This dissertation focuses specifically on the question: flow has the General Conference of the United Methodist Church (UMC) responded to the disability rights movement in the United States? There are approximately 50 million people in the U.S. classified as "disabled." Despite the large and ubiquitous nature of this population, people with disabilities remain among the most marginalized groups in the U.S. with little social and economic power. The disability rights movement that began in the late 1960's and early 1970's is a response to the norms of charity, stigma, segregation, and custodial care that characterize the history of disability. The operative role of religion in the social construction of disability is of primary concern in this project. This dissertation explores how the top legislative assembly for the UMC, where people with disabilities have had little representation, has understood and responded to the disability rights movement from 1968 to 2004. As a part of this focus, I present a history of the disability rights movement in the U.S., analyze how the disability community has engaged the struggle for self-definition and full participation, and provide some background on disability studies and religion. This background includes a review of what some other denominations have done in terms of responses to disability rights. In the analysis of the UMC, I utilize the primary source documents of the General Conference, namely the Book of Discipline, the Book of Resolutions, the Daily Christian Advocate, and the Journal of the General Conference. This study analyzes 10 General Conferences over a period of 36 years. In addition, I also included two ancillary data sources: a) phone interviews with the leaders of the Association of Physically Challenged Ministers of the UMC and b) a small sample survey of laity with disabilities and General and Jurisdictional Conference delegates from the Mississippi Annual Conference of the UMC. This research confirmed my original hypothesis that the General Conference has not defined disability as a category or movement in the same way it has done with other categories and rights movements, such as the Civil Rights Movement or the Women's Movement.