P-G blasts out DVD that is 'hate-filled'

A recent Sunday edition of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette included an obviously expensive, professionally-produced anti-Islamic DVD titled "Obsession." One of our OMD ministers who viewed the DVD frankly called it "hate-filled" and "lie-filled." It was also included in newspapers in Akron, Columbus, Canton, Toledo and other cities in Ohio; and, apparently, in still more cities in "battleground" states in the presidential election. The Cleveland Plain Dealer did not carry the DVD.

Many Unitarian Univeralists in the OMD have already expressed outrage that something which blatantly violates the principles of religious freedom and tolerance could be distributed in our community, and put into the hands of our children, under the label of "advertising". They are writing the newspapers which distributed the DVDs to let them know how they feel.

This is a non-partisan issue. Our congregations and the district are able to express their disgust with this kind of reactive messaging without any risk to their non-profit status. I believe that we are called by our values and principles as Unitarian Universalists to speak out against those who would promote intolerance and fear in our communities.

Some district congregations and the Ohio Council of Churches are organizing around this issue and leading protests. Your congregation can too. If you need assistance, please contact the district office at office at ohiomeadville.org.

You can write a letter to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette:

Letters may be mailed to the Editor, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 34 Blvd. of the Allies, Pittsburgh, PA 15222.

Letters may be faxed to (412) 263-2014 or sent via e-mail to letters@post-gazette.com or by clicking here

Drummer (newsletter) got a blurb about this space

Sunnyhill-dot-orgblogspot.com = unofficial blog

Sunday music from both the choir and the folk group, with the new wash tub bass player, are two recent postings at the unofficial Sunnyhill blog. All sorts of chatter is fair game at the unofficial blog. Many have signed up to be contributors. Others are welcome.

The blog allows for a main post and comments to sustain the discussion. Blog postings
are less invasive than blast emails. But, blogs are also able to be seen by others on the internet.

http://Sunnyhill-dot-org.blotspot.com

---

Also, this FORKED blog exists, FWIW,

http://Sunnyhillboard.blogspot.com

Nuff Said

All World News: My Afternoon With Doug Shields

All World News: My Afternoon With Doug Shields: "'Enough is enough,' he said criticizing Ravenstahl for saying that the settlement was 'protecting the public' while not actually saying what the mayor was protecting the public from. Shields guessed that the mayor's office 'felt panicked' by Ford's resignation letter and questioned Ravenstahl's description of a 'settlement of potential claims.' What claims? he asked. Ravenstahl claimed that Ford's letter was a lie. If that's the case, then why the settlement? Shields asked rhetorically.

Enough is enough of the all D political folly of Pittsburgh.

City council is not an investigative body. Doug is right. However, it is a funding body. It holds the purse strings. The members of council can cut off all pay to the URA and shut it down fully.

Don't pay someone to go away. Rather, have the entire URA go away. Liquidate it. Shut it. End its charter to make any additional transactions. Lay off the employees.

Unitarian Gospel Song -- tune up

From Joe Jencks house concert

Joe Jencks gets tuned up and does part of the introduction to the song, Come With Me. To catch the entire set -- come to our house concert on Wednesday, September 17, 2008. Arrive at 6 or after. Music starts at 7.

Do RSVP to Mark Rauterkus, Mark@Rauterkus.com, 412 298 3432.

From Joe Jencks house concert

River is a life giving stream, song.

Song at Service

New Minister in town -- and "pre-fired"

The new minister is at Sunnyhill. He comes to us "pre-fired." He is a temporary minister.

