A "free Byu" Compromise

[ttribe]

It could work the other way, too. In theory, those who leave the Church over theological or historical issues jump ship too soon. I suspect countless individuals who encounter such issues stay, work through them and end up even stronger in the faith. For the most part, we never hear their stories. We only hear about the ones who leave. Having the enrollment requirement in place might be the incentive they need to put in the intellectual work necessary to work through the issues as opposed to uncritcally swallowing the anti-Mormon party line.

Of course.

[Scott Lloyd]

As we have seen over and over on this board, when someone leaves the Church, they often turn against the Church and become advocates

for the Dark Side. Some become militant objectors. BYU is not the place for that to happen.

Would it be worse to insist on a "silence clause" for students who loose faith in exchange for their continued enrollment at non-member tuition rates?

It would be unworkable at best. They could not be prevented from spreading their bile.

[Kenngo1969]

Naturally, I'm not the least bit surprised at your hard-line approach on any of this.  It's clear you consider any loss of faith, or expression thereof, as a willful act of betrayal.

Nope.  Lack or loss of faith is one thing; willful concealment is the problem.

 

P.S.: I see Scott Lloyd beat me to it in his Post #31.  Good call.  And, while I'm not a lawyer, and while anyone who is a lawyer will tell you that this is a stretch, arguably, someone who conceals his loss or lack of faith to maintain enrollment and continue to pay the tuition rate reserved for members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in good standing has received a benefit under false pretenses, i.e., has committed fraud.  While, again, I think BYU should help such students transfer, and while pursuing fraud cases of this type might be a win in the courts, it would be a loss from Christian ethics and public relations perspectives, so BYU probably would never do it.  Still, it's not completely outside the realm of possibility.

Edited July 24, 2015 by Kenngo1969

[mormonnewb]

Now that you mention it, this rings a bell with what we were told when I visited West Point with the Mormon Tabernacle Choir on July 4. They are indeed required under penalty of law to pay back the taxpayer subsidy if they elect to drop out after (I think) a year of enrollment.

 

And I think this is a very apt comparison to what I have suggested (but not advocated).

 

I agree that the BYU's mission is much like Westpoint -- the US Military Academy.  Except that BYU wants to call itself a "university," which is traditionally an institution devoted to paideia.  A university is supposed to be a place where young people go for more than just credentials, but to be exposed to new and different ideas that challenge their pre-existing presuppositions.  As former Princeton professor Cornel West is apt to say, "At some point, I want my students to leave my class experiencing intellectual vertigo and ontological dizziness, in which they realize that their worldview rests on pudding."

 

This is obviously not what BYU is hoping to produce in its students.  In fact, the "reward" for reassessing one's worldview is expulsion.  And that's fine.  Westpoint isn't looking to have its cadets reassess their ideas about pacifism either.  And Westpoint also provides a wonderful technical education for its students, which employers also greatly value.  It just doesn't pretend to be more than it is.  It trains military officers.  BYU trains tithe-paying, calling-fulfilling, temple-attending Mormons.  I think there is a great case to be made that this is the most important training that one could ever receive.

 

And maybe I'm just straining at gnats (it's happened once or twice).  Perhaps, no one pays much attention to designations like "college," "university," "academy," or "institute" anyway.  After all, MIT doesn't call itself a "university," but it has employed Noam Chomsky for the last 60 years, so it seems to have melded some university into its institute.

Edited July 24, 2015 by mormonnewb

[CV75]

Getting back to the idea of policy fostering duplicity, I think the link to duplicity that was mentioned in the OP (but not acknowledged as a link) is the fear of receiving consequences; the policy is not the link. It reminds me of the Garden of Eden story: the policy was expulsion once the forbidden fruit was eaten; the instinctive reaction to the coming punishment was fear and hiding.

Edited July 24, 2015 by CV75

[thesometimesaint]

I agree that the BYU's mission is much like Westpoint -- the US Military Academy.  Except that BYU wants to call itself a "university," which is traditionally an institution devoted to paideia.  A university is supposed to be a place where young people go for more than just credentials, but to be exposed to new and different ideas that challenge their pre-existing presuppositions.  As former Princeton professor Cornel West is apt to say, "At some point, I want my students to leave my class experiencing intellectual vertigo and ontological dizziness, in which they realize that their worldview rests on pudding."

 

This is obviously not what BYU is hoping to produce in its students.  In fact, the "reward" for reassessing one's worldview is expulsion.  And that's fine.  Westpoint isn't looking to have its cadets reassess their ideas about pacifism either.  And Westpoint also provides a wonderful technical education for its students, which employers also greatly value.  It just doesn't pretend to be more than it is.  It trains military officers.  BYU trains tithe-paying, calling-fulfilling, temple-attending Mormons.  I think there is a great case to be made that this is the most important training that one could ever receive.

 

And maybe I'm just straining at gnats (it's happened once or twice).  Perhaps, no one pays much attention to designations like "college," "university," "academy," or "institute" anyway.  After all, MIT doesn't call itself a "university," but it has employed Noam Chomsky for the last 60 years, so it seems to have melded some university into its institute.

 

Nonsense.

[ttribe]

I got the impression they were more in the camp of let BYU handle it how they want, we don't have the insight or jurisdiction to dictate to them the rules.

 

I don't see the two as mutually exclusive.

