Free Byu?

[Scott Lloyd]

Aren't boogey men by definition mythical? So this one created by Free BYU isn't real, either.

I worked for ten years at a private Catholic university. Some of this discussion reminds me of the various kinds of temper tantrums students had there over the years.

One that had me really rolling my eyes was the year that an article appeared in the student newspaper regarding the horrible injustice surrounding the birth control policy at the university. Some students were outraged - outraged, I tell you! - that birth control was not available in the student health center.

Somehow, their "rights" were being trampled and the big, evil church/school was wrong, wrong, wrong. They had a "right" to be provided birth control by the university and how dare the university be so horribly unjust.

Oh yeah...and the university should be providing said birth control for free.

I could be wrong....nah, not really....but every single student knew they were enrolling in a Catholic university. They chose to attend the university. There were policies, rules, contracts in place that they agreed to upon enrollment. I guess these students were bright enough to gain admittance to the university but not bright enough to understand that a Catholic university would uphold Catholic teachings regarding birth control.

Not only did these students think that the policies they agreed to didn't really apply to them, but apparently these poor, deprived, got-my-rights-trampled-on-students could figure out to make their way to the various bars in the area on a regular basis and get falling-down drunk, but couldn't figure out to get to any of the drugstores in the same neighborhood to procure birth control. Apparently, even if they had, there would have been that pesky issue of actually - oh, the horror! - having to pay for their own birth control. You know - the birth control for their own bodies for the sex they were choosing to have.

When did everything - and I do mean everything - become about me, me, me? That's what all of these threads about how horrible and mean and unjust the church is are really all about. It's all about 'me' being the most important thing. The only important thing. The gospel, the church, BYU - everything and everybody should be just the way I like it, because there is nothing more important than 'me'.

It brings to mind the lyrics of a song on an Alex Boye CD that I listened to on the way to work this morning:

I'm coming back to the heart of worship

And it's all about You,

It's all about You, Jesus

I'm sorry, Lord, for the thing I've made it

When it's all about You,

It's all about You, Jesus

So many people today are instead singing "It's all about me".

Those are beautiful lyrics. Thank you for posting them.

I hope you won't think it too inappropriate of me if I post another song, far less sublime, but also with a very pointed message that I think applies to this whole "Free BYU" brouhaha. It's

And to Analytics: If Notre Dame were to have an enrollment policy similar to that of BYU and were to enforce it, it would not bother me in the least. I don't know why you expected us to be stymied by this hypothetical.

Edited to add:

Turns out the above link is to a performance by a cover band.

. It's not a live performance video, but it does display the lyrics.

Warning: the political correctness and entitlement crowds might find this offensive. If you think it's going to wound your sensitive feelings, by all means don't click on it!

Edited July 25, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[Scott Lloyd]

Excellent point.

i don't know why you think it's so excellent.

 

Have you missed the posts from those of us (calmoriah, Raingirl, Storm Rider, me) who have said it wouldn't bother us if Notre Dame had such a policy and enforced it?

 

I love it when antagonistic critics turn out not to know Mormon attitudes as well as they think they do.

Edited July 24, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[HappyJackWagon]

Not to me.  Not only do I live in the UK, I've not been a member all that long.  And I have had no need to look into how BYU works.  I really don't know how involved the Brethren are in the organisation/running of BYU and how connected they are.  And your posts confused me.  Who does set the honor code?  (BtW - until i read it on this board, i didn't even know there was an honor code - my university had a set of rules, but I've never heard it called an honor code in the UK.)  

They are closely related, no doubt. For example, the prophet and apostles are on the board of directors for BYU and it is not unusual to see past presidents of BYU become apostles or other general authorities. Sometimes a GA is the President of the university. BYU & the church are closely tied but BYU sets its own policies which only impact BYU students and faculty, as approved by the BOD of the university (ie the church). On the other hand the church sets policies that impact BYU as well as the rest of the church.

[Scott Lloyd]

If a student registers under the conditions of meeting with a bishop and getting an ecclesiastical endorsement, then the student knows exactly what is required to maintain enrollment at BYU. Transferring credits to another school may be a bother, but it can and should be done if only for the reason of maintaining the personal integrity of the student and institutional integrity of the school. BYU=LDS Church has the right to set whatever conditions it wishes for admission and continued enrollment without explanation. Don't like those conditions? Go to another school. There are many. Why would you want to be surrounded by people you believe are deluded, misled, hypocritical, or brainwashed in an institution you don't like which is operated by a church you believe is deceptive, controlling, and false? Sounds like torture to me.