From people & vips

Conference-Big Ideas for Small Congregations(members<175)

OMD Fall Leadership Conference

Big Ideas for Small Congregations

“Whatever size you are, know that there are gifts and challenges all along the way. The trick is to be the best you can be at whatever size you are. Have quality worship, find one social action project to commit to, pay your bills, take care of each other, learn to handle conflict graciously, welcome visitors and love your children. Any congregation can do that. We’ll show you how.”
-from Big Ideas for Small Congregations:
A Friendly Guide for Leaders

Is your smaller congregation (175 members or fewer) energized and poised for growth? Or maybe you would like to grow, but just don’t know how. Or maybe are you a new or potential leader of a mid-size (150-300) congregation who wants to learn more about church leadership. If so, this conference is for you! Presenter Ellen Germann-Melosh, the co-Author of Big Ideas for Small Congregations: A Friendly Guide for Leaders, will present a model that will help put the work of your congregation into perspective and will share success stories of small congregations that became healthy, growing, vital members of their community. The afternoon session will be tailored to address the important issues in our congregations.

Saturday,
October 18, 2008
Unitarian Universalist Fellowship
of Wayne County
3186 Burbank Road
Wooster, Ohio 44691
Registration: 9:00-9:30 a.m.
Conference: 9:30 a.m. till 3:00 p.m.
Fee is $25 per person*, including lunch and snacks. Home Hospitality and Childcare can be requested with early registration (by October 3). Fee after October 3 is $35.

*Congregations sending 3 or more members receive a
$5/person discount (early registration only) and get a free copy of the book!
Registration information was sent in your Congregational packet, or may be found at http://www.ohiomeadville.org/onlinereg/smallcongreg.html

Global Warming Aug 24, 2008

You know, I originally intended to speak about alternative energy forms. What piqued my interest was George Bush’s pushing the “hydrogen economy”. I thought it was an interesting contrast, H2, the least dense substance in the universe being championed by W (Dubya), the densest substance in the universe. However, after some thought I decided that I preferred to talk about global warming, as it is the fundamental threat to our species in the coming century, more than war, more than poverty, more than terrorism, more than-here I will be bold enough to state “insert your favorite social issue here”. I include any social issue I may favor in this statement. I will not mince words. If our species cannot timely come to a sound successful strategy regarding global warming, we could be looking at our extinction.

For disclosure purposes, I am not a scientist nor do you need to be a scientist to understand global warming. Science’s role is to give us correct information; our role is to use the information responsibly.
First I would like to state that you will also hear the term global climate change, which I feel is only part of the story. Global climate change is a result of global warming. Global climate change includes such phenomena as moving a village higher up a mountain in Africa because the mosquito line has migrated upward; the possibility of more severe storms in the coming century; drought due to a diminishing cryosphere (ice and snow cover), or possibly precipitating a new ice age in Europe due to shifting the Gulf Stream. These phenomena are used to undermine the credibility of global warming as a real phenomenon by those who have vested interests in continuing business as usual, are simply in denial about a major paradigm shift needed in human organization, or who simply live in a constructed reality impervious to contradictory evidence. Global warming is the term I will use because the scientific evidence points to global warming as the phenomenon that causes the observed climate change effects. More specifically, anthropogenic (human caused) global warming is the core issue we must effectively address. This activity is primarily the burning of fossil fuels.

I have no problem with any legitimate scientist who may question global warming and addresses the question by the scientific method. However, societal decisions have to be made with the information currently available; global warming will not stop occurring while we wait. The overwhelming scientific consensus is that we are experiencing human induced global warming. My hope in presenting this program is that you will have enough information to responsibly participate in the public policy discourse, including being able to reject misinformation or disinformation. My information must be necessarily brief; if you wish more detail Mount Lebanon Public Library has an excellent resource, Earth’s Changing Climate by Professor Richard Wolfson of Middlebury College. They have it available in DVD, audio CD, and transcript form.

