What would you like to do re: merging SOUP with Christian/Prog. Group?

[wildflower]

Poll question: What would you like to do re: merging SOUP with Christian/Prog. Group?

In my previous thread, I mentioned 3 possible options for ideas I had for this group, regarding its possible merge with the Christian Liberals/Progressive People of Faith Group (See http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=292&topic_id=646# ). Which option do you like best? Or is there another option you'd prefer that I haven't thought of?

ON EDIT: I also posted a link to this poll in the Christian Liberals/Progressive People of Faith Group, after talking to Skinner. I hope that's okay.

[Ranec]

1. I think we should keep the groups as they are

I don't think it is such a big problem if the traffic isn't too high. Sometimes that is a good thing because it gives people time to think and respond. On some of the other groups, if people don't see your post after a day it disappears into the long list.

I don't want to restrict the scope of discussion here by either making the name more specific (UU or Unity or etc.) or by falling under a Christian banner.

[wildflower]

2. It wouldn't be under a Christian banner, though,

if the combination were renamed "Progressive Faith Group" or similar. Christians would be included, as well as those of other faiths.

-wildflower

[wildflower]

3. Re: renaming S.O.U.P. to UU

Is there anyone in the S.O.U.P. group who doesn't have a generally universalist view (even if they're not officially a Unitarian-Universalist, subscribing to some other faith)?

If there are such members, I can see why it would be difficult to rename.

But if not, what if the name implied generic universalism rather than the specific Unitarian-Universalist faith? But a name that a UU person would still notice and click on when looking through the groups?

For example, "Universalist Group"?

-wildflower

[Maat]

15. Actually, I'm with you here, Wildflower.

I was the one that brought this up with Skinner (go ahead, yell at me). I was just giving up - I love discussing UU-type stuff a whole lot. But the group wasn't getting a lot of traffic.


I just want to thank you for initiating this discussion. I just wasn't sure what to do.


Even though I attend Church of Relgious Science, I also visit my Unitarian-Universalist Church at least once per month. I'm a member of both churches, with the blessings of both Reverends.

The CRS material is just focused on our affirmative prayer and meditative techniques. These two philosophies are VERY similar. Even the Reverends said so - in the sense that both encourage individual spiritual paths.

And I know UUs would be fine with having me post with them. And since I am both, I know that I would fine with the name change.

[wildflower]

4. Note: For people who are inclined to choose "Other":

Can you indicate what your preference would be?

Note that the second and third options are essentially "Don't merge" options, giving alternatives to merging.

Thanks,

-wildflower

[RevCheesehead]

5. I've had a chance to think about this for about a week (or longer).

When we (CL/PPF) first started our group, our goal was to have a place for Liberal Christians. In our discussions, some people asked if we could include others who might want to post: UU's, Jewish, etc... We had no objection, so amended the name of the group to Christian Liberals and Progressive People of Faith.

My personal goal was to have a group for political and theological discussion, free from the animosity and fighting of the Religion/Theology forum (my experience there has been less than satisfactory).

We most certainly have an open-door policy. It's not like anyone has to knock, seeking permission to enter. My sense (from reading through your group, briefly) is that you seem to be happy with things the way they are right now.

My only concern, if we merge, is that we may lose the specific Christian identity of the group. After all, that was our original purpose in coming together. We're still trying to find ways to build understanding between our various Protestant and Catholic denominations - and, I think we're doing well.

I know that some people in our groups "cross-post" (seriously, no pun intended at all!). If you're OK with that, I guess I'd prefer that we keep things as they are right now. At the very least, could we wait until after the election of the new pope? (I'm hoping that some inflammatory stuff across the board will settle or disappear.)

[mandyky]

6. Other - I'm not a "biblical Christian" so a merge with

that group is unappealing, to me. It seems many of us here are "mystics", so if we have to merge I'd say the astrology/spiritual healing group might fit some of us better.

Personally, I'd rather not merge at all, so maybe we can drum up some more participating posters.

[wildflower]

7. How do you feel about the second and third options listed? n/t

[mandyky]

8. I don't like the name change option

but am willing to try to drum up more support and participation for our group. I like the name SOUPers (**pout**) LOL

[wildflower]

9. I just had a thought on this (option 3/getting more participation)...

When DU groups were started, wasn't it said that at some point, we may be able to have DU groups show up on the Latest page?

