⇒ MAIN INDEX ⇒ MC FAQ ⇒ CONTACT ME ⇒ 306 TOPICS ⇒ EX-MORMON FORUMS |
|
|
 Join the Blue Ribbon Online Free Speech Campaign! |
© 2005-2010 Compiled With: Caligra 2.0.1 ALPHA |
Containing 4,172 Articles Spanning 306 Topics Ex-Mormon News, Stories And Recovery Online Since January 1, 2005 |
|
PLEASE NOTE:
If you have reached this page from an outside source such as an
Internet Search or forum referral, please note that this page
(the one you just landed on)
is an archive containing articles on
"BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY - SECTION 2".
This website,
The Mormon Curtain
- is a website that blogs the Ex-Mormon world. You can
read
The Mormon Curtain FAQ
to understand the purpose of this website.
|
|
 | Friday, Oct 27, 2006, at 08:03 AM BYU Professor Rick Davis "We Don't Have Blacks In This Area To Speak Of" In Describing Region's Low Welfare Rate Posted By JOHN MILLER AP BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY - SECTION 2 -Guid- | ↑ |
From SeattlePI.com:
An eastern Idaho history professor who appears to link what he described as his region's low welfare recipient rate with the fact that "we don't have blacks in this area to speak of" is drawing irate reaction.http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/6... |
| | Thursday, Nov 2, 2006, at 06:55 AM New Family Life Research Study Proves One Thing - There Is Zero Academic Integrity At BYU Posted By Lucyfer BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY - SECTION 2 -Guid- | ↑ |
| The Church News for the week ending October 21, 2006 contains several interesting articles – one of which just set me on my ear. My eye was caught by the title – “Shared Religion Helps Couples Prevent, Resolve, and Reconcile Marital Conflict” and I was hooked. I assumed this was aimed at all those LDS couples in which one person wakes up from the coma of Mormonism and opts out – which we all are familiar with here. It ended up being worse than that.
The article is based on a recent research study conducted by BYU Family Life professor, David Dollahite, in collaboration with BYU graduate Nathanial Lambert. The study was published in the October issue of “Family Relations” – a BYU sponsored journal from the Child Development and Family Relations Department – oh, BROTHER!!!! (to read the entire journal article, go to http://familyliving.byu.edu/documents....) The second paragraph of the glowing Church News summary states: “The take-home message here is that couples who practice their faith together are more likely to have less conflict, to reach mutually satisfying resolution if there is a conflict, and to remain committed to each other and the marriage when conflict does occur.” (as quoted by author, David Dollahite) WOW! Now, if these research results were legitimate, that would be a fairly compelling finding worthy of national attention. I am a social scientist myself, so statements like this attract my attention. Unfortunately, reading the actual journal article leads ones to an entirely DIFFERENT conclusion. First, the research questions that directed this study were “a.) Do highly religious couples PERCEIVE (caps mine) that their religious beliefs and practices influence conflict in their marriages? And b.) To what extent, and specifically, how does religiosity affect marital conflict?” Well… this is a bit of a horse of a different color….studying perception is not quite the same thing as studying actual fact. So, how exactly did the illustrious BYY Family Life professor go about studying these complex and thorny questions? Well, he selected 57 “highly religious” heterosexual couples from “Abrahamic” faiths (Christian, Muslim, Jewish). These couples were predominately white, middle-aged (men - 48, women – 45), had been married an average of 21 years, had at least one teenaged child, and had high educational levels (almost all college grads or above). OK – so not exactly a representative sample. Oddly enough, the research study included NO control group against which to compare the experimental group – hmmmm - curiouser and curiouser.... The experimental design consisted solely of a self-report questionnaire with an intensive interview by the researcher. Both husband and wife were interviewed together – even though the journal article clearly stated that “many scholars advocate interviewing spouses separately to encourage greater honesty and to be sensitive to issues of GENDER AND POWER”. Apparently, this best practice was not utilized in order to “allow spouses to discuss their relationship – including conflicts – together and thus be able to remind and correct each other and complement each other’s experience” – uh, yeah...right – that’s going to happen in male dominated fundamental religions – sure thing....uh-huh!!! So – what did this study find? Well, they logically found that deeply religious couples PERCEIVED that their shared religious beliefs helped them avoid conflict, resolve marital conflict, and even reconcile in those rare occasions when *gasp* conflict actually occurred? NO – REALLY????? These couples actually think this is true? Well, waddaya know??? What was even more interesting, the researchers sort of forgot to add the words “participants felt, or thought, or perceived, or stated” when they summarized the results – suddenly self-reported feelings and perceptions became stated as FACT!!! WOW – I wonder why that happened? Furthermore, guess what these 57 super religious couples said were the magical strategies for avoiding conflict, resolving conflict and reconciling after conflict had occurred???? Wait for it – here it comes – it is an amazing super secret answer.... The answer is ----- prayer, studying scripture and attending church. Uh, oh – OK….. Jeez! How come I didn’t think of this??? Of course, the fatal flaw in this so called “research” is completely obvious to anyone with a semester of research methods training - thereis a HUGE difference between fact and perception. What someone thinks or feels is NOT the same as what is fact – what is real – what is objective truth that can be proved, measured, quantified, substantiated! Well, except in the Mormon Church, that is. In Mormonism what someone feels always seems to trump what is fact. Fine for a religion – not so good when it comes to research in the social sciences!!!! This type of bilge would be summarily dismissed by any legitimate journal in which articles are submitted to real-life peer review. The best part is that at the very end of the Church News article, Brother Dollahite gushes, “The teachings of the Prophet are true”. Ah, yes – academic rigor at its best. |
| | Wednesday, Nov 8, 2006, at 07:54 AM BYU Fireside: Stop Masturbating, Get Married, Get Your A$$ Back In Church Posted By Polygamy Porter BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY - SECTION 2 -Guid- | ↑ |
http://newsnet.byu.edu/story.cfm/6180...
Four benchmarks can help church members know whether their personal faith in Christ is being made perfect by their works, said Bishop Keith B. McMullin, second counselor in the Presiding Bishopric, at Sunday's CES fireside, (Nov. 5, 2006).This stereotypical bishop tells the zoobie students how to measure their FAITH. Choices, Devotion, OBEDIENCE, and service.  Choices Lo and behold, his example about choices, is about overcoming PORN PORN PORN PORN PORN PORN PORN PORN PORN PORN Why is it the topic of choice for mormon leaders? C'mon the mayor of Clearfield downloaded tons of PORN and he was still able to function as not only the mayor(albeit mayor of the GI town Clearfield) BUT, he was able to be a stake prez... IF there was PORN back in 1830 this discussion board would not exist as old Joe would have just grabbed him some porn and relieved his sexual tensions with Rosie Palm instead of Fanny Alger. Devotion He then relates a story that makes no sense and relates to faith in christ in no way shape or form... First it happened in 1856, so its REAL current, next it is about a child who gets lost from the handcart company his family is walking with. He implies the mother stayed awake for six days until her child was found. WTF? Like other parents of other faiths, even atheists, would not do that? OBEDIENCE Run! He's got the marriage obedience sledge hammer out and looking to bust some knee caps. He rags on young people who are destined to follow the path of Sherri Dew, the most famous old maid in mormonism, and possibly the most successful. So whats wrong with that? They sure do put her up on a pedestal, yet she never married(her fiancée ended up GAY) and therefore abandoned the spirits in heaven she was to provide tabernacles of clay.. He tells the young twenty-somethings to stop "hanging out" and even though they cannot afford to get married, he's certain through their obedience to mormon leadership, if they will get married poor, they WILL BE HAPPY bringing children into poverty. WTF? CAN someone look up the history of this pious puke? From the looks of his bald geekieness, I bet he had a tough time snagging a bride.. Service Since this is one of his measures of Faith in Christ, you'd assume he was talking about serving others less fortunate than yourself? NOPE! He's talking about service as in attendance at LDS CHURCH SERVICE(s), e.g. being an active mormon. WTF? What about service to your fellow human? "Unchecked by faith in Christ as the redeemer of mankind, this secular or natural world produces men and women who are proud, obsessed with self, overly competitive, reactionary, fiercely independent, driven by desires, appetites and worldly acclaim"Huh, sounds like Sherri Dew: http://www.deseretmorningnews.com/dn/... There ya have it! Stop bopping the baloney, be so devoted to no masturbating that you will end up getting married so that you can have your new bride use her vagina to work the semen out of you in a proper manner, into her fertile womb, thereby producing future tithe payers. Lastly get your ass back in the mormon pew. |
| | Tuesday, Dec 19, 2006, at 08:14 AM A BYU Prof Presentation On "Evolution" Posted By Druid BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY - SECTION 2 -Guid- | ↑ |
| Last week I slipped behind the Zion Curtain, (used a back road,) to attend a NSTA science convention in SLC, UT. Held at the Salt Palace, presenters from all over the US were there. I had intended not to attend a BYU presentation on “Evolution” figuring it would be Adam and Eve and 7,000-year-old stuff. But, out of curiosity I walked in late from another presentation to see some thing I never thought I would. There was this BYU professor right up in front of god, a large crowd and everybody, teaching man from monkey- evolution straight up. We were only two blocks away from the COB. I half expected exCIA security types to be recording from the shadows this blasphemy for use at his tribunal. He had set up on the audience tables about 6 or 8 complete sets of the standard plastic early human evolution skulls that are used by the rest of the world to show our primate heritage and he was talking through some finer points of human evolutionary biology. I was stunned.