Let me distinguish between climate and weather. Global warming is about climate, the long term atmospheric trends, not weather, which is short term variation in atmospheric conditions. We have direct temperature measurements back to about 1860. Prior to that scientists use indirect evidence, called proxies, to study past climate. We have boreholes that go back about 1,000,000 years. These records show a cyclic pattern of brief (10,000 to 20,000 years) warm spells (interglacials) separated by longer cold spells (ice ages). The pattern repeats approximately every 100,000 years. This pattern results from subtle changes in the earth’s tilt and orbit and other complex feedback mechanisms. Climate reconstruction goes back even further using a variety of other proxies, including geological evidence for ice, fossil vegetation, and oxygen isotope (same protons, differing neutrons) ratios from fossil plankton. This evidence suggests that earth has been considerably warmer in the past as well as thought to have 4 periods when the planet was frozen solid, entirely covered with ice. These extremes occurred tens of millions to hundreds of millions of years ago. However, during the last at least 1,000,000 years earth has not experienced a warming greater than the period beginning with the industrial age and accelerating during the last twenty years.

So we have extremes of hot and cold. What determines a planet’s temperature, and therefore its overall climate. The basic cause is a balance between incoming solar energy and outgoing infrared radiation. The physics of temperature as a function of that balance is well understood. The presence of an atmosphere complicates the situation, as it blocks outgoing energy, thereby shifting the energy balance to warming. This is commonly called the greenhouse effect. For earth the natural greenhouse effect warms the planet by about 60° Fahrenheit, from 0° to 60°.
The earth’s atmosphere is made up of mostly nitrogen and oxygen, both of which are transparent to incoming sunlight and to outgoing infrared radiation. The greenhouse gases, primarily water vapor and carbon dioxide, are transparent to incoming sunlight but opaque to outgoing infrared radiation. This is due to an effect of their more complicated atomic nature, having three atoms per molecule rather than two, as do oxygen and nitrogen. We really have no need to get into the science of it; the point of mentioning this is that the greenhouse effect is an identified scientific phenomenon. Those who, for whatever their reasons, oppose policies designed to curb global warming, have the burden of refuting the evidence with better evidence, not with rhetoric, misinformation, disinformation, or outright ignorance.

I would like to spend some time presenting the false arguments of those who oppose policy formulated to stop global warming in order that you can recognize them and know them to be false arguments. Again, I state that those who have legitimate doubts have recourse to the methods scientists use to settle disagreements. Legitimate scientists, however, do not go on Fox News or its ilk to publish their findings. Those who do contribute not light, but noise, to the issue.

We have already mentioned one of the arguments, using global climate change’s varying outcomes to undermine the credibility of the global warming phenomenon itself. Those who study the outcomes can tie them back to global warming. Those who claim otherwise do not do so for scientific reasons but for other reasons, which may be anywhere from shallow research to researching to a predetermined conclusion.
Another argument is presenting a false statistical analysis. This includes statements that the effect is too small to measure. This is incorrect, if there is any correlation at all, the effect is measureable; methods other than correlation are used to search out the nature of the effect. Another is to say that climate change is cyclic, and we are merely experiencing a warm cycle. Statisticians can measure cyclic effects and determine if the effect is statistically significant beyond the cyclic effect. Very briefly, if you segment those 100,000 year hot-cold cycles, overlay them, and statistically calculate the representative curve, you have a measure of the cyclic effects to whatever degree of certainty you wish. I state this not to go into the mechanics of the statistics, but so that if you hear these arguments you know that they are false.

Another argument is to state that scientists don’t study climate, they study computer models of climate. This is about as specious an argument as can be made. Computer models are a legitimate tool of science. Their results must meet the standards of validity and reliability that all scientific tools must meet. Computer models put us on the moon, and even more impressive, brought us back to earth from the moon. Specifically regarding climate study, models are validated by determining if they “predict” the past as it is known from the methods previously stated, direct measurement or proxy measurements.
Another false presentation is that models have widely varying outcomes. The different outcomes is what they are designed to measure. The IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) has, at last count, 31 scenarios that measure variables the IPCC considers important. The main axes are Economic Growth vs. Environmental Preservation, Globalization vs. Regionalization, and Technology type and level (carbon based vs. renewable). The outcomes are different because the inputs are the variables, and the model is measuring the effect of the particular variable. Again, those whose impartiality may be slanted are distorting legitimate information to illegitimate ends. For the record, I do not see economic growth and environmental preservation as inherently at odds but at odds due to the economic joining of government and vested economic interests. That’s a subject for another talk on another day.