Heh. Indeed.

Reminds me of that book title "Get Out of My Life! But First, Can You Drive to the Mall?"

[KevinG]

 

Here's the recording from the actual group. It's not a live performance video, but it does display the lyrics.

 

Warning: the political correctness and entitlement crowds might find this offensive. If you think it's going to wound your sensitive feelings, by all means don't click on it!

 

Any song that refers to Shakespeare as "Old Billy" gets a rep point from me.

[why me]

 

 

But for those of you defending this policy, how would you feel if the shoe was on the other foot and, say, the University of Notre Dame had a policy that students who converted to Mormonism were subject to being immediately expelled?  Would you celebrate the "freedom of religion" Notre Dame would be exercising with that policy?  Would you think students who converted to Mormonism deserved to be kicked out?  Would you consider this policy reflective of high standards that should be emulated by other private schools? 

Notre Dame is a terrible example since it is not actually following the rules or laws of the catholic church. And this is creating problems among faithful and devote catholics:

 

http://www.crisismagazine.com/2015/notre-dame-must-take-exemption

 

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2009/05/how_notre_dame_drifted_away_fr.html

 

http://eppc.org/publications/what-church-does-notre-dame-belong-to/

 

Considering all the controversy at notre dame and the catholic church, I think that BYU is doing well and should keep it the way it is. Notre Dame is a classic case of how it should not be done. BYU should not be corrupted by secular issues.

Edited July 24, 2015 by why me

[mormonnewb]

BYU is not just providing university services though. It is also providing many religious ones.

I suggest that one needs to look at BYU as something more than just a university in order to see what is and isn't appropriate to do.

 

You're absolutely right.  The soundness of the policy is best judged by BYU's ultimate mission.  Over the course of this conversation (started months ago), I've become less convinced that I was correct in originally condemning the policy.  If BYU's ultimate goal is to prepare the saints to be the best Mormons they can be (as opposed to say, providing the most well-rounded education possible), and if having ex-saints on campus would detract from that goal by fostering disbelief in others, then the administration should act to remove that "threat."  And if it can do so in a way that is kind and considerate to those who lose their testimony (i.e., assisting in the transfer process, not withholding transcripts, allowing the person to finish out the semester if they agree not to be disruptive, etc.) -- and it appears that in many cases, BYU does just that -- then kudos to BYU.

 

My only remaining question is: Has BYU given up on President Kimball's call for it to become an "educational Mt. Everest"?  Here is a short excerpt from a feature on then-BYU President Jeffrey R. Holland in the June 1983 Ensign:

 

 

 

Challenged by President Spencer W. Kimball at his inauguration to help BYU become an “educational Mt. Everest,” President Jeffrey Holland has responded enthusiastically. Striving to make BYU the “Harvard of the West” might be a worthy enough goal for some, but President Holland has gone on record as preferring to see Harvard and Yale fighting “to see who can become the BYU of the East!”

 

As I see it, this simply can't happen, given BYU's ultimate mission of keeping people in the Church because the trail up to the top of education Mt. Everest is treacherous.  For example, someone in one of the current threads on this topic expressed disappointment that BYU's religious studies classes tend to be the equivalent of Sunday School, and that they don't offer critical textual analysis and other elements that might be present in, say, another school's Christianity 101 course (thus, the problem of getting these courses to be transferable towards a degree at a non-Church school).  Yet, the problem with "beefing up" BYU's introductory religious studies courses is that you are going to lose some testimonies.  And this isn't a problem unique to Mormonism.  There is a common saying among Protestant religious educators that goes something like: "The surest way to turn a believer into an atheist is to send him to seminary."  When you expose students to the often-messy real-life methods by which scripture and doctrine come to be, some students are going to deconstruct themselves right out of belief altogether.  Others will develop a more (as we progressives love to say) "nuanced" view of the matters.  But I don't know if either of these things is helpful to the overriding mission of the Church -- to prepare young saints for a lifetime of tithe-paying, temple-attending and calling-fulfilling.