After the session and the crowd had dispersed some, I talked to him and mentioned I was surprised to see him teaching human evolution so openly considering that BYU was not known for it’s academic freedom. He said that he had worked at BYU for over 30 years and had been called in a number of times- like recently when he had debated on radio a creationist and BYU felt he was crossing the line because people might have considered his defense of evolution to be an official church position. He did mentioned once a GA had called him on his open teaching but it seems he has continued to teach real science anyway. (How did he escape the September 7?) He had written a small book (that he was not selling) from which he quoted to the small after crowd that had gathered, what he considered the official church position. A verse from genesis and a statement that man was made in gods image. He concluded this did not exclude evolution. My question to him was how could he reconcile this with the fact that on the other side of BYU campus from him religion professors were teaching the earth was 7,000 years old and we most certainly did not come from monkeys. And back in the 30s, 40’s and 50’s the Church was pounding the pulpit with the same message that creationists are spouting today. He suggested that the church had in the early 1900’s accidentally “ painted its self into a corner and had been trying to get out ever since”. (Not very hard, I thought). He mentioned that things were improving and recounted how in years past he could hardly sit through a BYU faculty meeting with out someone getting up and tearfully bearing their testimony and saying how they needed to get rid of those atheist scientists on campus who were teaching evolution. But now if something like that were to happen in a faculty meeting, they would be considered out of line. I guess that is progress. One of his disciples (if vigorous head nodding makes one such) volunteered “some people have left the church over evolution when they didn’t even need to. But that wasn’t the real reason they left…” (Of course not… they must have sinned). I was thinking yes, that was actually one of the reasons I left, and he was right it wasn’t the only reason. I left because I expected god’s one true church would be correct about how the world worked. They’d be social moral front runners. They’d be right often and right first. Not bring up the rear on science or civil rights. I left because god’s one true church would not do any back peddling on new world archeology or genetics to try and keep afloat their most sacred sinking Book of Mormon. There’d be no back peddling excuses for past prophet’s contractions to modern teachings, the shear volume of which makes it obvious these men were simply wrong. Wrong way too much and way too often to use the excuse “Oh we have to remember they were just human ” I left because their “new revelation” does not look like new knowledge, but simply a reluctant caving in on past doctrine as they drag their feet on issues in which you’d think gods true church would lead…. I applaud the BYU professor for teaching human evolution as he does. To the official Church Secret Service assigned to lurk on our board: I am sure the church knows who he is already, no need to return and report. But I don’t want to send any more grief his way. So I won’t mention his name. I suspect he is left alone because BYU could lose accreditation if they fired him just for teaching accepted science. Besides they might need him some day. The church has been officially quiet on evolution for years, knowing that to take any stance would drive a wedge in the church. But someday in the future when my mother’s young earth generation has died off, the church will spin a twist and let it appear as if they had always allowed people to believe either way, much like the Catholics have done. And this guy will be the shinning proof. But it is way too early for them to embrace evolution right now, even my uber-TBM Mom could not handle that. Meanwhile, in spite of a few brave souls, the predominant perception in thechurch is still a straight reject of evolution. This causes a leak- a moderate but significant intellectual mind drain from church membership which might other wise have stayed in the fold. So they are stuck, they are damned if they do …damned if they don’t. Just plain damned in so many ways. I am safely home from the conference now. Park City where I stayed with my son, is a breath of fresh air. I can’t see anywhere else in Utah I would move to on purpose. I loved the Blue Boutique bill board on I-15. You can get CTL rings there by the way and there is soft porn in the back room. Downtown Sugarhouse. Ok, maybe I could live in Sugarhouse. There must be people out there who have taken this guy’s YBU classes. Anyone get it straight up at god’s own university? How many are still hearing the 7,000-year-old earth doctrine from religion professors? |
| | Thursday, Apr 5, 2007, at 06:50 AM Free Speech Closes Early At BYU Posted By Bryan Young and Steven Greenstreet BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY - SECTION 2 -Guid- | ↑ |
From the Huffington Post:
The campus of Brigham Young University was electric with controversy today as it was the site of two protests surrounding Dick Cheney's upcoming visit to speak at their commencement ceremony.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bryan-y... |
| | Monday, Apr 30, 2007, at 08:45 AM BYU Grads Admonished To Pay Their Tithing And Students Who Signed Anti-Cheney Petition - Put On Don't Hire List Posted By tol BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY - SECTION 2 -Guid- | ↑ |
| For those of you who read my response to "who attended the alternative ceremony" - you know that my daughter and I did. I loved it - so much passion, so much creative energy. It reminded me for just a second of the positive side of the 60's anti-war movement. I remembered feeling the passion and excitement of believing we could change the world for the better.