Anyway, if this happens someday maybe it would help?

-wildflower

[mandyky]

10. Maybe everytime one of our members start a "religious" topic

in other forums, they could mention our Group in a PS sidenote, too.

[Frogtutor]

11. My thoughts on this:

I think almost everyone of SOME kind of faith is welcome in the Christian Liberals/Progressive People of Faith Group. I did enjoy the early days of Religion/Theology when we were all in there together; I really liked learning about other beliefs. Then, if you'll pardon the expression, that forum went to hell in a hand-basket! BTW, I think the only people that would be UNwelcome in the group would be those who want to argue about God's existence, or tell us what stupid sheep we are; that seems to be what the Religion/Theology forum is for, now.
So, ya'll are welcome over there anytime, and I hope you feel the same way about us!

:hi:

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

12. I like SOUP

I know if I go there, people will read and respond to my posts about spirituality with some understanding and empathy.

[wildflower]

14. How do you feel about the second and third options? n/t

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

22. I feel UU would exclude me

as I'm not Uniterian/Universalist. I think telling others about SOUP is a good idea, though.

[wildflower]

25. What if the "or similar" name was...

"Universalist and Progressive Faiths Group"? (Or something similar?)

I was thinking of you when considering this, because while you have your own faith, you strike me as having a universalist view, accepting all paths.

-wildflower

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

27. maybe

but personally I'd be more comfortable with something about mysticism being in there....but I guess this is ok.

[Maat]

35. You are a great poster, ayeshahaqqiqa!

We wouldn't want to exclude you.

Since anyone is welcome at UU, we just wanted to play on the Universalist language; we all agree on each person exploring and being on their own unique spiritual path.

HOWEVER, if a name change would upset, then it's a no-go.

UNLESS, we could add a word, like Seekers on Unique Paths and Universalists (to mean we celebrate unique paths - and to let those open know this is where the group is).

At UU, we have people with a whole rainbow of belief systems. All are welcome. That is the new and current meaning of the term.

The important thing is to encourage the posting - and make the regulars, such as yourself, any new seeker feel welcome and affirmed. That's my goal anyway.

Thoughts?

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

39. That name is good

because it welcomes others. Since I perform Universal Worship and believe in the One, of course I could be said to fit under the terms Universalist and Unitarian. But because UU also refers to a specific church, I fear that some new posters would look at the name of the group, think it referred only to that church, and pass it by.

[Maat]

43. You're right. We wouldn't want them to pass it by.

It's for all people like us - who create individual spiritual paths for themselves. Probably everyone does, but we're open and affirming about it.

Thanks. Keep postin'! I look forward to it. Take Care!

[Princess Turandot]

13. I voted 'other'..

I think the Progressive Christian group was set up in part because there is so much discussion of fundamentalist Christianity in the general forum.My sense was that this group was intended to be both a safe-haven for liberal Christians as well as a forum that would indicate that there's a vast world of Christianity outside of what the media likes to show: the social justice, 'Sermon on the Mount' Christians (and Catholics as well.) I think all people should be cross-welcomed in these 2 forums, but that they need to retain their own identities.

[Maat]

36. You are right. I didn't understand that CL/PPF was meant ..

to retain that 'Christian' orientation.

So, keeping SOUPs is the best option.

We just have to encourage posting.

Favorite quotes, etc.

We are truly open here to discussing any spiritual topic.

Hey, every month I enjoy 'drumming;' we chant, drum, rattle, and meditate. It's great!

[hvn_nbr_2]

40. "'Sermon on the Mount' Christians"

Nice term. Somehow I missed it in my first reading of this thread.

[Maat]

16. Wildflower ... maybe we could change the name to ..

Unitarian-Universalists and Spiritual Independents ...

or Unitarian-Universalists and SOUPers (Seekers on Unique Paths).

The pastor of my UU church stated that both CRS (Church of Religious Science) and UU were 'universalist;' that's what they share.

Maybe that would be a good compromise.


Maybe we should start a post every now and again in R&T mentioning the group.