The last argument I will mention is more of an attempted indictment than it is an argument. It goes something like this: Einstein disagreed with the mainstream scientists of his time, and proved to be right. Therefore, we can’t accept global warming merely because scientists overwhelmingly agree with it. Their argument, however, is specious. Neither Einstein nor anyone else whose theories prevailed argued for the null hypothesis, which in this case is that we don’t know what causes global warming or that what we know is insufficient. They argued for their specific theories and peer-reviewed evidence ultimately supported them. In the case of global warming peer reviewed research overwhelmingly points to a human induced global warming effect. Scientists do not take a vote.
That said; let’s get back to the greenhouse effect. Nature has provided us with, though not a controlled “experiment”, an opportunity to study the effect of atmosphere on a planet’s temperature through the study of three planets, Venus, Earth, and Mars. Earth, we have already mentioned, has a natural greenhouse effect of about 60° Fahrenheit (33°C). Venus would have an atmosphere-free-temperature of about 55°C. It, however, does have an atmosphere density 100 times that of Earth’s and this is 96% carbon. Venus has an actual surface temperature of about 500°C (not a misprint). Mars would have an atmosphere free temperature of about -55°C. Mars has an atmosphere about 1% of Earth’s and its actual temperature is only slightly cooler than predicted by the net result of sunlight in and infrared radiation out, supporting, through elimination, the greenhouse effect being due to atmosphere. The greenhouse effect on Venus is why I say that global warming is the issue we must address above all other issues.

Meanwhile, back on Earth, we have mentioned two major greenhouse gases, water vapor and CO2. Some recent scientific research indicates a third possibility, the burning of sacrificial candles at Unitarian Universalist rituals, but we can address that at a future service. Water vapor cycles between surface water and airborne water in about a week, on average. Due to precipitation, the effects do not accumulate. There may be some increase in the absolute amount of vapor in the air as the earth warms, but it is not thought to be significant in terms relative to CO2. CO2 cycles between the air and earth due largely to photosynthesis with a secondary cycle of surface water and air exchange. CO2 cycles between air and surface on the average every 5 years. The difference is that, unlike water vapor, as CO2 is added to the atmosphere it accumulates. It is still being recycled every 5 years, but a larger amount is being recycled. The larger amount causes less infrared loss, and consequent heat retention. The process is called a positive feedback mechanism, feedback that enhances its own effect. Don’t be fooled by the name, it has negative consequences in that it is not self-correcting as is the water vapor cycle. The accumulation will remain in the atmosphere for centuries.

The only question remaining is: how do we know it’s anthropogenic (human induced)?
Remember, the Earth’s energy flow is sunlight in, infrared radiation out; adding atmosphere causes the greenhouse effect. The composition of the atmosphere determines the extent of the greenhouse effect; the presence of carbon dioxide being the main determinant. The natural CO2 exchange is about 560 gigatonnes-a gigatonne is a billion tonnes. Now, let’s go to fossil fuels. Fossil fuels are carbon that was removed from the atmosphere by natural processes eons ago. As in-ground solids or liquids, they don’t effect the energy flow. Burning releases them back into the atmosphere at the rate of 7 gigatonnes per year. In addition, deforestation accounts for about 2 gigatonnes per year of CO2 not removed from the atmosphere. Humans are increasing CO2 at the rate of 9 gigatonnes per year. The deforestation effect is easily measurable and not contested by any legitimate source. The fossil fuel burning is also easily measurable, but there are those who do contest that the carbon is coming from human sources, for whatever their reasons. How about the carbon? How do we know it’s from our fossil fuel burning?

Scientists are able to use carbon dating techniques to determine that the carbon being added is from fossil fuels, and not some other source. It really is confirming what we already know, as once again, fossil fuel use is a commercial activity and its volume is extensively documented.