 

And don't get me wrong.  I'm not so sure that educational Mt. Everest is all that is cracked up to be.  On a weekly basis, I worship with a few BYU grads who have more joy, contentment and fulfillment than any ten Harvard PhDs that I know.  I just have to wonder if the faculty and administration of BYU isn't still shooting for a goal that is incompatible with the principle mission of the institution.  In my very limited interaction with the faculty there, they seem to be focused on much the same things as faculty at other renowned schools -- publishing, national department rankings, the number of Fulbright Scholarships awarded in this year's classes, etc.  Yet, they are working under restrictions that will make it extremely difficult for them to get to the top of the mountain, so to speak.

 

Take, for instance, something like having a graduate win a Nobel Prize.  For an academic department, this has to be as close as you get to a "holy grail."  Yet, only one BYU grad has been awarded a Nobel -- Paul D. Boyer '39.  But here's the kicker -- he is an atheist.  So, in short, arguably the greatest academic success in the history of BYU was an abject failure in regards to BYU's core mission -- training up the saints who "endure to the end."  In short, I'm not sure that it's possible to have your JDawg and eat it too.

[ERayR]

You're absolutely right.  The soundness of the policy is best judged by BYU's ultimate mission.  Over the course of this conversation (started months ago), I've become less convinced that I was correct in originally condemning the policy.  If BYU's ultimate goal is to prepare the saints to be the best Mormons they can be (as opposed to say, providing the most well-rounded education possible), and if having ex-saints on campus would detract from that goal by fostering disbelief in others, then the administration should act to remove that "threat."  And if it can do so in a way that is kind and considerate to those who lose their testimony (i.e., assisting in the transfer process, not withholding transcripts, allowing the person to finish out the semester if they agree not to be disruptive, etc.) -- and it appears that in many cases, BYU does just that -- then kudos to BYU.

 

 

I don't see the two as being mutually exclusive.

[Analytics]

Why wouldn't I? Why would anyone have a problem with that position? You ask the question like you expect each of us to be idiots and incapable of taking any stand. The reason why this is simple is that we are talking about our faith and our respect for taking a stand. If you don't believe the stand up for your beliefs, but be honest enough that you willing to live with the consequences.

Those against this position are making it out as if changing schools is very difficult. I don't see the big deal. I changed school three times until I finally graduated from the UofU. Had scholarships at each university, enjoyed my experience, but just was not comfortable at one; our son died at another and we moved to SLC and I returned to school. No, the U did not accept my religion classes from BYU, but exactly what is the big deal with transferring? It is not a big deal; you are going to have to give me something more to sense that there is a personal cost of significance by simply standing by your position.

There is a major difference between, "Gosh, bishop, I am having some problems with faith" and "Bishop, the Church is false and I don't want to be a member of it any longer. Here is my resignation letter and I want it confirmed that I am no longer a member immediately." If someone does not want to be a member, then great. We each have our free agency, but why do you guys think life should be without consequences?

More importantly, if you don't believe in the Church, why in the heck do you want to attend BYU where the Church is everywhere? Wouldn't it be better to be somewhere else that is more in lined with a more open, secular environment?

Finally, the Church has very few universities and colleges. It does not come close to have anywhere near the number of universities like the Catholic church. What few options we have available to members needs to be utilized by those who want to attend rather than those who don't.

I really am not seeing the boogey men you guys are making out of this.

Certainly worse things happen in the world than somebody being dismissed from a religeous university that he or she no longer believes in. What motivated my question was the fear of "religeous freedom" being curtailed that we are told we ought to worry about. It is really hard to find examples of legitimate threats to religeous freedom, so if the shoe was on the other foot, I would think people's education being inconvenienced because of a religeous choice would be exhibit A of religeous freedom being hampered. Edited July 25, 2015 by Analytics

[ERayR]

Certainly worse things happen in the world than somebody being dismissed from a religeous university that he or she no longer believes in. What motivated my question was the fear of "religeous freedom" being curtailed that we are told we ought to worry about. It is really hard to find examples of legitimate threats to religeous freedom, so if the shoe was on the other foot, I would think people's education being inconvenienced because of a religeous choice would be exhibit A of religeous freedom being hampered.

 

No curtailment of religious freedom here.  However, there is some restriction of where and on whose dime you can exercise it on.