Yesterday I went to her convocation at the Marriot where she received her empty folder that will hold her diploma when it arrives. driving into Utah County - I noticed for the first time the emphasis everywhere on family - One billboard said - "you have two toddlers and are expecting twins" and then proceeded to sell the new and growing family something that new and growing families apparently need. Getting to the campus I was surrounded with families everywhere. It appeared that almost every graduating sutdent was married and had a toddler or two in hand. When we sat down we were surrounded with families - large one - the siblings and parents of the grad and all the sibling's children - were apparent. As a graduate would "walk" - the announcer would say something like - Sally Jones is walking with her husband. Or Jim Jones (yes on purpose) is walking with his wife - Judith. sometimes they would say - Ellie Smith is the 11 child in her family. Or Spencer Kimball Williams is the son of (insert some GA, President of BYU Hawaii, etc). Family and church hierarchy - over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over . . . . My daughter (you give them a card with your name on it when you approach the stand) had them announce - Michelle Ross the Fourth - so cute and just a little rebellious. But still - just because she is graduating with a 3.8 GPA, got accepted into a very competitive MBA program,has a mother that figured out how to support four children and did a great job at it - with one masters degree and two graduate certificates - who started and manages a Research Center at a University Research One Facility - none of that is noteworthy. (I realize that many of the graduates have amazing accomplishments and stories - my point is that is not what was focused on - only - were they married, did they come from a large family, and was their father some GA person.) My little family certainly did not fit. My youngest (boy)has chin length hair, his girlfriend was not dressed as if she wore garments, I had on a sleeveless turtleneck under a sheer jacket, and BtC came directly from a day of play in jeans and a T-Shirt. I tried to remember 29 years ago when I graduated at the young age of 20. I was pregnant when I got my diploma and most of my friends were married and also pregnant. Over the next couple of years we all added to our brood. By the time my husband finished his masters - we had two children. Our ceremonies were full of siblings, children, and Mormon sureness. But I can't remember how it felt to be Mormon anymore. I could remember thinking that I was going to change the world for Mormonism (had given up the ole hippie life - but not the youthful, unrealistic passion). but I can't find the feelings anymore - I can't relate. One thing you all might find interesting - is the Dean admonished them all to pay their tithing. That cracked me up - we are at a graduation and we get a tithing talk. Well - Michelle has graduated. She is off this morning to Alaska to work and then will go to Bradeis in the fall. I will drive out East with my amazing, talented, beautiful, smart, and driven daughter (so proud). I hope she dances. It was Eric Bybee - one of the 25 students who planned the event and one of the speakers. He said no one in Provo would rent them space for the commencement ceremony and that the 1000 students who signed a petition protesting Cheney as commencement speaker were put on a no-hire list and that list was given to businesses in Provo. |
| | Wednesday, May 2, 2007, at 08:16 AM Local Businesses Monitor Names of Cheney Protestors, Form Massive "Do Not Hire" List Posted By The Huffington Post BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY - SECTION 2 -Guid- | ↑ |
From The Huffington Post:
The madness continues in Provo, Utah.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joe-vog... |
| | Wednesday, Dec 19, 2007, at 07:17 AM BYU Honor Code Office Handles Attempted Suicides Inappropriately Posted By Anonymous BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY - SECTION 2 -Guid- | ↑ |
| Several years ago I was a BYU student, and was diagnosed with bipolar disorder. At one point during my years there I became suicidally depressed, and after all of my blessings, prayers, and attempts to be "righteous" failed, I attempted suicide. I spent a week in the hospital, after which my mother accompanied me home to my BYU approved apartment. Having just experienced the worst hell I could ever imagine, and thinking things could only get better from there, I was shocked at what came next.
Before I had even left the hospital, the Honor Code Office had contacted each of my roommates individually (none of whom, by the way, were BYU students), and asked them detailed and personal questions about me. They launched an investigation, and I was summoned to their office like a criminal. I had no idea that attempting suicide was considered an Honor Code offense. I can't describe to you the feelings of panic, betrayal, shock, and downright anger I felt towards the Honor Code Office, BYU, and the Church. Their involvement was wrong on so many levels I don't even know where to begin. First of all, how did they find out about my situation in the first place? Psychiatric patients are afforded the same right to privacy as any other kind of patient. That means someone broke confidentiality to snitch on me to the Honor Code Office. Who would do that? When I actually met with the Honor Code Office representative, I was shocked. She demanded that I sign a release allowing the office total access to my treatment records, and allowing them permission to speak with my psychiatrist and therapist about my treatment. I was threatened with expulsion if I refused. Since when does the Honor Code Office have any legal right to my legally protected medical records? I was a very fragile and sick young woman, and the invasive, violating investigation pursued against me by the Office drove me to the brink of a second suicide attempt. I needed help, compassion, and treatment. Instead I was treated like a dirty criminal unworthy of studying at God's great university. I have never written about this before, but a few days ago in the mail I received a survey from the Honor Code Office requesting information from those who had had "dealings" with them in the past few years. Even now, several years after leaving the church and BYU, that questionnaire made me feel like a dirty sinner, even though all I was guilty of was having a psychiatric disorder. One question on the survey asks if the "guidance" provided by the Honor Code Office strengthened your relationship with Jesus Christ. No, you bastards, it didn't. It nearly cost me my life. |
| | Friday, Feb 29, 2008, at 07:26 AM Brigham Young University Kills Testimonies Posted By chocmool BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY - SECTION 2 -Guid- | ↑ |
| I was never very TBM anyway. I was the one at the stake dances that had the scandalous clothes on, or the one in class who would tell the teacher that it was wrong to befriend only members of the church.
I was my Beehive president, and in the Miamaid presidency, but once I got to Laurels, the leaders had learned not to ask me to be an example. Once I went to college, it actually was my choice whether or not to go to church. My first year I went to Weber, and rarely (if ever) went to church. I had few mormon friends, and I usually convinced them to not go to church with me. We would do something else, something fun. Then I went to BYU where everyone in my apartment was TBM. I lived in an apt with 6 other girls, and had to share a room with one of them (she would ask me to turn off my music if the lyrics were offensive). There was always religious iconography on the walls, and religious programming on the television. My first hint that something was REALLY wrong was my first Tuesday on campus. At 11, everything was shut down for devotional, so I thought I'd go too. I had no friends, and so was all alone as I started towards the Marriott Center. That didn't last long, as I was joined by this tide of humanity walking north from the humanities building. Everyone was being reverent, or at least silent. It was the creepiest thing I have ever experienced in my life. I felt like cattle, like a part of this mindless herding to listen to more mindlessness. I never went to another devotional. I hated religion classes. The teachers were pompous and uncaring, and the subject matter was ridiculous. I took one of the D&C courses because I had to, and I was bored to tears and more than a little scared. It was things that I had never heard of before and awful to read (I thought the BOM class was bad). The only classes I enjoyed were my bible ones, and that because we could actually look at historical sites and tie it to ancient history. No doing that with the fiction in the BOM. I didn't get on with anyone from BYU. My roommates were scared of me, and I learned early on not to go to my student ward. My first few months there, I kind of did, but it was the least spiritual experience of my life. I attended at one of the buildings on campus, and our bishop was always telling us to get married and the girls shouldn't say no to dates. Then, my bishop threatened to pull ecclesiastical endorsement because I wasn't going enough. So I transferred my records up to my brother's Salt Lake ward (which I also didn't attend very much). The boys at BYU were beyond awful. I didn't date. I refused to date pompous sexist bastards who thought I should cow at their priesthood authority and listen to every word they said. I was told that I wasn't submissive enough, wasn't quiet enough, wasn't meek enough. You are damn well right I'm not! Occasionally some well meaning soul would try to take me aside and tell me how I could make myself more marketable in the marriage field. Be quieter, and don't disagree so much was the general consensus of how to fix me. I made it clear that I had no desire to get married or be marketable in any way. So I was a feminazi to all that knew me. It wasn't all bad. I read all day everyday. I occasionally wondered if I was going crazy. I studied a lot. I wrote some. I worked all the time. I always had lunch on campus, usually getting a soup in a loaf. Those things were good. I heard in church all my life how the world would be such a great place if everyone were a mormon, and how great the millennium would be. At BYU, I saw what the world would be like, and I didn't like it. I thought it was an awful way to live. Anyway, so two years after graduating from BYU, I intellectually found out what I had emotionally known all along: the church is a crock, and no place for me. Thank god! |
| | Wednesday, Mar 12, 2008, at 07:08 AM BYU On NCAA Probation - A Story Of What Happens When The Church Needs A Scapegoat Posted By Bad boy BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY - SECTION 2 -Guid- | ↑ |
| There is an interesting story developing about BYU being placed on probation for recruiting violations for the men’s volleyball team.
