Should the seven principles be considered sacrosanct?

The statement of the seven principles of Unitarian Universalism was adopted by the Unitarian Universalism General Assembly in 1985 and has served the association of UU congregations well.

Now there is talk of messing with it by adding new principles. As Rev. Denise D Tracy has written the seven principles should be considered immutable and unchangeable. Amendments can be added but the original seven principles which were developed over 9 years of study and discernment should be considered sacrosanct.

Unitarian Universalists do not like authority which is considered sacred. They would rather question, complain, discuss, reason, and argue. This tendency to be skeptical, curious, and rebellious is a good up to a point, but is nothing holy, is nothing true, can nothing be counted on?

Unitarian Universalists either believe in nothing permanent or they believe in something true. In the post modern world, sometimes called the "post truth world", there is no truth according to the adherents of this worldview. But this is false belief and leads one eventually to pessimistic nihilism. If you believe in nothing, you will fall for anything.

There is an infinite presence, whatever you want to call it, "Higher Power," "God," "Mother Nature," "The Force," and it fuels the good, the true, and the beautiful. The Seven Principles are good, true, and beautiful and they should be not only allowed to stand, but lifted up as a beacon of faith not to be tampered with.