Free Byu?

[Scott Lloyd]

You don't remember in scripture where Christ said, "A deal is a deal.  Too bad for you"?  Strangely, me neither.  

The parable of the talents comes to mind. I didn't have to consider very long to come up with that one. Perhaps there are others.

 

Edited to add:

Matthew 7: 23

 

I might add others as they occur to me.

 

Edited further to add:

 

Matthew 12:36.

 

You might want to think about retracting or revising your post. How well did you think it through?

 

Edited further to add:

 

My, this is way too easy.

 

Perhaps, to save time, I'll just refer you to the "Accountability" entry in the Topical Guide of the LDS edition of the King James Bible.

Edited July 22, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[rockpond]

Well, I would think that from the standpoint of the Church, resignation from it is and ought to be viewed as a grave act not to be taken lightly.

 

And I suppose someone now is going to pull up President Uchtdorf's talk and wave it in my face. I would just say that, as kind and conciliatory and he may have seemed in that talk, there are privileges that accompany membership in the Church of Jesus Christ, and those privileges ought to be reserved for such.

 

Yes, there are (and should be) privileges that accompany membership in the Church.

 

But BYU allows both non-Mormons and former Mormons to attend.  They just don't allow one to *become* a former Mormon while attending.

 

If the concern, based on your previous comment, is that a former member is now occupying a spot reserved for a member, a new balance could easily be achieved in the next round of admissions.  Not a big deal.

 

The problem (for me) is that the Church seems to be giving a lot of lip service to freedom of religion and it wants to reap the benefits... it just doesn't want to extend them to anyone outside of our belief system.

[Scott Lloyd]

Yes, there are (and should be) privileges that accompany membership in the Church.

But BYU allows both non-Mormons and former Mormons to attend. They just don't allow one to *become* a former Mormon while attending.

If the concern, based on your previous comment, is that a former member is now occupying a spot reserved for a member, a new balance could easily be achieved in the next round of admissions. Not a big deal.

The problem (for me) is that the Church seems to be giving a lot of lip service to freedom of religion and it wants to reap the benefits... it just doesn't want to extend them to anyone outside of our belief system.

I thought I had covered before the question of whether this is a matter of freedom of religion. It's not. It has to do with living up to conditions of a contract.

One is free to decide whether or not to enter into the contract in the first place but is not entitled to unilaterally revise the conditions of the contract thereafter.

There's that word again. Its the difference between a right and an entitlement.

Edited July 23, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[rockpond]

I thought I had covered before the question of whether this is a matter of freedom of religion. It's not. It has to do with living up to conditions of a contract.

 

One if free to decided whether or not to enter into the contract in the first place but is not entitled to unilaterally revise the conditions of the contract thereafter.

 

There's that word again. Its the difference between and privilege and an entitlement.

 

Of course, BYU can create whatever contracts it wants for students.  That doesn't mean that they are all morally defensible.  And that is what makes it a matter of religious freedom for me.  (That's lowercase religious freedom... not the 1st Amendment kind.)

[Scott Lloyd]

Of course, BYU can create whatever contracts it wants for students.  That doesn't mean that they are all morally defensible.  And that is what makes it a matter of religious freedom for me.  (That's lowercase religious freedom... not the 1st Amendment kind.)

I don't see anything morally indefensible about it. You break a contract, you lose the privileges: What's immoral about that?

 

I'll tell you what's immoral: the idea of denying someone admission who's wiling to comply with the conditions because an enrollment slot is being occupied by somebody who has broken them. That is clear injustice and thus immoral.

Edited July 22, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[rockpond]

I don't see anything morally indefensible about it. You break a contract, you lose the privileges: What's immoral about that?

 

I'll tell you what's immoral: the idea of denying someone admission who's wiling to comply with the conditions because an enrollment slot is being occupied by somebody who has broken them. That is clear injustice and thus immoral.

 

Again... I think that students who attend should be held to the terms of the contract they signed to be admitted.  I had no problem living up to the terms when I was a student there and no regrets.

 

I'm saying that it is the contract itself that is morally indefensible.  The idea that a high school kid can enter into a contract that restricts acting on his religious beliefs for the next 5+ years (finish HS, mission, college) or face a tremendous educational setback.

[cinepro]

I don't see anything morally indefensible about it. You break a contract, you lose the privileges: What's immoral about that?

 

I'll tell you what's immoral: the idea of denying someone admission who's wiling to comply with the conditions because an enrollment slot is being occupied by somebody who has broken them. That is clear injustice and thus immoral.