I think that we can safely leave the “if” debate regarding global warming to talk radio, and get on with the business of the “how” of addressing global warming. The following is an extremely brief overview of global warming policy issues for the future. It comes down to eliminating fossil fuels as an energy source.
There are only three non-fossil energy sources for earth; solar, geothermal, and motion (wind and tides). The average North American uses 10KW per person, the equivalent of 100 human slaves. Sunshine provides ten thousand times the energy needs of the current human population of the earth at the North American consumption level, geothermal about a thousand. Even motion, the least abundant of the three, provides 100 times human energy needs.

Converting these sources to usable applications is a solvable engineering problem. The primary issues to be considered in alternative fuel technologies are scale, physical capital, and the extent to which the alternative technology is dependent on a fossil fuel foundation, which is now mostly petroleum. Here I would like to sound a cautionary note; we must beware of what I call Sidewalk Supervisor Syndrome. It goes through three stages. Stage 1 is “It can’t be done”. Stage 2 is “It can be done but it’s not worth it”. Stage 3 is “If they would have listened to me, we would have had it a long time ago”.

Of all the alternative fuel technologies, only nuclear power is scaled to be available in the reasonably near future, which I will arbitrarily set as a transition time of 20 years. The technology beyond 20 years is simply an unknown. I have read legitimate articles that state nanotechnology will lead us to the replicators of Star Trek, except that we will be able to replicate any substance. If I have a faith, it is that if someone can dream it, we can build it. But we need to do what we can with what we have right now. The other alternative energy sources scale on a regional or local basis. I don’t state that as an endorsement of nuclear power, only a fact to be addressed. We can have the talk about alternative energy at some future service, for now we simply have to begin looking at how we should start. We need a transitional fuel that we can do now.

The “Precautionary Principle” is the IPCC’s answer to the “if” part of global warming. The Principle states “Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty should not be used as a reason for postponing cost effective measures to prevent environmental degradation”.

I think it’s excellent for a start, but the devil is in the details. I would prefer to omit the term cost effective, because the concept of cost effectiveness is distorted by the vast subsidies that are given to the fossil fuel industries. However, we have to start somewhere, and The Kyoto Protocol is the beginning of an attempt to put this principal into action. The Kyoto Protocol is not the final answer because it sets goals, not requirements. I would prefer a set schedule over no less than 20 years to reduce carbon emissions to zero with no exceptions.

The barriers to this are not scientific or technical, they are economic and political. The extent to which the alliance of finance and government has corrupted society on a global basis is, as I see it, the root problem to be addressed before any other. I don’t have a detailed proposal; I have been vocal in other forums about the effect of our economic structure on our societal outcomes. I do not think government subsidies of any fuels are the answer; private capital should take that risk. But if ever we needed a zero tolerance policy toward something, it is fossil fuels. The first step is to remove the influence of money from our political system; otherwise we are just continuing the practices that brought us where we are today.

Economists, high priests of the spirituality of money, who have the power to commune with the unseen hand of the marketplace, traditionally measure the status of human development by Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita. Using this measure, there is strong correlation between GDP and energy consumption.

An alternative model published by the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) is the Human Development Index (HDI). The HDI is the signature trademark of the Human Development Report (HDR), an independent report commissioned by the UNDP that is written by a team of scholars, development practitioners and members of the Human Development Report Office of UNDP. The HDI has had a significant impact on drawing the attention of governments, corporations and international organizations to aspects of development that focus on the expansion of choices and freedoms, not just income.

The HDI measures the average achievements in a country in three basic dimensions of human development:
A long and healthy life, as measured by life expectancy at birth;
Knowledge, as measured by the adult literacy rate;
A decent standard of living, as measured by GDP per capita in Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) terms in US dollars.

It is interesting that initially, the HDI rises with an increase in per capita energy consumption, but after this initial rise increasing energy consumption does not increase HDI.

This is one model of alternative methods of measuring our well being. There are others; the point being that we need not blindly accept the mythology of the marketplace in human well being. We need to do more than shift our priorities; we need a fundamental shift in how we vision our relationship with the earth. We can no longer look on the earth as a resource for private exploitation but as a commons for which we all share responsibility. It belongs to all of us but not to any single one of us. Any lesser vision is at our peril.

