, "Do no harm to our global connection." A clear case that unity is more important than gays (or claims of "unity" is a way to enforce his desires). The protest then wasn't just about keeping the "incompatibility" clause, but also about overturning the committee's recommendation and about the ugliness of the debate (not to mention the anti-gay forces spouting off claims that have no grounding in reality).

There are a couple more petitions that should be mentioned. One is to call the denomination to repent for acts of hate and violence and includes calling on the various boards and agencies to educate the membership on the sins of hate and bigotry. It passed 839-34. You may refuse membership to gays, but don't hate while you're doing it.

The other is a proposed amendment to the UMC Constitution, saying "We are in ministry to all." Instead of amending the list of classes in the statement, "no conference … shall exclude any member … because of race, color …" the entire "because" clause has been removed rather than add sexual orientation or gender identity. The amendment passed out of committee. The plenary vote is not recorded at the official conference website. It still must be passed by 2/3 of all the district conferences worldwide (a stiff uphill battle). Alas, wording the petition this new way -- simply saying we're open to all -- reminds me of the battle over school bullying laws in Michigan. Because it explicitly states it is not acceptable to bully gays (amongst others) it is held up in the state Senate. But many have found that when you say only "bullying is unacceptable" it is amazing how people can justify their actions against gay kids isn't bullying or that gay kids fall outside the scope of "all".