You can read the story here: http://www.deseretnews.com/article/1,... Many of you exmo’s who will read this are probably going to react that “Told you, BYU does bad stuff too” or “Ha—this will show TBMs that their gloried BYU aint so spanking clean”. TBMs will respond that the findings of the NCAA aren’t that egregious and that this is no big deal—no real sanctions were imposed. But there is a more subtle and ugly story hear. One that involves the ruining of a good person’s lively hood and reputation for the purpose of saving God’s University from a little tarnish or smear in its athletic program. The violations leading to the probation aren’t the “here’s a convertible”, game fixing or “let’s have someone take that test for you” violations that normally plague athletic programs. Instead, the NCAA cited BYU and its then volleyball coach for “failing to monitor” things which resulted in technical violations of NCAA rules. No unethical behavior or intent to cheat was found on the part of the coach. Simply there was a failure to oversee things. If you read the NCAA report and the coach’s response, you are left wondering—wow—the NCAA rules can get kind of technical. I can see how compliance is difficult, but perhaps alone not a justification for a failure to comply. On the other hand, where you had defectors from Cuba who were out of place in the U.S and they were receiving the kind of human help you’d hope people (and church members) would give to people doing something as brave as defecting from the Cuban national volleyball team, (such as English lessons paid for by a player’s mother, a ride from the airport, crashing on a couch, and a job that paid $2 more than an alleged “nominal wage”) you are left wondering--are these really the kinds of violations you need to ruin someone’s career over. Clearly, this wasn’t your run of the mill “program-gone-wild” like SMU in days past. The defecting cubans also joined the church supposedly. The one who actually ended up playing at BYU had a big write up in the BYU paper a few years back about how brave his whole story was (fleeing the National Team and his family) and how it all lead to him joining the church. If members of the BYU volleyball community helped along the way, is that really such a bad thing from BYU's perspective? Nonetheless, BYU felt the need to ruin somebody so—they forced the then volleyball coach to resign and built their case to present to the NCAA around the notion that all blame should be placed on the Coach. A scapegoat had been found. It appears that the former Coach was quite a contributor and loyal devotee of BYU. From Orem, the former Coach, Tom Peterson, has been involved in BYU volleyball since day one. A graduate of BYU, coaching the club team way back when to lay a foundation for its sanctioning by the school and future success, coaching the women’s team, before leaving to Penn State where he lead State to the first National Championship by a non-west coast team. He later returned to BYU as head coach to lead BYU to a National Championship also. With Peterson’s talent, he probably could have gone other places besides BYU, but he apparantly always wanted to be apart of BYU. (See bio at http://utahstateaggies.cstv.com/sport...) It is probably no surprise to most of us here that an institution like the Church/BYU would behave this way. Despite the somewhat benign nature of the infractions and Peterson's deep commitment to BYU volleyball and his 27 years of untarnished compliance with NCAA rules, BYU felt the need to turn their back on him the moment it looked as though something negative might come out about the School—and as soon as BYU probably saw the PR/legal advantage of distancing itself quickly from the coach via the forced resignation in a late night meeting. Prudent maneuvering to woo the NCAA and its review committe (representing another, very similar organized institution--the NCAA--that says it promotes high ideals, like BYU but at the end of the day, is highly motivated by the $$$ in college athletics). How many of us have had the same experience? Years of loyalty and service to the Church, dedication, and trust that the institution will look out for you only to be blindsided when things get just a little rough, you realize that the church isn’t in it with you. You are really on your own. Disposable at a whim to promote the larger, glorious mission of the Church. I feel sorry when people get trapped in in these kinds of games. Sure, this kind of politicing and scapegoating happens everywhere—big institutions, other churches, etc, and we are all grown ups in a tough world. But for members of the church I'm just a little more sensative. They give the church a trust and commitment that you don’t give to others not really knowing that, in reality, the Church sees you as disposable if needed despite the commitment you've made to it. Such loyalty and belief is clearly ill advised. But I once felt that way too, so I understand how gut wrenching it can be when it is all shattered, not to mention the financial impact of a lost job. There were probably other issues at play here too that might color this story by way of speculation. How would BYU be seen by Cuba if it were known that defectors from its prominent national volleyball team were given safe haven at BYU? Would they let the missionaries in once Castro kicks the bucket? Who really knows what motives Church/BYU administrators judgement. I'm just glad I'm out of the line of fire now. The BYU Coach who was forced to resign made a press release about the decision here: http://www.deseretnews.com/article/1,... The NCAA report is on their web site at NCAA.org |
 | Tuesday, Apr 1, 2008, at 07:57 AM The Pot Calling The Kettle Less Than White And Delightsome: Plagiarism Of BYU's Honor Code Posted By Steve Benson BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY - SECTION 2 -Guid- | ↑ |
| (Note: The following is adapted and updated from a post of mine that first appeared on the Recovery from Mormonism board on 21 January 2004).
The Associated Press reports that students at the University Texas at San Antonio (UTSA) plagiarized wording from Brigham Young University’s honor code without giving BYU proper credit for what has been described in news accounts as basically a “sloppy” Internet “cut-and-paste” job by the UTSA students. http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepub... --BYU: Spotless and Blotless? Mormon-owned Salt Lake City-based television station KSL pointed out that BYU had itself given proper credit to the Center for Academic Integrity for its own acknowledged borrowing from the Center's wording which BYU says it incorporated into its own honor code. KSL also reported that the UTSA student who oversaw the drafting-by-unattributed copying of UTSA’s honor code admitted that the taboo exercise “was an oversight that will be corrected.” http://www.ksl.com/index.php/?nid=148... --Live by the BYU Honor Code, Die by the BYU Honor Code BYU’s honor code condemns “intentional plagiarism” as “a form of intellectual theft that violates recognized principles of academic integrity as well as the Honor Code.” It describes it as “the deliberate act of representing the words, ideas, or data of another as one’s own without providing proper attribution to the author through quotation, reference, or footnote.” Referring to intentional plagiarism, BYU’s honor code warns that “such plagiarism may subject the student to appropriate disciplinary action administered through the university Honor Code Office, in addition to academic sanctions that may be applied by an instructor.” BYU’s honor code also condemns “inadvertent plagiarism,” which it defines as “the inappropriate, but nondeliberate, use of another's words, ideas, or data without proper attribution. Inadvertent plagiarism usually results from an ignorant failure to follow established rules for documenting sources or from simply being insufficiently careful in research and writing.” While not being “in violation of the Honor Code,” BYU’s honor code declares that inadvertent plagiarism “nevertheless [constitutes] a form of intellectual carelessness that is unacceptable in the academic community.” BYU’s honor code further defines inadvertent plagiarism as “a form of academic misconduct for which an instructor can impose appropriate academic sanctions. Students who are in doubt as to whether they are providing proper attribution have the responsibility to consult with their instructor and obtain guidance.” BYU’s honor code goes on to declare that “[p]lagiarism of any kind is completely contrary to the established practices of higher education, where all members of the university are expected to acknolwledge the original intellectual work of others that is included in one’s own work” and that ”[i]n some cases, plagiarism may also involve violations of copyright law.” BYU’s honor code then gives examples of plagiarism: “Direct Plagiarism: The verbatim copying of an original source without acknowledging the source. “Paraphrased Plagiarism: The paraphrasing, without acknowledgment, of ideas from another that the reader might mistake for your own. “Plagiarism Mosaic: The borrowing of words, ideas, or data from an original source and blending this original material with one's own without acknowledging the source. “Insufficient Acknowledgment: The partial or incomplete attribution of words, ideas, or data from an original source.” BYU’s honor code notes that “[p]lagiarism may occur with respect to