[mormonnewb]

I don't see the two as being mutually exclusive.

 

Did you not read for comprehension again?      I gave a rather long (and boring) explanation of how BYU's two goals might conflict and how it will likely prevent BYU from reaching "educational Mt. Everest."

 

That being said, your point is well-taken that the goals are not mutually exclusive.  BYU can train faithful Mormons and also provide them with a solid skill base from which they can make significant contributions to society.  That has been proven past the point of reasonable debate.  What is open to question is whether BYU can reach the academic heights that it has aspired to (at least in the past) and still remain true to its foremost mission.

[Scott Lloyd]

Any song that refers to Shakespeare as "Old Billy" gets a rep point from me.

And kudos to you for figuring out that line. It took me quite a while to do so.

But let me take this opportunity to again forewarn the political correctness and entitlement afficianados about clicking on that link. They may well be scandalized by those lyrics.

Edited July 25, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[why me]

Did you not read for comprehension again?      I gave a rather long (and boring) explanation of how BYU's two goals might conflict and how it will likely prevent BYU from reaching "educational Mt. Everest."

 

That being said, your point is well-taken that the goals are not mutually exclusive.  BYU can train faithful Mormons and also provide them with a solid skill base from which they can make significant contributions to society.  That has been proven past the point of reasonable debate.  What is open to question is whether BYU can reach the academic heights that it has aspired to (at least in the past) and still remain true to its foremost mission.

In 2010 BYU was ranked 11th for employer recruitment. Ahead of the Y were some of the top private schools in the country. For a small university which is supported by a rather small religion, these stats are excellent. I see no reason to stir the beehive.

 

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748704554104575435563989873060

 

Mormons are receiving a great education at a very cheap price when compared to the tuition for the first 10 schools. BYU is almost reaching the mountain's top.

Edited July 25, 2015 by why me

[BlueDreams]

My only remaining question is: Has BYU given up on President Kimball's call for it to become an "educational Mt. Everest"?  Here is a short excerpt from a feature on then-BYU President Jeffrey R. Holland in the June 1983 Ensign:

 

As I see it, this simply can't happen, given BYU's ultimate mission of keeping people in the Church because the trail up to the top of education Mt. Everest is treacherous.  For example, someone in one of the current threads on this topic expressed disappointment that BYU's religious studies classes tend to be the equivalent of Sunday School, and that they don't offer critical textual analysis and other elements that might be present in, say, another school's Christianity 101 course (thus, the problem of getting these courses to be transferable towards a degree at a non-Church school).  Yet, the problem with "beefing up" BYU's introductory religious studies courses is that you are going to lose some testimonies.  And this isn't a problem unique to Mormonism.  There is a common saying among Protestant religious educators that goes something like: "The surest way to turn a believer into an atheist is to send him to seminary."  When you expose students to the often-messy real-life methods by which scripture and doctrine come to be, some students are going to deconstruct themselves right out of belief altogether.  Others will develop a more (as we progressives love to say) "nuanced" view of the matters.  But I don't know if either of these things is helpful to the overriding mission of the Church -- to prepare young saints for a lifetime of tithe-paying, temple-attending and calling-fulfilling.

 

Hmm....interesting notion. I'm assuming the quote was more toward BYU provo than ID and HI. The other two are good and have differing academic focuses, but it's more BYU-Provo that's got the academic competitive edge enough that would describe it as an "academic Mt. Everest." And BYU has moved up, academically, substantially since 1983. Several programs are definitely competitive and outrank most other schools. For example, my cousin is in the Law School program, whose rankings are great. I'm in another program (marriage and family therapy) that ranks #1 in the nation (maybe that shouldn't be much of a surprise ). When I'd go to national conferences and meet-ups, people were impressed by the fact that I went to BYU, because it's a research juggernaut in that field mixed with great clinical training. And, of course, there's the business department, accounting, animation in the art department, etc. I'm not going to look up all the other programs that excel or are Mt. Everesty. Too much work. But as I mentioned in the other closed thread, I have an East Coast mentality that insists that the name of the school matters. BYU-provo's name is, academically, very good.