Sunnyhill Board has Blog!

Sunnyhill Board of Trustees is proud to announce our latest way to communication with the congregation. We have a BLOG.
Just click this link http://sunnyhillboard.blogspot.com/ to get the most current happenings at Sunnyhill at the board level.
We will update it often so subscribe to the blog or check back often. Thank you - the Communications Team (Amy Kent, Lee Young, Louise Machinist and Sibyl McNulty)

Simplicity Circle Recycles Electronics Responsibly during Garage Sale

Simplicity wants to make sure that the electronics we inherit during the garage sale will be disposed of responsibly since most will not sell (if history is any indicator). We have found Agreenspan, a local recycler, who will dispose of electronics in an environmentally-responsible manner. Since this will cost us a few bucks we are passing on this charge as a drop-off fee during the garage sale, see list below. Most “free” collection events unwittingly send these electronics overseas into cyber-age waste dumps where computers are burned emitting toxic fumes, micro-chips are washed in acid baths and then dumped into local rivers. The fees will be collected on the honor-system; an instruction sign, drop-off fee pricelist, and cash box will be at Sunnyhill’s front door during the garage sale drop-off. Please contact Elizabeth or Charlie with any questions.

MONITORS $10.00

PCs, PRINTERS, FAX MACHINES, SCANNERS, LAPTOPS $5.00

KEYBOARDS, CABLES, MICE, SPEAKERS, CELLULAR PHONES No Charge

TELEVISIONS

The following prices are a guide to recycling charges for television sets.

Screen size- measure glass diagonally Recycling fee

15” or smaller $20.00

Over 15” but less than 27” $30.00

27” but less than 36” $40.00

36” and above (TABLE MODELS) $ 50.00

Floor models (wooden cabinets,

on wheels,etc,) $ 50.00

WE DO NOT PUT TELEVISIONS INTO LANDFILLS NOR DO WE SEND THEM OVERSEAS AS SCRAP TO BE STRIPPED AND LEFT AS POLLUTION. PLEASE BEWARE SO CALLED ‘RECYCLERS’ WHO DO NOT CHARGE FEES FOR ANY CATHODE RAY TUBE (CRT) MACHINE (TVs AND COMPUTER MONITORS). THEY CANNOT BE PROPERLY DISPOSED OF FOR FREE.

The Recycling Lie
“We may think we’re doing the right thing by giving our old electronics to a ‘recycler’ or a free collection event,” said Sarah Westervelt, BAN’s e-Stewardship Program Director. “But most of those businesses calling themselves recyclers are little more than international waste distributors. They take your old equipment for free, or pocket your recycling fee, and then simply load it into a sea-going container, and ship it to China, India or Nigeria.”

Once on foreign shores your old computer or TV becomes part of a cyber-age horror story. In China, woman and children breathe in the toxic solder vapors as they cook circuit boards, dioxins are produced when wires are burned, and micro-chips are washed in strong acid baths and flushed into the rivers as primitive metals extraction techniques take their toll on the local environment and the health of thousands of migrant farmers. In Nigeria the imported techno-trash that is not repairable is dumped and burned in swamps. BAN revealed these sad truths as early as 2002 in their film and report “Exporting Harm: The High Tech Trashing of Asia” and again in another report and film entitled “The Digital Dump: Exporting Re-use and Abuse to Africa," in 2005.

Unfortunately, according to BAN and ETBC, this ugly waste trade continues unabated from the United States because the government refuses to ratify the Basel Convention and the Basel Ban Amendment – international accords prohibiting trade in hazardous waste to developing countries, and has otherwise expressed little interest in controlling its toxic waste exports as long as they are claimed to be destined for recycling or re-use. As such, US e-waste exports are in contravention of international law, but not US law, and thus US “recyclers” are able to claim they abide by all environmental laws and are even "EPA approved".