unpublished as well as published material. Acts of copying another student's work and submitting it as one's own individual work without proper attribution is a serious form of plagiarism.” http://honorcode.byu.edu/index.php?op... --He Who Is Without Sin, Let Him Give the BYU President’s Plagiarized Inaugural Address Before Mormons get quick to point out the plagiarisitic shortcomings revealed at other institutions of higher learning, it might be appropriate to remind them of the plagiarizing penchant of BYU’s own president. On 25 April 1996, the then-incoming president of BYU (and Mormon General Authority), Merrill J. Bateman, delivered his inaugural address to the student body assembled in the Marriott Center, entitled "Response to the Charge." http://www.byu.edu/fc/ee/w_mjb496.htm Bateman was subsequently accused of stealing--without attribution--portions of his remarks from an article published earlier the same year, authored by conservative philosopher Gertrude Himmelfarb, entitled, "The Christian University: A Call to Counterrevolution." (First Things, no. 59, January 1996, pp. 16-19) http://www.leaderu.com/ftissues/ft960... The plagiarism accusation caused an uproar in academic circles, leading Bateman to deny the charge. The accusation was subsequently mentioned in an article appearing in the “Desert News,” in conjunction with the end of Bateman's tenure as BYU president: “Bateman, who served as the LDS Church's presiding bishop until his appointment as university president, was accused of plagiarizing the ideas of neo-conservative scholar Gertrude Himmelfarb during his 1996 inaugural address. Bateman denied the plagiarism charge.” http://www.exmormon.org/mormon/mormon... http://www.salamandersociety.com/foye... --Comparing Bateman's Inaugural Address with Himmelfarb's Article Although the manuscript copy of Bateman's 1996 inaugural address offered a single footnote reference to Himmelfarb's ideas (located on p. 18 of her article), Bateman failed in the spoken version of those remarks to acknowledge his reliance on Himmelfarb's ideas--thus, leaving the false impression that her words were his own. A point-by-point, topical comparison of the Himmelfarb and Bateman texts raises serious questions about Bateman's intellectual honesty: *On Disparaging Truth, Knowledge and Objectivity --Himmelfarb: "Today many eminent professors in some of our most esteemed universities disparage the ideas of truth, knowledge, and objectivity as naive or disingenuous at best, as fraudulent and despotic at worst." "Above all, it is the truth that is denigrated." "Finally, and most disastrously, the university, liberated from religious dogma, has also become liberated from the traditional academic dogma, the belief in truth, knowledge, and objectivity." --Bateman: "During the past two decades, however, a number of well-known educators have begun to denigrate truth, knowledge, and objectivity." *On Politicization of the University By Interest Groups --Himmelfarb: "It [the university] is also a highly politicized institution; no longer subject to any religious authority, the university is at the mercy of the whims and wills of interest groups and ideologies." --Bateman: "The university becomes a politicized institution that is at the mercy and whims of various interest groups." *On the Secularization of the University and Its Hostility to Religion --Himmelfarb: "For we are now confronted with a university . . . that has almost totally abandoned its original mission. It is now not merely a secular institution but a secularist one, propagating secularism as a creed, a creed that is not neutral as among religions but is hostile to all religions, indeed to religion itself." --Bateman: "If university scholars reject the notion of ‘truth,’ there is no basis for intellectual and moral integrity. Secularism becomes a creed that is no longer neutral but hostile to religion." *On the Rise of Radical Relativism --Himmelfarb: "The animating spirit of postmodernism is a radical relativism and skepticism that rejects any idea of truth, knowledge, or objectivity." --Bateman: "The driving theory is a radical relativism and skepticism that rejects any idea of truth or knowledge." --Before Giving Another Speech, Bateman Should Perhaps Review BYU's Honor Code BYU's honor code says the following about academic honesty and plagiarism: “The first injunction of the BYU Honor Code is the call to 'be honest.' Students come to the university not only to improve their minds, gain knowledge, and develop skills that will assist them in their life's work, but also to build character. ‘President David O. McKay taught that character is the highest aim of education’ (‘The Aims of a BYU Education,’ p. 6). It is the purpose of the BYU Academic Honesty Policy to assist in fulfilling that aim. “BYU students should seek to be totally honest in their dealings with others. They should complete their own work and be evaluated based upon that work. They should avoid academic dishonesty and misconduct in all its forms, including but not limited to plagiarism, fabrication or falsification, cheating, and other academic misconduct.” http://ce.byu.edu/sl/policies.cfm#aca... --Fellow General Authority Boyd K. Packer Rides to Bateman's Rescue A few months after exposure of BYU President Bateman as a plagiarizer, Boyd K. Packer issued what some saw as a thinly-veiled attack against Bateman's Mormon critics. At October 1996 General Conference, in a sermon entitled, "The Twelve Apostles," Packer warned: “Some few within the Church, openly or perhaps far worse, in the darkness of anonymity, reproach their leaders in the wards and stakes and the Church, seeking to make them ‘an offender for a word,’ as Isaiah said. To them the Lord said, ‘Cursed are all those that shall lift up the heel against mine anointed, saith the Lord, and cry they have sinned when they have not sinned before me, saith the Lord, but have done that which was meet in mine eyes, and which I commanded them. “’But those who cry transgression do it because they are the servants of sin, and are the children of disobedience themselves . . . “’Because they have offended my little ones they shall be severed from the ordinances of mine house. “’Their basket shall not be full, their houses and their barns shall perish, and they themselves shall be despised by those that flattered them. “’They shall not have right to the priesthood, nor their posterity after them from generation to generation.’ “That terrible penalty will not apply to those who try as best they can to live the gospel and sustain their leaders. Nor need it apply to those who in the past have been guilty of indifference or even opposition, if they will repent and confess their transgressions, and forsake them.” http://www.lightplanet.com/mormons/co... --Conclusion: Beware of Using Packer as One’s Ultimate Defense? Copy That For those troubled by the fact that the president of BYU was never disciplined for violating the very honor code of the university he was tapped out to lead, take heart. If Boyd K. Packer comes to a Mormon leader's defense, you know that leader did something wrong. :) |
| | Friday, Apr 4, 2008, at 07:06 AM Only At BYU: Singing As A Sign Of Mental Illness Posted By substrate BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY - SECTION 2 -Guid- | ↑ |
| The Deseret Morning News (http://www.deseretnews.com/article/1,...) reports today that BYU student Nathan Langford was threatened with a police citation for singing between his classes.
A “self-proclaimed fantasy geek,” Langford dressed in a Hobbit-like cloak and often sang folk songs outside the Joseph Smith Memorial Building on campus. But such outbursts of nonconformity are not appreciated at the Lord’s university. “Officers confronted Langford in response to several reports of suspicious activity, said BYU Police Lt. Arnold Lemmon. Callers were concerned about the singer’s mental health.This reminds me of chanson’s run-in with University Standards for her unusual hairstyle (http://lfab-uvm.blogspot.com/2008/03/...). One thing BYU students are good at is policing the actions and behavior of other students. In fact, they are encouraged to do so. Many of my friends have had to report to the standards office (read: Honor Code enforcement) because someone reported them for some sort of violation, whether substance-abuse-related or merely their not wearing socks (I’m not kidding). The sad thing is that often my friends were not guilty of these infractions, but someone reported them out of spite, apparently. It’s not surprising that this kind of superficial judgmentalism thrives in a religion that cares about whether its bishops have facial hair or its fair young women have more than one hole in each ear. Apostle David Bednar went so far as to suggest that you could tell how faithful a girl is in following the prophet by her willingness to remove superfluous earrings. The scriptures tell us that God looks on the heart, but Mormonism looks on the beard and the skirt length. As for poor Mr. Langford, he’s learned his lesson. He’s through singing: “Yeah, hello,” he said. “Like going against authority really isn’t my thing.” Of course not. If it were, he wouldn’t be at BYU |
| | Thursday, Jan 1, 2009, at 05:31 PM Inside The Mormon Ivory Tower Posted By Eric D. Dixon BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY - SECTION 2 -Guid- | ↑ |
| The Lord's University: Freedom and Authority at BYU, by Bryan Waterman and Brian Kagel, Signature Books, 1998, 474 pages.
