UPDATE:George W. Bush Library at SMU overwhelmingly rejected (844-20) by General Conference of the United Methodist Church
Categories: Dallas, Politics and Elections, Religion and Faith
Written By: Shawn Williams
The governing body of the United Methodist Church has come out against the George Bush Library being constructed on the campus of Southern Methodist University. This rejection passed on Wednesday morning, at the 2008 Quadrennial General Conference of the United Methodist Church that is still meeting in Fort Worth.
Here is the petition submitted by Diane Smock, Greenville, S.C.:
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…
The proposal had already been adopted in a committee vote ,with 51 voting in favor, 5 against and 1 not voting.
The group’s opposition is centered around the partisan think tank that will be attached to the library. The institute reportedly under the control of Karl Rove will have no academic oversight by SMU. But there may also be some concerns about associating the school with some of Bush’s policies.
“Many are offended by the contempt shown by the administration in areas like torture,” says Rev. Andrew J. Weaver, Ph.D. a minister and psychologist in Brooklyn, New York. “Torture is not a value of the Methodist church.” Rev. Weaver is a graduate of SMU’s Perkins School of Theology, and told Dallas South that torture in today’s terms would be the moral equivalent of slavery.
See more of Weaver’s thoughts in his article Slavery, Torture, and the Methodist DNA.
The decision now lies in the hands of the South Central Jurisdiction of the United Methodist Church. The land on which the library would be built is owned by the South Central Jurisdiction. A body of approximately 290, many of whom voted in the general conference, will take a final vote on the sale of the land. The 2008 South Central Jurisdictional Conference is scheduled for July 16-19 at the Hilton Anatole in Dallas. The North Texas Conference of the UMC will play host to the event.
If torture is in fact an issue, then it seems pretty cut and dry on where the administration stands. Just look at President Bush’s March 8, 2008 veto of a measure that would have banned waterboarding and other torture tactics used by the CIA.
According to the Washington Post Bush claimed the legislation “would take away one of the most valuable tools on the war on terror.” He went on to say “This is no time for Congress to abandon practices that have a proven track record of keeping America safe.”
I’ve always thought that the library is a good idea, but not the think tank. But I’m thinking about from a Dallas stand point, the school should have much broader concerns. Some faculty members have threatened to leave the university if the library and think tank are built, and some students have reportedly returned their SMU diplomas in protest to the school’s decision.
So what’s been reported as a done deal may not actually be the case. I hope to get some reaction from the General Conference at some point, but if not, we will follow the developments at the South Central Jurisdiction Conference in July.
By Shawn Williams
Here’s more on the Bush Library via an email that I received on yesterday after the initial post.
The General Conference of the United Methodist Church did receive a petition asking it to block SMU’s decision to lease land for the George W. Bush Presidential Library and Center. Its decision was only to refer it to the South Central Jurisdictional Conference. In no way did it reject the decision already made by the South Central Jurisdiction’s Mission Council. The action was merely procedural because the General Conference said the decision belonged at the Jurisdictional level. The overwhelming nature of the vote was due to the fact that it, along with 11 other petitions, was on a consent calendar of things approved overwhelmingly in committees that recommended referrals.
Scott J. Jones
Bishop, Kansas Area of the United Methodist Church
Immediate past president, South Central Jurisdiction College of Bishops
May 1st, 2008 at 9:30 am
It seems like a fairly shortsighted view to me. I really don’t think that history is going to judge GBW as harshly as people suppose now. Ronald Reagan brought out similar responses, and he is regarded now as a good president, if not a great one.
There are a lot of people caught up in partisan mania on both sides that is going to look pretty silly 50 years from now. And if we win the war on terror, which is very likely, even if it takes decades, like the cold war — then the people who were most vocal are going to be seen like the America Firsters in WW2.
May 2nd, 2008 at 10:42 am
It’s about time, being a product of SMU, I know old money and conservatives have a strong hold on a liberal “methodist” university.
May 4th, 2008 at 3:14 pm
As a member of The United Methodist Church, I hope and pray that the South Central Jurisdiction will not sponsor George W. Bush’s monument to torture, war, bloodshed, extreme right-wing politics and religion, and scientific ignorance. George W. Bush will never be considered a GOOD president, much less a GREAT one.
To those who will be voting in July at the South Central Jurisdictional Conference, PLEASE vote in such a way that United Methodists everywhere will be able to hold their heads high, rather than be embarrassed to admit they are United Methodists.
November 13th, 2008 at 11:09 pm
I hope that no school accepts the library for George W. Bush. Unless George wants to put it in China. They would probable take it, since they took everything else we have. Oh lord Burmashave
November 14th, 2008 at 8:36 am
i know it was an old message, but Phelps if you see this, how do you win the “war on terror”? And I don’t mean strategy. I guess the better way to phrase it is “how will you know when you’ve won the war on terror”? What is going on in the Middle East has been going on before there was even an America and America is not going to change that. Or is the “war on terror” referring to them being a threat to the United States? Is winning the war on terror like knowing when we are in a recession….we won’t find out we won until much later? That’s fine for economics, but not for war.
And I must disagree with you on GW. True Dem’s can’t stand the man for all he is worth, but even the Repubs have turned their back on this man. Of course historians will not be able to capture the pure loathing that many feel for him, but there will be no doubt that his presidency was full of missteps, misstakes, and just plain cowboy carelessness. But as for partisanship, I have to agree….Republicans talk of Reagan as if he was God, but I was a very young child and still remember “Reaganomics”. And if you speak to any black person over 50 and ask them about Reagan, they have an entirely different view of him than what is talked about by Repubs.