Doing the Right Thing: The e-Stewards Initiative
To help distinguish between these unscrupulous exporters and the responsible recyclers and refurbishers, BAN and ETBC created the e-Stewards Initiative – a program identifying North America’s most responsible e-Waste recyclers that have agreed to adhere to strict criteria created by the non-profit environmental groups. The criteria require that no hazardous electronics equipment or parts (as defined internationally) will be exported to developing countries or be processed by captive prison labor, and that none of it will end up in landfills or incinerators. These responsible recyclers can be found at: www.ban.org/pledge1.html or www.computertakeback.com/responsible_recycling/index.cfm. Consumers are urged to avoid recyclers not on this list including free e-waste collection events that do not state that they only use e-Stewards recyclers.

“We strongly urge all consumers to avoid all but those recyclers that have qualified as e-Stewards. If your local recycler has not qualified for the program, ask them to do so. Otherwise while trying to do the right thing with recycling, you can unwittingly become a player in a global digital dumping game, and end up poisoning those in developing countries,” said Barbara Kyle, National Coordinator of ETBC.

For more information contact:

Sarah Westervelt at BAN in Seattle: 1.206.652.5555, or swestervelt@ban.org.

Barbara Kyle at ETBC in San Francisco: 415-206-9595, or bkyle@etakeback.org.

For photographs of electronic wastes dumped in Africa and China: http://www.ban.org/photogallery/index.html

For more information on the horrors of e-waste export read the reports Exporting Harm and The Digital Dump, found on the Basel Action Network website: www.ban.org

For a list of responsible recyclers/refurbishers (e-Stewards): http://www.ban.org/pledge1.html

ATTN. Editors: Many newspapers and media outlets have been promoting recycling of electronics without paying attention to what the "recyclers" really do with the waste. Please be cautioned against helping promote free collection events or local recyclers that are not vetted as being non-exporters. Please call us if you have any questions in this regard.

Pointers to recources

These are articles to which I think members should have direct access on our website or blog, and I am submitting them for your consideration.

This is a library of UU resources:

http://www.uua.org/leaders/leaderslibrary/55644.shtml

The following are specific articles from the above that I think would be worth specifically noting separately:

This is a congregational self-assessment protocol;

http://www.uua.org/documents/ftp/congselfassessment.pdf

This is a by-law review protocol;

http://www.uua.org/leaders/leaderslibrary/congregationalbylaws/index.shtml

This is a policy governance model.

http://archive.uua.org/ga/ga00/217.html

Thank you for your attention and any consideration you may give to the above.

Next Forum

The US Army operates a center at Ft Leavenworth Kansas called "the finest learning center in the United States of America." We will watch the Commandant explain how the Army is now training the troops in "Nation Building" whereas just a few years ago, one politician mocked the previous President (Clinton) for using the Army for such activity.

We will also watch part of an interview with Gen. Petraeus where he relates some of the complications of the occupation of Iraq. The lesson to be learned from both officers is how well educated, perceptive and well spoken they are compared to the civilians to whom they must answer.

This will be in Room 25 at 10:15

Ken

Big Meeting and APT results are delivered

The Sunnyhill Service auction was as much fun as a day at the beach. It was held on Saturday night.

Sunday night the community gathered to get the results of the Action Planning Team in the next step of the 'bridge building process.'

The congregational meeting is next week.

Herb's idea for a new group

I am interested in hearing from those who are interested in forming a member-driven discussion group regarding who we are as UUs and what we expect from UUism and Sunnyhill.

In order that there be no misunderstanding, I will first state that I am specifically not interested in offering an alternative to the bridge building process. For full disclosure, I will state that I remain unconvinced that the bridge building process is responsive to the needs of our congregation. Our needs are both transactional and transformational; the consultant's report is limited in scope, whether intended or not, to transactional change. It addresses issues necessary to correcting management errors of the past but does not go beyond this aspect to address the core issues of defining who we are as a congregation and what will fulfill our congregational identity.