Most universities experience tense relationships among students, faculty, and administrators. Many schools welcome this conflict as an integral part of university life. Not so at Brigham Young University. The school's policies are approved by BYU's board of trustees, a panel that includes the president and other high-ranking officials of the school's sponsoring organization, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints — men revered as prophets by church members (commonly known as LDS or Mormons). How do students challenge the status quo in an environment shaped by their religious leaders? People who have grown up in the church are familiar with this statement from The Doctrine and Covenants, a standard Mormon book of scripture: "The glory of God is intelligence." The church encourages gaining knowledge, including spiritual knowledge attained through personal revelation. Thus many students arrive at BYU already thinking for themselves, only to encounter BYU's stifling policies on dissent and the expression of unorthodox opinions. The Lord's University: Freedom and Authority at BYU offers a history of Mormon attitudes toward education, using BYU's past few decades as a case study. It traces the development of the school's positions on feminism, evolution, student appearance, the school newspaper, and other turbulent topics. This book particularly interests me because several chapters focus on controversies that took place while I attended BYU, during the 1990-91 school year and again from 1994 through 1997. These include the firings of feminist English professors Cecelia Konchar Farr and Gail Turley Houston and anthropology professor David Knowlton, as well as the investigation and subsequent resignation of English teacher Brian Evenson. Surrounding these high-profile dismissals were cases of censorship of the official student newspaper, The Daily Universe, and investigations of contributors to the unofficial, off-campus student newspaper, The Student Review. The Lord's University authors Bryan Waterman and Brian Kagel are particularly qualified to document conflict surrounding BYU's student media because they served as editors of the Review and the Universe, respectively. I also worked for both of these papers in a variety of positions — the Review during my freshman year, 1990-91, and again in late 1996, and the Universe from 1994 through 1996. Despite my involvement in student journalism, I was unable to stand firmly on any side of the academic freedom controversies erupting around me. As an ardent supporter of the First Amendment and John Stuart Mill's concept of the marketplace of ideas, I favored free speech and the unrestricted flow of ideas, even though I often disagreed with some of the professors who were fired or were under investigation. On one hand, I didn't agree with the university's actions in firing and intimidating these teachers. But on the other hand, I believed private organizations have a fundamental right to hire or fire whoever they want, for any reason, whether the law allows them to or not. This put me in the awkward position of defending both the intellectual freedom of professors whose views I disagreed with, and the university's right to fire them,even though I disagreed with the university's doing so. Waterman and Kagel begin their book with historical chapters on Mormon education, the development of feminism at BYU, the evolution of the student newspapers, and the student dress and grooming standards, providing essential background information for understanding later controversies at BYU. They point out that Mormon education is based on the church's rejection of Protestant authority in the 19th century, setting itself "in opposition to 'the world' in education, theology, government, economics, and eventually marriage patterns — and [this] opposition implied a Mormon superiority. . . . At the same time, however, Mormonism — and especially its founder Joseph Smith — yearned for recognition and legitimation from the very culture it so fiercely opposed." Waterman and Kagel view subsequent decades of BYU policy through this lens, portraying a university that "on one hand . . . pined for the approval of the American mainstream; on the other, it wants to maintain that legitimacy while preserving the authority ofchurch leaders to maintain doctrinal purity." This dichotomy is evident to students, who follow a set of dress and grooming standards primarily left over from the 1950s. As political unrest escalated throughout the 1960s, BYU's president, Ernest Wilkinson, gradually developed an appearance code that first discouraged, then forbade, long hair and beards for men, and short skirts, pants and the "no-bra look" for women. Wilkinson had a set idea of what he didn't want at the school. "Certain kinds of people who seemed to be oddballs and had no regard for the culture or responsibilities of a civilized people were first characterized as 'deadbeats' and are now referred to as 'beatniks.' There is no place at BYU for the grimy, sandaled, tight-fitted, ragged-levi beatnik. If any appear on campus, we intend to 'tick them off.'" Wilkinson also told students "we want no 'go-go girls' nor their pseudo-sophisticated friends, nor will we tolerate any 'surfers.'" The authors note Wilkinson's evident anti-California cultural bias "that probably reflected the increase at BYU of California students (no doubt too highly represented, in Wilkinson's view, among troublemakers) as well as the increasingly notorious activities of Berkeley students." BYU sought to avoid even the appearance of political dissent. BYU's appearance standards have changed over the years. Women were allowed to wear pants in recreational areas beginning in 1967, and universally in 1971, although denim privileges were still several years away. Perhaps they changed because so many students ignored them: "A BYU Survey Research Center study conducted in March [1971] revealed that almost 40 percent of the students violated dress and grooming standards in some way, and that over 85 percent of that group did so knowingly." Despite the changes, the university designed appearance standards to make BYU an example to the rest of the world of how university students should look. This emphasis on surface factors like appearance is telling — BYU has always striven to maintain its image, even at the expense of the freedom of student inquiry: freedom of the press, academic freedom and even at times the right to assemble. The biggest academic freedom conflicts at BYU have revolved around feminism. This is a little surprising in a historical context, since the church, in its early years, had a comparatively progressive attitude toward women in higher education. However, even though the church has encouraged women to attend college, it always insisted that "their divinely ordained role is that of mother," and couched its encouragement of women's education in the value it would hold for men. Former BYU president Dallin Oaks echoed the thoughts of the church's president when he said in 1975: "Some have observed that the mother's vital teaching responsibility makes it even more important to have educated mothers than to have educated fathers. 'When you teach a boy, you are just teaching another individual,' President Harold B. Lee declared, 'but when you teach a woman or a girl, you are teaching a whole family.'" For decades, the church's policy of encouraging women to stay at home meant that most of the women hired were either unmarried or non-Mormon. When BYU started a new nursing school in 1954, "the school survived only because most of its posts were filled by non-Mormons; all of the graduate degree holders on its faculty were non-LDS. Over time the program was able to carry itself with Mormons gradually joining the faculty, but the school's initial message was clear: church leaders considered it more important for Mormon women to stay home than for BYU faculty to be LDS." As the feminist movement grew stronger and more radical throughout the 1960s and '70s, BYU and the church maintained strident opposition to feminist-supported legislation like the Equal Rights Amendment and Title IX of the Civil Rights Act. Despite counsel from church leaders "that in the employment and compensation of women — as in all other matters — you give careful observance to the requirements of the law," Dallin Oaks announced "BYU's unwillingness, to comply with six of Title IX's regulations" largely due to concerns about gender-separated housing and student appearance. The Department of Health, Education, and Welfare "assured BYU over the next four years that the government would not interfere with limitations imposed by private institutions for religious reasons." Feminism at BYU was on shaky ground, and the authors note that "Mormon opposition to the Equal Rights Amendment . . . would drive feminism in Provo underground for nearly a decade." Feminism resurged in the late 1980s and early 1990s, largely starting with the formation of a feminist campus club in 1988, named VOICE in 1989. Cecelia Konchar Farr, who had earned her master's degree at BYU in the mid-1980s, became one of VOICE's faculty advisors in 1990. When BYU advised that women be accompanied by men while walking on campus at night because of recent violent incidents against women, VOICE ridiculed the advice. It gained media attention by posting satirical flyers all over campus, stating that men would no longer be allowed to walk on campus at night unless accompanied by at least two women, "to demonstrate that they are not threatening." Campus staff tore down the posters, triggering a protest by over 400 students. Farr's activities generated increasing hostility at the school, including her participation in a pro-choice rally and VOICE's "Take Back the Night" demonstrations. She claimed, to the outrage of many conservative church members, that she was "a conservative and believing Mormon and also . . . a committed feminist." She was eventually dismissed, triggering more student protests. Gail Houston, another feminist English professor, was warned before her third-year review to modify her "feminist orientation and advocacy," and was eventually