BYU-I Teach let go

[bluebell]

1 hour ago, Gray said:

That doesn't follow. Civil rights for gay people is only one of many aspects. Some people have a belief system that says that women or ethnic minorities are inferior. In practice that usually doesn't get someone fired, but if it bleeds into work or if someone becomes a prominent, loud  activist against the rights of minorities, their employment could be jeopardized.

By your reasoning, could the church's mission statement be boiled down to "we oppose gay rights"? That's what you're doing with this company's policy.

That's not what i'm doing with the company's policy.  

I'm using the company's actual mission statement, and--using the basic definitions of the words they chose--seeing if the company follows their own policy based on how they treat their employees.  

The church's mission statement is "Perfect the saints, proclaim the gospel, redeem the dead, and care for the needy and poor."  If you want to do to the church's mission statement what i'm doing to the company's just use their actual mission statement--and use the basic definition of the words they chose--to see if the church is following their own mission based on how they treat their members.  

If you find that they aren't following their own mission statement (based on how they treat members) then you can rephrase it to what you believe better matches their actions (because that's what i've done with the rephrasing of the company's mission statement).

 

 

[bluebell]

1 hour ago, Gray said:

Their mission statement is pro-diversity. Diversity doesn't mean pro-anti-diversity. That's not what the word means in context.

How is firing people for diverging from from the company's belief system 'supporting diversity?'

[USU78]

1 hour ago, Gray said:

I thought this was timely, given the discussion:

http://www.grandforksherald.com/news/4303098-woman-who-threatened-kill-all-ya-somali-americans-will-be-fired

Quote

 

"We're gonna kill all of ya. We're gonna kill every one of ya," the woman is heard saying in the video as she leans into the passenger window to confront 21-year-old Sarah Hassan, who was recording.

"I wanted everyone to see what happens to us every day," Hassan said. "I was so scared."

 

 

Rather reminds me of the parents' meeting in Crocket, CA, attended by my father, the then HS FB coach, following the 'straight-razors and baseball bats wielding black students vs fist-wielding white football players defending the white girls from attack melee in the hall,' where one of the mothers got up, in the context of "clearing the air," and said, shaking her finger at the white parents:  "There aren't enough of us yet, but when there are, we're going to get you.  And don't you ever forget it."

One of my favorite diversity events.

Her voice was heard.  Imagine that!  The school year was 1958-59.  

Here's a question for you:  The demographic she represented/represents:  was it diverse?

Edited July 27, 2017 by USU78

[Calm]

3 hours ago, Gray said:

I thought this was timely, given the discussion:

http://www.grandforksherald.com/news/4303098-woman-who-threatened-kill-all-ya-somali-americans-will-be-fired

Surely anyone who threatens the life of anyone else should be fired and reported to police regardless of diversity

Edited July 27, 2017 by Calm

[sunstoned]

5 hours ago, bluebell said:

That's fine.  I don't think that BYU-I or BYU mind that you think that, nor the people who choose to attend those schools.   Thankfully, there are lots of schools to choose from and everyone can find the perfect fit for them.  

Yes there are.  And unlike BYU they have not been sanctioned by the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) for academic freedom violations.   

[bluebell]

9 minutes ago, sunstoned said:

Yes there are.  And unlike BYU they have not been sanctioned by the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) for academic freedom violations.   

Great. Obviously a lot of people don't care but it's fine for those who do.

[clarkgoble]

27 minutes ago, sunstoned said:

Yes there are.  And unlike BYU they have not been sanctioned by the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) for academic freedom violations.   

Note that it's worth reading the AAUP report on the situation with Gail Houston who didn't receive tenure (or rather BYU's equivalent) due to teaching that people should pray directly to heavenly mother and that gender isn't essential (contrary to the Proclamation on the Family) They also mentioned other issues like requiring a temple recommend for professors. In other words the AAUP wants there to be no connection between religious practice and being a professor at BYU. Which is fine and I can understand why they'd feel that way. I'm not sure most members would agree.

Edited July 27, 2017 by clarkgoble

[Rain]

8 hours ago, rockpond said:

I spoke of values in the company.  But I'm done trying to help you understand and you still refuse to answer my question and dialogue with me.

 

 

8 hours ago, ALarson said:

I don't know how you've been as patient as you've been here, rockpond.  Time to move on, IMO 

She just doesn't get it and won't respond to your questions.  