Maybe we should check out that 'frontpage' option you suggested.

I asked Tux, for example, a UUer, why he did not post, and he said that he did not have a 'donor star.' What could we do to alleviate that problem? Buy him a star?

By the way, thanks again for the help - just discussing it helps.

P.S. What was Skinner's input to you?

[wildflower]

18. Oops, I posted the below before I saw your post!

I've noticed people do buy each other donor stars quite often.

As for Skinner...he was agreeable to posting a poll. Here's the thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=120x33622

-wildflower

[wildflower]

17. Well it's looking like most don't want to merge. What if...

both groups were renamed to reflect their membership?

One thing that has become clearer to me is that the Christian Liberal group wants to retain its original Christian identity.

So...

What if the "Christian Liberals/Progressive People of Faith Group" were renamed to "Christian Liberals Group"...

And the "Seekers on Unique Paths Group" were renamed to "Progressive Faith Group"? (Or "Univeralist and Progressive Faith Group"?)

And that might help make the groups clearer to people looking in the DU Groups list.

Though, like Mandy, I do like our original name (which was thought of by Ma'at :hi:, for those who don't know).

-wildflower

[Maat]

20. I like it!

How about: Universalist and Progressive Faith Group (a.k.a.SOUPs)?

Way cool!

I'm really in favor of the re-name.

Say, Wildflower, what do you think of a post in Religion and Theology asking who is Universalist but cannot access our group?

Or I could ask who is UU - and then ask people to note if they cannot access because of the donor issue. What do you think?

Let me know - can you propose our new name after it gets some support here? How much support do we need?

On edit:
I do get the feeling, because of input I received through the PM system, that the Christian Liberals/PPF does want to keep its "Christian" identity. And that's O.K. It does mean I need this group, however.

[wildflower]

24. Asking who can't access our group...

That is an excellent idea.

On the name change, I'm okay with it but not sure how many others are? Maybe we need another poll :).

-wildflower

[Maat]

34. LOL!

Yep, I'm always for more polls.

Would you mind setting another one up?

This time, let's accept that we want to keep the group, and the groups separate.

Now, let's quibble over the name.

How's that?

[wildflower]

44. Ok, not sure I'm so good at these polls :) but I'll do my best. n/t

[intheflow]

46. Could we change SOUP to

Unitarian/Universalist & Progressive Faith Group? (Not "Unitarian Universalist" or "Unitarian and/or Universalist")

I identify more with Universalism (note capitalization), but also with Unitarianism, which I think reflects those of us who value the wise rabbi Jesus the Human but find the Jesus the God--Trinitarian theology--hard to swallow.

But, really, I'll go with whatever you all agree on. I'm just happy that there appear to be so many UUs on DU that we could have our own group. :)

[hvn_nbr_2]

19. Explaining my "Other" vote

The options in the poll seem a bit odd to me. There are a couple "change" options but no option that says "keep what we have." Also, the option to mention this group elsewhere seems like it would go along with any and all other options.

I'm very eclectic in my beliefs and practices and I frequent several of the spiritual groups, looking for and finding something different in each:

SOUP - I think of this group as a place largely for two groups: the New Thought / "positive-thinking" types such as Church of Religious Science and Unity; and Unitarian-Universalists and any other similar groups. Having attended both CRS and UU regularly in the past, it seems like a slightly odd pairing but it works for me.

Christian Liberals/Progressive People of Faith - This seems to be primarily a Christian-oriented group, although I feel welcome there even though I'm not a practicing Christian. My eclectic approach is largely informed by my Christian upbringing and the Bible is the only scripture I can quote from, other than a few small passages from the Tao or Patanjoli (spelling?). If I wanted to start a thread about a Bible topic, I'd most likely start it there instead of here; most other kinds of spiritual subjects I'd bring up here.

Ancient Wisdom and Pagan Spirituality - I'm more neo-pagan than anything else in my eclecticism, so I go there. There doesn't seem to be any issue about that group being separate from these other ones, so I won't say anything more about it.