 

What would be wrong with accepting that an adult student can have changes in belief over the course of 4 - 6 years, and accepting that every admission entails some risk on the part of the school (and the Church) that the student may have a loss of faith during their tenure at BYU?  And that since BYU is first and foremost a university, students that lose faith but are otherwise willing to abide by the Honor Code could be allowed to finish their degree? 

 

That would seem reasonable, and moral.

[Scott Lloyd]

Again... I think that students who attend should be held to the terms of the contract they signed to be admitted.  I had no problem living up to the terms when I was a student there and no regrets.

 

I'm saying that it is the contract itself that is morally indefensible.  The idea that a high school kid can enter into a contract that restricts acting on his religious beliefs for the next 5+ years (finish HS, mission, college) or face a tremendous educational setback.

You seem to have a very low opinion of the capacity of high school students. I don't share it.

 

And I don't see a "tremendous educational setback" for one who transfers to a different school in the middle of his academic career. As I said, it would probably be a better fit for him anyway if he has chosen to reject the ecclesiastical underpinnings of BYU and its mission.

 

But aside from all that, I repeat that my sympathies are with the student who wants with all his heart to enroll at BYU but can't because somebody who has refused to live up to his contract is occupying scarce space there.

[Scott Lloyd]

What would be wrong with accepting that an adult student can have changes in belief over the course of 4 - 6 years, and accepting that every admission entails some risk on the part of the school (and the Church) that the student may have a loss of faith during their tenure at BYU?  And that since BYU is first and foremost a university, students that lose faith but are otherwise willing to abide by the Honor Code could be allowed to finish their degree? 

 

That would seem reasonable, and moral.

A risk that the student will apostatize from the faith and remain in that condition while enrolled is one that the university chooses not to assume -- and it has the right to make that choice and write it into the contract, just as a prospective student has the right beforehand to reject the contract and go elsewhere.

 

The university has no moral obligation to continue to provide education and other privileges to one who has apostatized from the faith, the thinking of the entitlement generation notwithstanding.

Edited July 22, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[rockpond]

You seem to have a very low opinion of the capacity of high school students. I don't share it.

 

And I don't see a "tremendous educational setback" for one who transfers to a different school in the middle of his academic career. As I said, it would probably be a better fit for him anyway if he has chosen to reject the ecclesiastical underpinnings of BYU and its mission.

 

But aside from all that, I repeat that my sympathies are with the student who wants with all his heart to enroll at BYU but can't because somebody who has refused to live up to his contract is occupying scarce space there.

 

I share in sympathizing with any young man or young woman who wants to attend BYU but cannot because someone who is not living up to their contract is taking up a spot.  Everyone who signs on to attend should live up to those rules.  I'm not disagreeing with you there, Scott.

 

The loss of credits is a tremendous educational setback.

 

And I do hold a high opinion of our youth.  I also understand that amount of growth that happens in those college years.  Neither of which is relevant to whether or not it is right for the Church and BYU to require such a term in their contract with students.

[Scott Lloyd]

I share in sympathizing with any young man or young woman who wants to attend BYU but cannot because someone who is not living up to their contract is taking up a spot.  Everyone who signs on to attend should live up to those rules.  I'm not disagreeing with you there, Scott.

 

The loss of credits is a tremendous educational setback.

 

And I do hold a high opinion of our youth.  I also understand that amount of growth that happens in those college years.  Neither of which is relevant to whether or not it is right for the Church and BYU to require such a term in their contract with students.

While you may have cause to sympathize with the plight, whatever it might be, of one who has had a faith crisis in his college years, that is not something that is the fault of the university or its trustees, supporters or patrons, nor should they be made to bear the consequences of that loss of faith or voluntary withdrawal from a covenant community.

Edited July 22, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[rockpond]

While you may have cause to sympathize with the plight, whatever it might be, of one who has had a faith crisis in his college years, that is not something that is the fault of the university or its trustees, supporters or patrons, nor should they be made to bear the consequences of that loss of faith or voluntary withdrawal from a covenant community.

 

And what exactly do you think are the consequences that they are being made to bear?

[Scott Lloyd]

To add some perspective to the "losing faith" position.  When I was in a married student ward we had plenty of students who were in some sort of church disciplinary status who were still allowed to continue their degree.  We even had a couple of inactive members who we visited and encouraged to return to the church.  In none of these cases was someone "kicked out" for their human struggles with faith.

 

In my experience it took a pretty open stance against the church, or very serious transgressions to get one removed from BYU due to lack of ecclesiastical endorsement.

If (and it's a substantial "if") the university is going to err at all on the side of leniency, I would suggest it ought to be for those who have strayed but are making their way back to the fold as opposed to those who have out-and-out rejected the faith and have no intention of returning.