I will participate in the bridge builder process primarily as an observer and commenter, not because of the value of the process but because of the value of being aware of the state of the process. I will not be disruptive but I will not silently stand by if I see the process as contributing to advancing a forgone agenda from either within this congregation or from the UUA.

That said, I would like to meet with persons who would like to discuss what we expect from being a UU. I cannot be specific in an agenda because I want those who come to bring their own issues and perspective free from the necessity of having any prefixed limits on their concerns. One of my own concerns is do we need a minister at all, another is what, if any, relationship should we have to the UUA. I am stating these not because they should be the agenda, but as examples of transformational issues as opposed to transactional issues such as who should be the minister or how much dues we should pay the UUA. I hope that such examples would encourage others to look at fundamentals and to speak freely in an atmosphere not burdened by an outside agenda.

In order to be clear, I would like to specify that the group would be free ranging as it desires in considering issues, but only issues. I am not looking for the group to be a management alternative or to be mission driven. There are plenty of other opportunities for action driven agendas. Of course, participants may gain ideas or learn of allies for taking action within the congregation, but that would be a derivative benefit of the group, not a directed intention.

For those of you who feel more comfortable knowing I didn't invent a non-agenda driven group, I am copying the model of Calvin Pava, of the Harvard Business School in looking at Task Complexity (High/Low) and Conflict (High/Low), and am using the Quadrant 4 model, Nonsynoptic Systems (High Complexity, High Conflict). It's set forth on Page 151 Leading Change in the Congregation by Gilbert Rendle. It's characteristics are that it uses unclear objectives, imprecise methods, encourages disorderly action, and uses tacit emphasis on changing the system.

Finally, I have been doing a little reading in Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma aspects of game theory, and will use my conclusions from the material to set the following standard for forming and continuing the group: I will meet as long as there are two other individuals willing to meet for two meetings, or two additional meetings once the group forms. In forming or continuing the group I will give no weight to the approval or disapproval of any non-participant, whether or not they occupy any position of authority in the church. I will terminate the group if, and only if, it does not meet the stated standard. This is not a hostile statement, it is a clarity statement.

If anyone is interested, please let me know.

Herb Caponi

SUUSI 2008 catalog | SUUSI

SUUSI 2008 catalog | SUUSI SUUSI 2008 catalog

The SUUSI 2008 catalog will be bulk mailed at the end of March. Until you receive your copy, or if you would prefer an electronic copy, you can download the catalog below.

SUUSI 2008 catalog - without registration forms (2.3 MB)

FORUM

For March, the Forum will be the video of Charlie Rose interviewing the author of the book: The Shock Doctrine, the Rise of Disaster Capitalism followed by the usual discussion.

Naomi Klein says: “The best time to push through these very unpopular economic policies is in the aftermath of some kind of crisis or shock” and giving numerous examples.

Share in the exchange of ideas during LifeCraft at 10:15 am on Sunday, March 30, 2008, in Room 25.

Greek organizers kindle backup Oly torch - Sunday March 23, 2008 12:52PM

We light this ...

SI.com - Olympics - Greek organizers kindle backup Oly torch - Sunday March 23, 2008 12:52PM: "a Greek actress in the white gown and sandals of a pagan high priestess used a backup flame lit at a rehearsal on Saturday.

That flame will be sent to China if storms forecast for Monday scuttle the official lighting ceremony beside the 2,600-year-old Temple of Hera in ancient Olympia.

'We hope the weather is good tomorrow,' Culture Minister Michalis Liapis said.

Clouds spoiled the ceremony for the 2000 Sydney Olympics and the last three Winter Olympics.

But bad weather is not the only headache for the mock-ancient ceremony's organizers -- who took the rare step of moving Monday's event an hour back to avoid rainstorms."

Bridge Building Forums

For those who have something to say and for those who want to learn.

Tues: 3-11-08 from 6:30 to 9:30 pm

Wed: 3-12-08 from 6:30 to 9:30 pm

Sat: 3-15-08 from 9:30 to 12:30 pm

Sun: 3-16-08 from 1 to 4 pm

Just show up.