placed on provisional status for a year until the school discontinued its provisional category, returning her to full status. The review cited several offenses, such as complaints from students that her classes were too politicized, with which she had not been confronted previously. She was fired, with much controversy, at her sixth-year review in 1996. According to BYU, Houston had "engaged in a pattern of publicly contradicting fundamental Church doctrine and deliberately attacking the Church." As with Farr, many of her students and colleagues were baffled by these claims, believing that the school fired her for her political views." Others were investigated for different reasons. BYU fired anthropology instructor David Knowlton at the same time as Farr, following a controversy surrounding a paper by Knowlton on why Mormon missionaries made useful targets for Latin American guerrillas. Church leaders released a statement "warning against presentations that 'jeopardize the effectiveness or safety of our missionaries."' Despite the critical stance many in the church took toward Knowlton's study, he probably wouldn't have been fired for this alone had he not publicly disputed the critics of his paper. Brian Evenson, another member of the English department, left BYU voluntarily after a lengthy investigation of a book of short stories he published before he was hired. I didn't know Evenson personally, but his harassment hit closest to home for me. I read his nationally-acclaimed book, Altmann's Tongue, months before the university expressed any concern about its content. Evenson was one of only two Mormon fiction writers whose work excited me and inspired my own attempts at writing — and now he was under attack for his fiction. An anonymous student note triggered the investigation, decrying the book's ostensible graphic violence and amorality. Evenson acknowledged "that Altmann's Tongue is one of the most difficult books ever written by a Mormon . . . but I also think it is one of the most uncompromisingly moral books as well, and many people have agreed." He saw his fiction as a realistic portrayal of evil and violence that countered glamorized depictions seen elsewhere. School officials disagreed. After continual pressure, Evenson announced in 1995 that "he was taking a year's leave from school for a position at Oklahoma State University. A year later he resigned when the position there became permanent." Anonymous notes to church leaders have become a fairly common occurrence at BYU, leading to the fear among some faculty members that they may be attacked for misunderstandings without having an adequate opportunity to defend themselves. Waterman's and Kagel's account of censorship on the campus newspaper in The Lord's University is true to my own experience. In addition to administrative intervention, the Universe practices intense self-censorship, excising most controversial opinions (and sometimes entire topics) before going to press, often due to fear of reprisal: The ever-present issue for the Universe . . . is censorship. Lorin Wheelright, overseeing the Universe under Dallin Oaks, once commented that "we control so much of the environment [at BYU] . . . that the temptation to manipulate the news is beyond human capacity to resist." He added, though, that administrators needed to exercise patience with young journalists, unless the school was openly willing to sponsor "a house-organ polyana [sic] sheet in which sweetness and light will be so glaring that we will die of ennui if not from blind staggers or a sour stomach." On the other hand, the off-campus Student Review, because of its student ownership, was not subject to official censorship. But it is banned from campus distribution. BYU also forbids campus-owned organizations, such as the BYU Bookstore, from advertising in the Review. This, combined with an adversarial relationship with the Universe, has caused the independent paper editorial and financial strains over the years, leading students almost to the point of abandoning production several times. The authors' coverage of BYU's newspapers is the topic they are most qualified to discuss, but here they also show a bias. For example, here is a paragraph discussing a student who was fired by the Universe after covertly working for both newspapers simultaneously: Political science student Russell Fox . . . had been involved with the Review and the Universe before accepting a paid position with the latter in the summer of 1992. He did a good job as city editor, and that fall the position of political editor was created for him. What the Universe did not know was that at the same time Fox was also a volunteer editor at the Review — under the pseudonym Michael Ho. While faculty advisors and Fox had had a few mild run-ins during the semester, it was not until election day itself — as Fox was organizing the complicated network of reporters, photographers, and copy editors who would be putting together the Universe's coverage — that [Universe faculty advisor John] Gholdston learned of Fox's secret identity. Fox was fired on the spot and Universe editor-in-chief David Farnworth and others assumed control of the effort. Waterman and Kagel fail to mention that Gholdston learned of Fox's dual affiliation on election night because Fox left the Universe newsroom to attend a Review staff meeting that evening — arguably the most important evening of the semester for a political editor. In that instance, a conflict of interest was clear — but the authors' view of Fox as a good guy causes them to leave out his responsibility for the situation. But in all, Waterman and Kagel have captured the essence of the BYU experience for those students and faculty members who don't maintain as strict an orthodoxy as the administration would prefer. In a church of ten million people, views differing from the norm will always pose a problem: John M. Armstrong, a philosophy student, wrote that one serious problem with the academic freedom document was that it assumed there is a set of values that all LDS people have in common. The list of fundamental LDS values and doctrines is shorter for some people than it is for others, he argued. "It seems inevitable that, in the coming years, those with the long lists will want all others to adhere to their lists." Armstrong wrote that when others "do not adhere, and the peer review process upholds the opinions of the so-called 'rebel,' there is nothing to stop those people with the long lists from contacting their General Authority friends as they have done historically in an effort to squelch the infidel." Most BYU students don't share these concerns, content instead to follow the administration's cues and at times ridicule those who question school policy. Even so, the church's attitude of maintaining such strict orthodoxy at its college is somewhat perplexing, considering that church leaders encourage students to attend college all over the world. In the early 1990s particularly, church leaders emphasized that college-age Mormons shouldn't set their hearts on attending BYU, instead encouraging them to attend other schools, particularly local colleges and universities, while maintaining church activity and attending church-sponsored Institute courses (the equivalent of the religion classes taught at BYU). This acknowledgment that Mormon students can enjoy successful, faithful educational experiences at secular schools stands in sharp contrast to BYU policies. If it's OK for Mormon students to gain exposure to controversial and secular ideas and environments elsewhere, why are church leaders so apprehensive about students' exposure to these things if they happen to attend school in Provo? One of the most important functions of a university is to expose students to new ideas and concepts, to challenge and stimulate, to provoke and sometimes disturb. With such a large support base in place, Provo seems to me to be the safest place for Mormon students to confront the unfamiliar. At any rate, surely the church is strong enough to manage campus tension without squelching dissent. After all, many other universities do, even those that don't claim to be "the Lord's University." (Printed in Liberty, May 1999 issue.) http://www.shrubwalkers.com/prose/eri... |
 | Monday, Feb 16, 2009, at 08:08 AM Was Scott Woodward Actually Fired By Byu? Posted By Simon Southerton BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY - SECTION 2 -Guid- | ↑ |
| Back in 2000, Scott Woodward was a full professor (not assistant or associate) in the department of microbiology at BYU.
This quote comes from an article in 2003 in the Wall Street Journal about the Sorenson Molecular Genealogy Foundation "In 2003, the project severed its ties with BYU and relocated to Sorenson's corporate headquarters in Salt Lake City. The university was running out of lab space, and the switch helped allay any concerns among non-Mormons that the project might have a religious agenda." It seems that Woodward had to go so that the SMGF didn't look like it was trying to find Lamanite DNA. That is probably why Perego and Woodward are so pissed at me. They think that I sent emails to the Brethren that showed that Woodward was looking for Lamanite DNA. If anyone sent emails to the Brethren it could only have been Area Leaders in Australia. I didn't even know who to mail stuff to. By 2005 Woodward was back lecturing at BYU and listed on the staff directory as a professor. But later in the year he was out and his name removed from the BYU directory. Don't the brethren treat their "world-renowned BYU scientists" well. |
| | Thursday, Feb 19, 2009, at 07:30 AM I Was A Landlord For BYU-Approved Housing Posted By Anonymous BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY - SECTION 2 -Guid- | ↑ |
| I was once a BYU landlord. Seeing how the church controls BYU students (and those trying to rent to them) was a real eye opener! I had to enforce honor code issues and pretend that I care when *gasp* someone had a member of the opposite sex in their room. (I would only know this if a roommate tattled.) I saw kids who couldn't pay their rent because they were embroiled in yet another Utah MLM scheme.