She did answer the questions. Several times. She was just considering the linguistic meaning of the mission statement and answered why that is important to consider and you feel she should answer it on your knowledge of how your company interprets it. It is essential for her to differentiate between the 2 because if the meaning is how you say your company does it, then the linguistic meaning makes for different outcomes of how she should answer the questions. In the end, several times she answered the questions considering both ways of doing it. 

 

Edited July 28, 2017 by Rain

[Gray]

23 hours ago, USU78 said:

This is what comes from letting other people control which words may be used and in which contexts.  Bullies restrict both the words and the contexts.

Yet "[c]ongress shall make no law" ...

Yes, trying to preserve civil rights for a long-suffering minority is "bullying". As someone who likes to quote Orwell, can you perhaps recognize your Orwellian use of language? Perhaps not.

[Gray]

23 hours ago, bluebell said:

That's not what i'm doing with the company's policy.  

I'm using the company's actual mission statement, and--using the basic definitions of the words they chose--seeing if the company follows their own policy based on how they treat their employees.  

The church's mission statement is "Perfect the saints, proclaim the gospel, redeem the dead, and care for the needy and poor."  If you want to do to the church's mission statement what i'm doing to the company's just use their actual mission statement--and use the basic definition of the words they chose--to see if the church is following their own mission based on how they treat their members.  

If you find that they aren't following their own mission statement (based on how they treat members) then you can rephrase it to what you believe better matches their actions (because that's what i've done with the rephrasing of the company's mission statement).

 

The church's mission statement must really be "fire employees who support gay rights." At least, using your reasoning, it must be.

[Gray]

23 hours ago, bluebell said:

How is firing people for diverging from from the company's belief system 'supporting diversity?'

How is it not? Again, diversity in the workplace is not about a diversity of opinions, or a diversity of cars, or a diversity of clothing options, it's about a diversity of people. Employees who are hostile to categories of people (that include their coworkers and customers) are not going to be supporting the mission of diversity. If you fire an employee for their membership in the KKK, that's a move in defense of diversity.

It's very similar to BYUI's mission of supporting the gospel. Employees who don't support the gospel are not supporting their mission. In this case, racist or homophobic individuals are to diversity what anti-Mormons are to the gospel.

Edited July 28, 2017 by Gray

[Gray]

23 hours ago, USU78 said:

Here's a question for you:  The demographic she represented/represents:  was it diverse?

The question is nonsensical. A single demographic cannot be diverse, by definition.

[Gray]

23 hours ago, Calm said:

Surely anyone who threatens the life of anyone else should be fired and reported to police regardless of diversity

The person being fired does represent a certain political viewpoint that is gaining some momentum in this country. This groups thinks that minorities, especially immigrants who are not white, should either be deported or else suffer violence. They have some allies temporarily in power at the moment.

Should the person have been fired for her views? I think so.

[thesometimesaint]

23 hours ago, Calm said:

Surely anyone who threatens the life of anyone else should be fired and reported to police regardless of diversity

That and $5 I can buy a cup of coffee at Starbucks.

[thesometimesaint]

24 minutes ago, Gray said:

How is it not? Again, diversity in the workplace is not about a diversity of opinions, or a diversity of cars, or a diversity of clothing options, it's about a diversity of people. Employees who are hostile to categories of people (that include their coworkers and customers) are not going to be supporting the mission of diversity. If you fire an employee for their membership in the KKK, that's a move in defense of diversity.

It's very similar to BYUI's mission of supporting the gospel. Employees who don't support the gospel are not supporting their mission. In this case, racist or homophobic individuals are to diversity what anti-Mormons are to the gospel.

I seriously doubt the KKK believes in diversity. However if my employment required membership in the KKK I'd find a different job.

[bluebell]

28 minutes ago, Gray said:

How is it not? Again, diversity in the workplace is not about a diversity of opinions, or a diversity of cars, or a diversity of clothing options, it's about a diversity of people. Employees who are hostile to categories of people (that include their coworkers and customers) are not going to be supporting the mission of diversity. If you fire an employee for their membership in the KKK, that's a move in defense of diversity.

It's very similar to BYUI's mission of supporting the gospel. Employees who don't support the gospel are not supporting their mission. In this case, racist or homophobic individuals are to diversity what anti-Mormons are to the gospel.

Just because people don't support SSM it doesn't mean they would automatically negatively impact the diversity of people where they work.  The idea is laughable.  For a company to even try to pass off that kind of judgement/caricature of those with different political beliefs as 'supporting diversity' shows that their mission statement is a farce.  It has nothing to do with supporting diversity.  It's all about rewarding those who agree with the political beliefs of the company and punishing those that don't.