Edited July 22, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[Scott Lloyd]

And what exactly do you think are the consequences that they are being made to bear?

I have already identified some: the loss of resources it takes to educate each student who enrolls there, resources that are intended for students expected to go on and make a contribution to the Kingdom and establishing Zion; the net loss of enrollment slots that could be offered to students who are eager to live up in every way to the conditions for admission and continued enrollment.

 

This is getting very repetitive. I've not seen any arguments here thus far to counter my position that are the least bit persuasive to me, and I don't expect to persuade anyone posting here right now who contradicts me, so I think we'll have to do one of those "agree to disagree" things and lay the matter down.

Edited July 22, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[Mormonmaniac]

Who said anything about "wolves in sheep's clothing"?

 

If a BYU student who is LDS decides that they no longer believe and they resign their membership to join the Catholic church (for example), they can be expelled.

Anti-mormons are the wolves. Are you a wolf?

[Mormonmaniac]

What specifically are you referring to?

Read it.

[rockpond]

Anti-mormons are the wolves. Are you a wolf?

 

Nope.  And we aren't talking about anti-mormons either.

[Mormonmaniac]

Nope.  And we aren't talking about anti-mormons either.

Oh, we arent? Hum...

[rockpond]

I have already identified some: the loss of resources it takes to educate each student who enrolls there, resources that are intended for students expected to go on and make a contribution to the Kingdom and establishing Zion; the net loss of enrollment slots that could be offered to students who are eager to live up in every way to the conditions for admission and continued enrollment.

 

BYU already allocates resources to non-LDS students.  The cross-over of a student from one category (LDS) to another (non-LDS) could easily be balanced with admissions each semester.  So that's not really much of a consequence.

[rockpond]

Oh, we arent? Hum...

 

No... if you read my posts you'll note that I've referred to students who decided to change religions while attending BYU but still live up to the honor code.

[why me]

 

 

So, yes, BYU can extract its pound of flesh and hold people to promises that they made at 17 years old.  But perhaps, an institution of "higher learning" SHOULD make allowances for the fact that, upon being exposed to new information, a young person's world view may change.  I think there's a word for that process.  It's called EDUCATION.

These students get a rather cheap education that just happens to be good. And these studentsknows the obligations and the rules that are required to remain in the school. Of course, views may change but if these views take them out of the church, well, the university has a right to deal with it as they see fit. I don't think that it is any different at other religious schools also. All schools have rules. And BYU is no exception.

Edited July 22, 2015 by why me

[Scott Lloyd]

BYU already allocates resources to non-LDS students.  The cross-over of a student from one category (LDS) to another (non-LDS) could easily be balanced with admissions each semester.  So that's not really much of a consequence.

It's a consequence to those who are denied admission because some of the slots are taken up by apostates.

 

It's a consequence to faithful Church members and contributors to the university who don't want to see scarce donations used to privilege those who have apostatized from the faith.

 

It's a consequence to all those who believe passionately in the underlying mission of the university as it pertains to the Church.

 

And why should the university have to re-balance its admissions each semester just to accommodate those who have not lived up to their commitments?

 

By the way, you and newbie have made an issue about the inability of an 18-year-old to make a four-year commitment about religious faith. What percentage of the studentbody at BYU has to transfer out each year because they've apostatized from the Church? The sense I get is that it's pretty low. It would seem young LDS men and women are typically able to make and keep commitments.

Edited July 22, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[rockpond]

And why should the university have to rebalance its admissions each semester just to accommodate those who have not lived up to their commitments?

 

Because we respect agency and religious freedom.  

[Scott Lloyd]

These students get a rather cheap education that just happens to be good. And these studentsknows the obligations and the rules that are required to remain in the school. Of course, views may change but if these views take them out of the church, well, the university has a right to deal with it as they see fit. I don't think that it is any different at other religious schools also. All schools have rules. And BYU is no exception.

 

At the United States Military Academy at West Point, which I visited just a few weeks ago, the honor code states "A cadet will not lie, cheat, steal or tolerate those who do."

 

I suppose if a cadet has a change of heart and decides he wants to tolerate lying, cheating or stealing among his classmates, he must bear the consequences, up to and including expulsion from the academy.

[Scott Lloyd]

Because we respect agency and religious freedom.  

Agency is the right to choose between right and wrong; it is not entitlement to escape the consequences of choosing wrong.

 

And for the umpteenth time, this is not an issue of religious freedom.

 

I reject the implied accusation that, by supporting BYU's admission and enrollment standards, I am disrespecting agency and religious freedom.

Edited July 22, 2015 by Scott Lloyd