Big Bush library news -- if it were true

Source: Dallas Morning News Blog


"Only problem is it isn't true. Instead of approving a petition against the library, the UMC General Conference on Wednesday voted 844-20 to refer the matter to the South Central Jurisdiction's conference scheduled for July in Dallas. "

Read more: http://metrocolumnistsblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2008/05/big-bush-library-news-if-it-we.html

---

The petition is still alive, but the General Conference refused to act on it. In other words, I wish the story here in LBN were on the money, but its not.

*** Committee Motion: Motion to Refer Refer to: South Central Jurisdictional Conference ***

Committee Vote:

For: 51

Against: 5

Not Voting: 1

Vote Date and Time: 4/28/2008 1:30 PM

Plenary Action Status

Last Vote Action: Vote on Main Motion

This motion was Adopted, with 844 votes for and 20 votes against.

Plenary Motions: 4/30/2008 9:39 AM

Vote on Main Motion ADOPTED 844-20

http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera_mikael___080501_methodists_reject_sm.htm

Submitted Text

SMU Bush Presidential Library Rejection (80089-MH-NonDis)

I hereby petition the UMC General Conference to prevent leasing, selling, or otherwise participating in or supporting the presidential library for George W. Bush at Southern Methodist University.

Rev. Andrew J, Weaver, Ph.D.

AWeaver747@aol.com

(Protect SMU Petition)

The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice. - Martin Luther King Jr.



Submitted Text Close Window X

SMU Bush Presidential Library Rejection (80089-MH-NonDis)

I hereby petition the UMC General Conference to prevent leasing, selling, or otherwise participating in or supporting the presidential library for George W. Bush at Southern Methodist University.
Rationale

We should support separation of church and state and if the Bush library goes on the SMU campus or property it will appear to the country and the world as an endorsement of that president by the United Methodist Church. Texas is a big state; surely there are other venues...

http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera_mikael___080501_methodists_reject_sm.htm


SMU Bush Presidential Library Rejection (MH171-NonDis-R)
Calendar Item Status: Committee Voted (Printed in DCA p. 2260)
Calendar Item No: 1185
Petitions on Calendar: 80089
Consent Calendar: Calendar D04
Committee Motion: Motion to Refer
Refer to: South Central Jurisdictional Conference
Committee Vote:
For: 51 Against: 5 Not Voting: 1
Vote Date and Time: 4/28/2008 1:30 PM

This is hard to understand. Were there two votes, the assembly and the committee and that the motion was adopted by the general assembly and then referred? I can't be sure. It may be that the General Assembly's decision on this is not binding or decisive. It is unclear.

I did not find a text that would have referred the question. I only found the text above which was clearly a condemnation of the situating of the library at SMU.

here is another explanation, which the comments say is still not correct.

http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/news/politics/blog/2008/05/bush_library_battle_revived.html

The bottom line seems to be that the general conference didn't vote on the merits of the petition BUT the petition is still alive.

but that the conference at which the vote was held does not have the final say on the issue. My theory: The conference of the entire United Methodist Church voted in favor of the motion, but that merely means that the conference has expressed his opinion, but its opinion is not binding. The expression of the general conference's opinion may not bind the district in the conference that owns the property and will therefor make the final decision.

I interpret that to mean that the vote was a strong censure of the location of the library on the SMU campus but that the censure is no more than an expression of opinion. That's how I would understand this.

I spoke to an elderly Methodist minister's wife today, and she said that the Methodist Conference votes on lots of social issues -- as a statement about where the church stands on them. She thinks this vote was an expression of an opinion but not binding. I think she is right. She knows a lot about the organization of the Methodist Church and has been extremely active in it during her entire, long life.

Oh well,it was good while it lasted!

:puke:

I kinda had a feeling... Why I didn't comment for a while on the initial "HURRAY!" post.