I would like to second the call of Ron Fuhrman to re-examine the CPSP statement on marriage equality. To begin, I confess that whilst fairly new to the CPSP family (Centennial Chapter member 2010) and that I do not entirely understand or have knowledge about how such statements or proclamations are made there are several questions that come to my mind.
First, was the statement written by merely the two executives listed, or in some executive session, or crafted in larger, broader context of the CPSP community? Comments already made seem clear that the statement itself is not representative of the belief and value system of the entire membership of CPSP and there has been a modest decorum of response from differing sides. I also (personally) think some of the language of the statement is not well thought out and I wonder how “helpful” it truly is to those the statement is intended for. But, greater than this, the integrity of the CPSP organization is at stake when the voices (executive or not) of a few with power begin making statements aimed at being representative of a large whole without due diligence or due process. CPSP and its executive leadership down to its chapter membership is beholden to a greater sense of accountability - to one another and to the constituencies we serve.
Second, why was the statement made at this time? The answer to this question, of course, may be easily understood with a response from the executives writing and publicizing it.
But why March 14, 2013? What is the significance? What is the meaning of making a proclamation on this date? Is it in response to an offense? A reaction to another date or statement of historical import? And why are we responding now (2013) to a congressional action made in 1996? It all seems like the CPSP statement is a “Johnny-come-lately” type of action. The declaration coming before the annual Plenary raises its own questions for me as to its validity. Is it reflective of a shift in leadership? Values? Direction? Or, is it about something else?
As such, the timing of the statement is curious to me because it seemingly dwells in relative obscurity with no real meaning or purpose apparent. This leads to a third question that remains for me, and perhaps one that for the entire membership of CPSP, ought to be the most troubling. By making such a statement (without collegial collaboration and dialogue and without any seeming intentionality as to the timing or date of declaration) is CPSP cowing to the same political antics that have been characteristic of its predecessor, ACPE? Of course, this implication has huge ramifications, especially in light of the recent request for a special assessment of CPSP members for replenishing the legal fund. And, for me, it begs the question of what type of an organization am I part of? I understand that CPSP, in a sense, is undergoing an organizational-type of puberty as it grows and matures and in such times there can be misguided moments and desired outbreaks (rebellions) and undesired outbreaks (acne) that occur as part of the process. But, we do well in those types of moments to minimize exposure and strengthen and affirm the unique characteristics which set our organization apart from others. CPSP beleaguered relationship with ACPE and with the organizations and institutions from which our younger organization is attempting to prove credibility and solidarity do not need such frivolous statements made without good thinking - no matter how well-intentioned they may be.
_________________________________
Brad Kenney
Centennial Chapter, Colorado
BKenney@chcc.org