 

 

[bluebell]

27 minutes ago, Gray said:

The person being fired does represent a certain political viewpoint that is gaining some momentum in this country. This groups thinks that minorities, especially immigrants who are not white, should either be deported or else suffer violence. They have some allies temporarily in power at the moment.

Should the person have been fired for her views? I think so.

No, they shouldn't be fired for their views.  They should be fired for threatening customers.  I don't want employers trying to police people's views.  It's an insane idea.

[bluebell]

1 hour ago, Gray said:

The church's mission statement must really be "fire employees who support gay rights." At least, using your reasoning, it must be.

 You can't just say it though.  You have to show how their actions prove that their current mission statement is not true.  

Which parts of their current mission statement are they not fulfilling?

[why me]

1 hour ago, Gray said:

How is it not? Again, diversity in the workplace is not about a diversity of opinions, or a diversity of cars, or a diversity of clothing options, it's about a diversity of people. Employees who are hostile to categories of people (that include their coworkers and customers) are not going to be supporting the mission of diversity. If you fire an employee for their membership in the KKK, that's a move in defense of diversity.

It's very similar to BYUI's mission of supporting the gospel. Employees who don't support the gospel are not supporting their mission. In this case, racist or homophobic individuals are to diversity what anti-Mormons are to the gospel.

Your post is a little confusing. Lets look at london. London seems to be very homophobic when compared to the rest of the UK. And yet, london is very diverse when it comes to people and cultures. What does this mean for diversity? It means that diversity can bring intolerance if cultures are intolerant in their diversity. Should companies hire muslims? Muslims, although quiet politically in the US and in Europe, are generally not supporters of gay rights. And they can be homophobic. So, why should a company hire muslims?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/johann-hari/can-we-finally-talk-about_b_828037.html

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/muslim-leaders-make-formal-complaint-after-islamophobic-banners-spotted-at-london-pride-a3587351.html

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/muslim-gay-wedding-couple-uk-first-online-abuse-jahed-choudhury-sean-rogan-walsall-west-midlands-a7836936.html

Diversity is not so marvelous if diversity of cultures bring less tolerance because that culture has intolerance toward others. And of course we have the jews of europe suffering from muslim intolerance too.

http://www.timesofisrael.com/german-jews-fear-growing-muslim-anti-semitism/

And if mormons have a prophet named Joseph Smith, who is on par with Mohammed or his better, how would mormons survive such diversity of people?

https://www.lds.org/ensign/1972/03/islam-and-mormonism-a-comparison?lang=eng

 

Edited July 28, 2017 by why me

[Hamba Tuhan]

5 hours ago, bluebell said:

Just because people don't support SSM it doesn't mean they would automatically negatively impact the diversity of people where they work.  The idea is laughable.

One of my best mates from our ward has a brother who is gay but adamantly opposes same-sex marriage. According to Gray's logic, this gay man could (and probably should?) be fired from certain businesses for 'not supporting diversity'. 

[rockpond]

18 hours ago, Gray said:

How is it not? Again, diversity in the workplace is not about a diversity of opinions, or a diversity of cars, or a diversity of clothing options, it's about a diversity of people. Employees who are hostile to categories of people (that include their coworkers and customers) are not going to be supporting the mission of diversity. If you fire an employee for their membership in the KKK, that's a move in defense of diversity.

It's very similar to BYUI's mission of supporting the gospel. Employees who don't support the gospel are not supporting their mission. In this case, racist or homophobic individuals are to diversity what anti-Mormons are to the gospel.

Gray -- You've done a great job of explaining the concept of diversity.  Thanks. 

[Jeanne]

33 minutes ago, rockpond said:

Gray -- You've done a great job of explaining the concept of diversity.  Thanks. 

I agree.  It is clear and precise in how diversity is interpreted in different aspects of life. 

[USU78]

Diversity is, to those who aren't preferred, a matter of compulsory compliance with a permitted set of beliefs, behaviors and vocabulary. And the beatings will continue until morale improves.

[rockpond]

1 hour ago, USU78 said:

Diversity is, to those who aren't preferred, a matter of compulsory compliance with a permitted set of beliefs, behaviors and vocabulary. And the beatings will continue until morale improves.

In a sense you are correct:  Diversity is not a participation ribbon awarded solely for showing up.  It needs to mean something. 

NOTE: due to a string of diverse complaints the thread is closed.