I had to evict someone for having homosexual relations in the house (his roommate tattled) Of course, if I didn't do as BYU said, all of the tenants would be forced by BYU to move out mid-semester and I'd be outta business. All of the rules and regulations related to BYU approved housing end up driving up the price for BYU students, who pay considerably more than the market rate for non-byu approved housing in the area. Large, well connected BYU-approved property owners have got to be the only ones benefiting from this system. |
| | Friday, Feb 20, 2009, at 12:07 PM My BYU University Review - Felt Like A Bishop's Interrogation Posted By Chad Hardy BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY - SECTION 2 -Guid- | ↑ |
| Last Friday, February 13th, I had my official university review with Vernon Heperi, Dean of Students at BYU. Susan flew with me to Utah for the review, and a Valentine's weekend ski get-away. She has no religious upbringing whatsoever, and for her to witness the university review at a Mormon-run school was indeed shocking. She still can't believe what she experienced, and neither can I. She told me that several times during the review, she had to hold her mouth from dropping from the questions that Mr. Heperi asked me.
My experience as a full-blooded Latter-day Saint is that the LDS church has an obsession with sex- even more than my innocent beefcake calendar. They don't get off by openly acting out sexually, just by asking others what they do in private. They love to ask the dirty little personal questions. For those who are, or have been LDS- you know exactly what I am talking about. You never can enjoy a private moment without thinking that you will have to discuss every graphic detail in your next bishop's interview. Well let's just say that my "university review" at the accredited Brigham Young University felt much like a bishop's interview - but it managed to entirely cross the line into much more personal, private questions. From Heperi's point of view, in order for him to grant me an exception to receive a diploma because I was excommunicated from the Mormon Church, he had to determine that I was still in good honor code standing currently- meaning that since I was last enrolled at BYU in 2002, and bound by the honor code - up until the current time I sat across from him in the review, I had to have lived the BYU honor code in its fullest. Yes, you read that right. The past 6+ years, even though I was not a student and had not stepped foot on campus until my August 2008 graduation, I had to have abstained from coffee, tea, alcohol, and anything and everything SEX all those years I was away in order to be in good honor code standing to receive my degree. I am sorry to say that I have worn shorts, grew out a beard and watched an R rated movie a few times since 2002, so I might be out of a diploma. If you think this is ludicrous, how do you think my poor friend Susan felt. She is still freaked out about it. My Dad was there too. Imagine being grilled about sex in front of your Dad- and at an "academic" review. I know I am a grown adult, but please! It was so extremely embarrassing and inappropriate. My family is uber-Mormon. They don't talk about sex, period! The whole experience was so surreal and strange and just plain degrading. I recorded the review, and will have it available for public consumption in the future. |
| | Tuesday, Mar 3, 2009, at 07:42 AM Ex-Missionary Calendar Maker Denied BYU Diploma Posted By KUTV BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY - SECTION 2 -Guid- | ↑ |
From KUTV:
SALT LAKE CITY (AP) - A Brigham Young University dean has denied an appeal to release a hold on the diploma the creator of a Mormon beefcake calendar says he earned.http://www.kutv.com/content/news/topn... Note that the quote: "Heperi says Hardy's refusal to answer some questions about his life since leaving BYU in 2002 and the present were a factor in the decision." was an interrogation by the Mormon Cult. Chad was asked "normal" Mormon interrogation questions about his sexual life, masturbation, alcohol and drugs. Chad's refusal to be subjected to Mormon Cult rules even after he was excommunicated led to the decision. From Deseret News: Officially, the loss of membership was for conduct unbecoming a church member. The charges were rooted in his failure to pay tithing, a lapse in other religious obligations and, according to a senior church elder, his involvement with the 2008 "Men on a Mission" calendar.So now you can be excommunicated for not paying your tithing? "I conclude that you have not demonstrated conduct and personal behavior in harmony with the principles and values reflected in the honor code, including the principles of living a chaste and virtuous life, respect for others and participating regularly in church services," Heperi wrote.I thought the details of private Priesthood meetings were secret. Why is Heperi discussing the details of this meeting to the public? |
| | Wednesday, Apr 8, 2009, at 07:47 AM Apostles, Not Apostates: BYU Paper's Ungodly Typo Posted By Google BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY - SECTION 2 -Guid- | ↑ |
From Google (Associated Press):
PROVO, Utah (AP) — Thousands of issues of Brigham Young University's student newspaper were pulled from newsstands because a front-page photo caption misidentified leaders of the Mormon church as apostates instead of apostles.http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/a... |
| | Monday, May 11, 2009, at 09:16 AM Reason 4,593 Not To Attend BYU Posted By Clusterfetch BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY - SECTION 2 -Guid- | ↑ |
| You would be in school with the one Kenneth Clark and his ilk. Kenneth apparently has problems keeping his thoughts pure and has grown tired of constantly averting his eyes from the temptations of the flesh that abound on the campus of the Lord's university. Particularly threatening to his eternal salvation are "unnecessary displays of bosoms" (as opposed to the necessary displays, which are, of course, harmless).
Well, he isn't going to take it any more, so he has lashed out at the parties responsible for his thoughts and temptations - women. You see, they have been thoughtlessly disrespecting his desire to keep his thoughts pure by wearing shirts that show a little cleavage (which he helplessly notices, BKP patented rapid eye aversion techniques notwithstanding) and utterly failing in their responsibilities of keeping Kenneth's thoughts clean and his environment in a state that he would find temptation free. His wife is equally appalled, obviously not confident that Kenneth will be able to withstand the fiery darts of the devil - at least not those in cleavage form. Like her hubby, she also lays the blame at the feet of the women Kenneth happens to see when he walks around campus each day and not with Kenneth himself. Here's his thoughtful editorial from today's Daily Universe: No low necklines!Kenneth Clark, Orange, Calif. http://newsnet.byu.edu/story.cfm/7241... |
| | Friday, Nov 6, 2009, at 08:28 AM BYU Is Shutting Down Its Women's Research Institute Posted By Bringitdown BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY - SECTION 2 -Guid- | ↑ |
| http://news.byu.edu/archive09-Oct-wom...
What a joke. BYU would be laughable if it weren't tragic. "As part of the reorganization, the Women’s Research Institute will be discontinued, ... Additionally, the Women’s Studies minor, which had been administered by the institute, will now be administered by the College of Family, Home and Social Sciences." So to translate that out of newspeak, BYU is saying "Instead of having an entire Research Institute devoted to learning, we've decided to abolish it and make anyone who wishes to minor in Women's Studies do so through the College of Being a Good Housewife" Only in mormondom can a discontinuation of a research institute be a reorganization that "will result in significantly expanded resources for research and creative activities pertaining to women." And yet somehow mormons have this view that BYU is some 'Harvard of the west' type super-school where real academics are important. It's really no surprise to me that a church which (as of 2003) is still teaching women that their divine role consists of "cooking meals, washing dishes, making beds for one’s precious husband and children" wouldn't value having a feminist academic wing at its flagship university. (See http://institute.lds.org/manuals/eter...) |
| | Wednesday, Jun 23, 2010, at 10:32 PM LDS News Of The Weird: BYU-Idaho Institutes Faculty Snitch Hotline Posted By peter_mary BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY - SECTION 2 -Guid- | ↑ |
| My wife has a client who is on the faculty at BYU-I, who keeps her informed on all the latest and greatest mandates coming down from on high courtesy of Kim Clark, president of BYU-Idaho. The latest? A hotline that all faculty and staff can use to anonymously report any behavior they observe in which another faculty member fails to live up to the standards expected of a temple endowed employee of BYU-I. It's a 24 hour hotline, and employees are expected to use it if they observe untoward behavior at a grocery story, a football game, in the privacy of someone else's home...doesn't matter. God...er, I mean, Kim Clark et al want to know if ANYONE is at ANY TIME doing ANYTHING that they don't approve of. |