Astrology, Spirituality & Alternative Healing - I used to go there a lot and go less and less now. Partly because SOUP and CL/PPF now exist. I think AS&AH existed before either of those and seemed to have a broader scope then. The "Spirituality" in that group's title also seems to be a misnomer now, needing some qualifying adjective but I don't know what that would be. There's very little discussion of alternative healing there, the spirituality runs toward the more "out there" and/or New Age subjects (That's not a put-down), and it's becoming more and more a primarily astrology group. Since I don't really care one way or the other about astrology, I spend less and less time there. There was a time when I would have posted subjects like dreamwork, shamanism (if I wanted a larger audience than the pagan group), remote viewing or other psychic phenomena there, but I'd probably come here with those sorts of subjects now. Some of those subjects would seem to fit better over there, but I've also experienced some hostility there because of them. (Seems strange and sad, but true.)

Religion & Theology - I read it, but I probably wouldn't ever start a thread there. Can't think offhand of a subject I'm interested in that wouldn't fit better and get better discussion in one of these other groups.

Hope I didn't bore you too much with all these words. I guess if it was too boring, you didn't get this far. I'm somewhat curious if other people see these different groups' purposes as I do or something else.

[Maat]

21. I read your post and liked it...

would you mind if we changed the name to Universalists and Progressive Faiths/Spritualities (aka SOUPs)?

Because, believe me, we are all Universalists - we believe in each individual's right to an individual path or spirituality.

[hvn_nbr_2]

28. No objection but I just realized something I've been missing

I don't have any objection to that suggestion, or any strong desire for change.

In re-reading this thread just now, I realized that people seem to be using the word "universalism" differently from how I use it, if I understand correctly. Seems like you're using it to mean "accepting of everyone's divergent beliefs; all are welcome here." My understanding of the word is from the Universalist denomination (which merged with Unitarians to form UU), which got that name from the belief in universal salvation in a Christian heaven, i.e that everyone goes to heaven somehow sometime. (At that time, Unitarians and Universalists were both Christian denominations, although obviously not closed-minded ones.) Some of what has been said here makes more sense to me now. I kept wondering why everyone was latching onto that word that, to me, seemed to denote a fairly specific subset of us.

[Maat]

33. Ooh ... interesting.

Because the UU pastor I was talking to was using it to talk about how CRS, Unity, and UU accept individual paths (or divergent beliefs). Maybe that is how everyone is using the term now.

Interesting historical context, though. I guess accepting 'universal salvation' is, when you think about it, one step closer to accepting individual paths. I can kind of see how the evolution occurred (Ooh, I did use that word, 'evolution,' didn't I - LOL!).

Yes, I was using 'universalist' in the sense of promoting the idea of each person having an individual spiritual path.

Interesting.

[wildflower]

23. I didn't list "keep what we have" because I thought we had to do something

I got the sense that if a change isn't made, one or more of these groups would be shut down. So I was trying to think of what else we could do.

Option 3 is essentially keeping what we have, but would require us to do something to increase the posts.

I've sometimes wondered about the other groups you've mentioned as well, and whether some of them should be combined. I guess it comes down to whether people are happy and are posting enough to justify the group's existence here.

Thanks for your post!

-wildflower

[hvn_nbr_2]

31. Now I understand

I didn't have any sense that any of the groups would be shut down, certainly not from lack of enough posts. There are other groups with far fewer and less frequent posts. Is anyone actually talking of shutting this group down, or was that just a fear that it might become an issue?

If someone had initially started out knowing how much interest there would be in having spiritual discussion groups of various sorts, and had set out to create a logical set of groups, they certainly wouldn't have come up with the odd set of partially overlapping groups that we have now. That's just how it evolved. But I hadn't gotten any sense that any were likely to be shut down, and I don't think we'll correct the piecemeal evolution of groups with more piecemeal evolution of one or two groups.

[wildflower]

32. I got the impression from the discussion here...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=120x33387

So I tried to figure out what we could do to avoid shutting this down.

I hope we can come up with a solution that we'll all be happy with and keep the group alive.

-wildflower

[Maat]

37. Although, Skinner doesn't seem to be in too much of a hurry..

to combine groups or anything.

In fact, he DID say to make sure to take a poll.

Maybe if we just show a little interest, we can keep things as they are. But, I recommend another poll. Maybe we could add just one word or two to the SOUPs title.