 

And to the religion department's credit, the four years of classes for all students taken aren't meant to be the equivalent of a religious seminary. And they also differ by the professor who teaches. I purposely tried to choose teachers who would add even a little more of the academic stuff, so most of my classes were definitely more than a sunday school level. That said, I assume these courses, I assume, are similar to when I took an intro drawing class. I was underwhelmed because my base knowledge/experience was drastically better than the average Jane. But for the average person whom intro classes are suited for, these added enough and expanded their knowledge. I'm going to assume if one actually was majoring in the religion departments (I don't even know what they offer), they would likewise become more academically intensive.

   

And don't get me wrong.  I'm not so sure that educational Mt. Everest is all that is cracked up to be.  On a weekly basis, I worship with a few BYU grads who have more joy, contentment and fulfillment than any ten Harvard PhDs that I know.  I just have to wonder if the faculty and administration of BYU isn't still shooting for a goal that is incompatible with the principle mission of the institution.  In my very limited interaction with the faculty there, they seem to be focused on much the same things as faculty at other renowned schools -- publishing, national department rankings, the number of Fulbright Scholarships awarded in this year's classes, etc.  Yet, they are working under restrictions that will make it extremely difficult for them to get to the top of the mountain, so to speak.

 

 

Which leads to an idea....  What constitutes the greater education?.... Solely achievement in an academic field (in which my education is about to fail me, because I hate research) or success in several areas, including capacity to contribute to society, form meaningful healthy relationships, as well as developing one's intellect in balance with that, being able to afford life post-college, etc... In which case BYU is extremely successful, as you've noted.

 

Take, for instance, something like having a graduate win a Nobel Prize.  For an academic department, this has to be as close as you get to a "holy grail."  Yet, only one BYU grad has been awarded a Nobel -- Paul D. Boyer '39.  But here's the kicker -- he is an atheist.  So, in short, arguably the greatest academic success in the history of BYU was an abject failure in regards to BYU's core mission -- training up the saints who "endure to the end."  In short, I'm not sure that it's possible to have your JDawg and eat it too.

 

 

What's also funny is he graduated from BYU when the school was far less academically competitive...so there's that too. But again the nobel prize is only one measure, one that only covers 5 broad areas, 3 of which are based in someway around the hard sciences. So this is the proverbial "holy grail" only for a few areas of academic study. Plus, schools (including Universities) end up having niches in certain areas. BYU is similar.  

 

With luv,

BD

[Raingirl]

Those are beautiful lyrics. Thank you for posting them.

I hope you won't think it too inappropriate of me if I post another song, far less sublime, but also with a very pointed message that I think applies to this whole "Free BYU" brouhaha. It's

And to Analytics: If Notre Dame were to have an enrollment policy similar to that of BYU and were to enforce it, it would not bother me in the least. I don't know why you expected us to be stymied by this hypothetical.

Edited to add:

Turns out the above link is to a performance by a cover band.

. It's not a live performance video, but it does display the lyrics.

Warning: the political correctness and entitlement crowds might find this offensive. If you think it's going to wound your sensitive feelings, by all means don't click on it!

 

Oh dear.

 

Perhaps I shouldn't have clicked on the link.

 

I fear I am now in grave danger of being seen dancing around the office, singing at the top of my lungs.

 

[ERayR]

Did you not read for comprehension again?      I gave a rather long (and boring) explanation of how BYU's two goals might conflict and how it will likely prevent BYU from reaching "educational Mt. Everest."

 

 

I may not have been as your post often make my eyes glaze over when reading them.

[Scott Lloyd]

Oh dear.

Perhaps I shouldn't have clicked on the link.

I fear I am now in grave danger of being seen dancing around the office, singing at the top of my lungs.

It is indeed an infectious song with a driving beat and a primal rock and roll structure and clever lyrics.

But let me repeat my caution to entitlement advocates who are apt to find the words upsetting. Never mind that I have included the link in my sig line, which makes it a semi-permanent part of all my posts. Be warned!

Edited July 25, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[mormonnewb]

Hmm....interesting notion. I'm assuming the quote was more toward BYU provo than ID and HI. The other two are good and have differing academic focuses, but it's more BYU-Provo that's got the academic competitive edge enough that would describe it as an "academic Mt. Everest." And BYU has moved up, academically, substantially since 1983. Several programs are definitely competitive and outrank most other schools. For example, my cousin is in the Law School program, whose rankings are great. I'm in another program (marriage and family therapy) that ranks #1 in the nation (maybe that shouldn't be much of a surprise ). When I'd go to national conferences and meet-ups, people were impressed by the fact that I went to BYU, because it's a research juggernaut in that field mixed with great clinical training. And, of course, there's the business department, accounting, animation in the art department, etc. I'm not going to look up all the other programs that excel or are Mt. Everesty. Too much work. But as I mentioned in the other closed thread, I have an East Coast mentality that insists that the name of the school matters. BYU-provo's name is, academically, very good.

And to the religion department's credit, the four years of classes for all students taken aren't meant to be the equivalent of a religious seminary. And they also differ by the professor who teaches. I purposely tried to choose teachers who would add even a little more of the academic stuff, so most of my classes were definitely more than a sunday school level. That said, I assume these courses, I assume, are similar to when I took an intro drawing class. I was underwhelmed because my base knowledge/experience was drastically better than the average Jane. But for the average person whom intro classes are suited for, these added enough and expanded their knowledge. I'm going to assume if one actually was majoring in the religion departments (I don't even know what they offer), they would likewise become more academically intensive.

Which leads to an idea.... What constitutes the greater education?.... Solely achievement in an academic field (in which my education is about to fail me, because I hate research) or success in several areas, including capacity to contribute to society, form meaningful healthy relationships, as well as developing one's intellect in balance with that, being able to afford life post-college, etc... In which case BYU is extremely successful, as you've noted.

What's also funny is he graduated from BYU when the school was far less academically competitive...so there's that too. But again the nobel prize is only one measure, one that only covers 5 broad areas, 3 of which are based in someway around the hard sciences. So this is the proverbial "holy grail" only for a few areas of academic study. Plus, schools (including Universities) end up having niches in certain areas. BYU is similar.

With luv,

BD

It's good to be largely in agreement with you again.

I think BYU's Law School is a great example of achieving success but not "educational Mt Everest." It has a great reputation for producing competent, hard-working and ethical lawyers. In fact, if I had to pick a law graduate to hire in a law firm and all I knew about her was the law school, I'd pick a BYU grad over Harvard, Yale, you name it.

However, here is the rub: Law schools are not solely judged on the quality of lawyers they produce, because, in truth, the best and brightest lawyers in each class usually don't practice law (at least not for long). They become professors and judges, and oh yeah, about a third of the U.S. Presidents. Therefore, the reason that Harvard and Yale are the two biggest names in the law school game is that ALL nine of the current SC judges attended one of these two schools. Likewise, an outlandish percentage of the deans at law schools attended one of these two schools, including BYU's Dean.

In a sense, BYU's success with law firm employers is a recognition that BYU can be trusted to produce lawyers that are competent, ethical and smart ... but not "too smart." After all, the insanely smart lawyers (regardless of the law school) are likely to move on to more academically rigorous pursuits. The practice of law simply entails too much tedium for them.

Edited July 26, 2015 by mormonnewb

[BlueDreams]

It's good to be largely in agreement with you again.

I think BYU's Law School is a great example of achieving success but not "educational Mt Everest." It has a great reputation for producing competent, hard-working and ethical lawyers. In fact, if I had to pick a law graduate to hire in a law firm and all I knew about her was the law school, I'd pick a BYU grad over Harvard, Yale, you name it.

However, here is the rub: Law schools are not solely judged on the quality of lawyers they produce, because, in truth, the best and brightest lawyers in each class usually don't practice law (at least not for long). They become professors and judges, and oh yeah, about a third of the U.S. Presidents. Therefore, the reason that Harvard and Yale are the two biggest names in the law school game is that ALL nine of the current SC judges attended one of these two schools. Likewise, an outlandish percentage of the deans at law schools attended one of these two schools, including BYU's Dean.

In a sense, BYU's success with law firm employers is a recognition that BYU can be trusted to produce lawyers that are competent, ethical and smart ... but not "too smart." After all, the insanely smart lawyers (regardless of the law school) are likely to move on to more academically rigorous pursuits. The practice of law simply entails too much tedium for them.