Suggestions?

Seekers on Unique Paths (and Universalists and other Progressive Faiths).

[elshiva]

26. Please leave SOUP as it is!

[wildflower]

29. How do you feel about options 2 and 3? n/t

[elshiva]

30. 2 and 3 are both ok

as long as we keep it known that UU is for anyone to post on... I'm not UU but I love SOUP.

[Maat]

38. Wouldn't you say that you are Universalist in spirit, though...

because you are so accepting of each person's individual spiritual path ... because you have explored and been taught many different religious cultures, no?

[elshiva]

45. Yes I call my a universalist with a little "u."

I don't go to UU services or agree with their worship practices...

[Frogtutor]

41. I had no idea there was a threat of SOUP being shut down;

That puts a whole new perspective on this combination suggestion. I have absolutely no problem with the two groups being combined, but of course, it's not up to me. Especially if SOUP can't exist on its own. Obviously, the traffic volume wouldn't change much, and we could have more cross-faith interaction, which I really enjoy.

Do you think you could repost to the Christian Liberals group and make this shutdown threat more clear? I'm probably not the only person who didn't get the urgency of the situation. It might make a difference in people's opinions.

[Maat]

48. All I can say is ... thanks for the support.

This whole got started when I saw some talk that groups could/should be shut down for 'not too many posts.' I posted to Skinner about it, and he just made a nice general comment to the effect that, yes, some maybe should be combined.

Then I received PMs. There were some from the Christian Liberal group (not you) that weren't crazy about the combination.

Meanwhile, Skinner suggested polls in the SOUPs group; so, I don't we are in danger of imminent death or anything.

It was enlightening, however, to see how different people feel.

Although, I do recognize that Christian Liberals really DO need a place in which they feel safe.

If, for some reason, Skinner does decide to combine, for simplicity, then we will have no choice but to post in the combined group.

But, it is true that this probably isn't a space issue, just a simplicity one.

Maybe I shouldn't have discussed it with Skinner.

But it has been an interesting dialog.

Thoughts?

[kwassa]

50. There are other groups that have less traffic than this, and

have not been shut down, or even threatened to shut down. These groups take almost no bandwidth in comparison to just the daily flow in the Lounge or GD.

I think many go to Religion and Theology for the action that this forum gets, the side forums might be a little too specialized for people, and many participants are reluctant to pony up money to support DU.

I also think that people that basically agree with each other tend to talk less than those that argue with each other. Someone reading something they agree with might have a silent assent rather than a vociferous counter-argument. That is the way threads generally work. When there are nothing but like-minded people in a group, there is often very little discussion. It is not unique to this group at all, but true of many of the new forums on DU, and in other Internet groups I have participated in.

[Maat]

51. You've made a valid point.

The threads that get the most posts in Religion and Theology are the ones in which believers insult non-believers, and vice versa.

I tire of the whole thing after reading a few posts.

Peace and Blessings,

[wildflower]

52. I think we are like-minded in one way, but not in others

We all believe that everyone else's path is vali;, that's the basis of the group.

But if we all have different religions/faiths and are on different stages of our path, there are lots of differences to discuss.

This is also how I see liberalism, in its ideal anyway; its basis is one of tolerance, and within that there are many different views.

But I can see how the atmosphere of respect here means we don't get into heavy arguments and that leads to the effect you're describing.

-wildflower

[Frogtutor]

42. Ok, I'm just grasping at name combinations here...

Playing around with letter combinations, etc.

COLOR: Christians of Liberalism/Other Relgions (or "left" instead of "liberalism")

CLEAR: Christian Liberals____?____ ____?____ Religions (or "leftists" instead of "liberals")

LOAF: Liberals Of All Faiths

Just trying to think of something catchy, but it's going to take someone more articulate than me!

Feel free to get creative!

[intheflow]

47. BELIEVERs

Being
Engaged
Liberals,
It's
Essetial We
Value All
Enlightened
Religions


Although I like the LOAF suggestion. It's Biblical (loaves and fishes) but also celebrates those of use who take a lazier approach to spirituality (by sleeping in on Sunday mornings).

:silly:

[mandyky]

49. Hope you don't mind

I borrowed your sig line! LOL