 

I know next to nothing about BYU Law (minus that my cousin goes there and she's very smart...but I'm also biased, so there's that). But I'm still curious in whether it's really about them not making students who are "smart, but not too smart" and the large chunk of that pool that would have had the chops for it, preferring areas that also cater to their personal lifestyle choices....ie. family orientation. From what my cousin also tells me a lot of law areas are time consuming....time she'd rather spend with her husband and her baby. She'll work, and has landed a great internship that will probably become her job after school, but in part because it's less time intensive and is "family-friendly" (you know, for a law firm). And there's still the fact that that girl wants a large family (in mormon terms, ginormous in non-LDS ones) how that will all balance out, I have no idea. But that's a personal delimna I hear over and over again...especially for women, but definitely with men too. So many LDS that I know (in grad school) are making decisions based on the fact that they want families and they want to actively participate in said families. And even for those who aren't planning on it super soon (like my other cousin who seems determined to travel the world), they frame their education in such a way that it still allows them to enjoy living and breathing. In short, their education, though super important to all of us, just isn't the ultimate goal/focus in most of their lives.  

 

The achievement you mentioned often comes with some sacrifice on that front. And a lot of LDS just aren't willing to pay it up, culturally. I honestly don't think it has much to do with the said programs. Like my own for instance. I was exposed to research, had an amazing advisor, loved the classes, and really enjoy teaching opportunities....but currently have no urge to get a PhD, because I also hate research. Do I have the intelligence for it? Yeah. Could BYU have trained me well in it? Definitely. Did I want to expend the effort? No, I value having fewer migraines and I'm a people person, not the paper type. My job choices? I chose a job not only because I love the emphasis, but because it was flexible. I could set my hours and in five years I may be able to further reduce and take on managerial stuff that I could do at home. In other words, the limitation to BYU wasn't the program but the desires of the students to some extent.

 

With luv,

BD

Edited July 26, 2015 by BlueDreams

[why me]

In a sense, BYU's success with law firm employers is a recognition that BYU can be trusted to produce lawyers that are competent, ethical and smart ... but not "too smart." After all, the insanely smart lawyers (regardless of the law school) are likely to move on to more academically rigorous pursuits. The practice of law simply entails too much tedium for them.

Maybe. But then again, some of the top law schools produce lawyers for the family busness. And yes, some do want to go into politics etc. BYU is ranked 34th. Not too high but not too low either when we consider the size of the school and the tuition fee. BYU's reputation is its mormon heritage. Some are probably quite smart but may not be in for other reasons beside law. Law is looked upon among mormons as a good paying career and also as a career that a person can make a difference in at a one on one level. So, BYU law students may not be all that interested in doing something outside law. It is more of a cultural norm among mormons who are studying law.

 

http://grad-schools.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-law-schools/law-rankings/page+2

 

This is also an interesting read since it mentions the honor code quite often in the text:

 

http://www.top-law-schools.com/wiki/BYU_Law_School

Edited July 26, 2015 by why me

[HappyJackWagon]

It is indeed an infectious song with a driving beat and a primal rock and roll structure and clever lyrics.

But let me repeat my caution to entitlement advocates who are apt to find the words upsetting. Never mind that I have included the link in my sig line, which makes it a semi-permanent part of all my posts. Be warned!

Apparently to you... Disre for Fairness = Entitlement.

 

It's very big of you to dismiss an entire philosophy of fairness as an entitlement mentality.

 

I imagine the suffrage and civil rights movements were both based on entitlement as well.

[Scott Lloyd]

Apparently to you... Disre for Fairness = Entitlement.

 

It's very big of you to dismiss an entire philosophy of fairness as an entitlement mentality.

 

I imagine the suffrage and civil rights movements were both based on entitlement as well.

Don't confuse entitlement with justice. Or cheapen women's suffrage and the civil rights movement by likening them to this.

Edited July 27, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[HappyJackWagon]

Don't confuse entitlement with justice. Or cheapen women's suffrage and the civil rights movement by likening them to this.

Could you explain then why seeking to change a cultural norm in favor of greater fairness is considered an entitlement in some cases but not in others?

[Russell C McGregor]

Wrong. Again. It's morally indefensible because it doesn't respect agency, because it hinders a child's education because their faith changed in a direction that disappointed the institution.

Meanwhile, BYU is happy to reward non-LDS students who choose to end commitments and covenants they had made to their faith as long as they do so to join the LDS church.

 

"Morally indefensible?"

 

Melodramatic much?

[rockpond]

"Morally indefensible?"

Melodramatic much?

Just trying to follow your lead, Russell.