[BlueDreams]

And maybe I'm just straining at gnats (it's happened once or twice).  Perhaps, no one pays much attention to designations like "college," "university," "academy," or "institute" anyway.  After all, MIT doesn't call itself a "university," but it has employed Noam Chomsky for the last 60 years, so it seems to have melded some university into its institute.

 

 

Yeah, I'd call this straining at gnats, especially considering the accreditation says otherwise. And since that's not what most colleges or universities need to attest to be considered accreditted. I've done my bachelor's and will walk with my master's there in exactly 3 weeks. So I guess that could make me a byu "expert" of sorts...At the very least I'm the one most recently graduated from it and most acquainted with being a student at present ( of Provo....never done ID or HI). I attended BYU because I was an east coast snob who believes in the name and prestige of the school and BYU-provo was in the top 100 universities (still is). But I'm also a penny pincher....so win-win 

 

The closest I could find to any working definitions was this...which would still leave BYU strongly in the University definition.

 

 It's not a narrow-focus school....rather it has a very specific foundational purpose (promotion of an LDS faithful perspective) while giving a broad range of education (that can and does push you and your beliefs, at least in the fields I've chosen). Of course, how this is done will differ. Your mind melting ideal is probably not as commonly seen in all specific colleges within a university, such as business or more concrete oriented fields. 

 

As for the OP: 

That stated, I like the proposal mentioned. BYU's Honor Code has had some tweeks recently which I think have been helpful for it to be more fair to those who may have more difficulty with it, without doing a massive overhaul. I have things in the Honor Code that I've broken on occasion (not biggies, IMO) and, looking over it, there's one my master's program itself was pretty lenient on (ie. clean language). So though there's flexibility and I doubt a person who was just struggling with their faith or a specific tenet (I've seen/heard people who obviously are in a class setting) would have the same problem as someone who's actively decided to leave the church, I do get why the policy is in place. It goes against the main purpose for the school's existence. There's also the fact that it's DIRT CHEAP. I can't complain about the Honor Code much because of this. I've been saved crippling financial debt because of this and will graduate with only a 8-10K in student loans (all accrued in the last 2 years....I had no debt for my undergrads and graduated with money). Money that I could pay back in a couple of years as opposed to a decade or 2.

 

Attending BYU truly isn't a right, it's a privilege on this note, even for the non-lds students who's un-subsidized tuition is still cheaper than almost all comparative schools. Each student is basically an investment made in large part by the church for the LDS community. (Even the Non-LDS could be seen as an investment, in part as being bridges into other faith communities and nations). So what do you do with a student who has decided to leave the church and can't believe it anymore? They are unlikely to invest in the community....especially if they view that community, in a number of ways, fundamentally flawed. It's this community that is footing the bill for their education. Meanwhile, their place represents a space that another student who would support and bolster the community in question and the purpose for said university....spots are competitive. So I get the mentality behind it. I can even agree....even though it can be tough.

 

Even for the student, in some levels I think it would be a better decision. I think of how my education has been framed within the context of a) faith and b) LDS beliefs specifically, I honestly don't think this would be the best fit for someone who loses faith/LDS beliefs in the first place. Again, that may vary from school to school....others would probably have an easier time ignoring it. But I think it may be short-changing themselves in their chosen path of wanting to be outside the community by staying. Even in the short term, it would be difficult. You're at a school where the church attendance rate is through the roof. Social activities, especially in your undergrads, often revolve around church-based activities. It can be fairly isolating if you don't. On a psychological stand-point, I don't think it's also super healthy to be persistently reminded as to what you are not.  

 

Only think I'd add, is possibly allowing to finish if the time is very short and could feasibly be done in a semester (ie >18 hrs).

 

With luv,

BD 

Edited July 24, 2015 by BlueDreams

[Kenngo1969]

... I have things in the Honor Code that I've broken on occasion (not biggies, IMO) ...

 

Why, BlueDreams ...

 

Did you grow a beard?

 

 Sorry.  Couldn't resist!

[BlueDreams]

Why, BlueDreams ...

 

Did you grow a beard?

 

 Sorry.  Couldn't resist!

 

Not graduated yet (again)...can't tell

 

Nah, they're just not worth mentioning. Most people have broken it a little at least once. Kinda like those other commandments that are actually eternally binding.  

[ERayR]

I agree that the BYU's mission is much like Westpoint -- the US Military Academy.  Except that BYU wants to call itself a "university," which is traditionally an institution devoted to paideia.  A university is supposed to be a place where young people go for more than just credentials, but to be exposed to new and different ideas that challenge their pre-existing presuppositions.  As former Princeton professor Cornel West is apt to say, "At some point, I want my students to leave my class experiencing intellectual vertigo and ontological dizziness, in which they realize that their worldview rests on pudding."

 

This is obviously not what BYU is hoping to produce in its students.  In fact, the "reward" for reassessing one's worldview is expulsion.  And that's fine.  Westpoint isn't looking to have its cadets reassess their ideas about pacifism either.  And Westpoint also provides a wonderful technical education for its students, which employers also greatly value.  It just doesn't pretend to be more than it is.  It trains military officers.  BYU trains tithe-paying, calling-fulfilling, temple-attending Mormons.  I think there is a great case to be made that this is the most important training that one could ever receive.

 

And maybe I'm just straining at gnats (it's happened once or twice).  Perhaps, no one pays much attention to designations like "college," "university," "academy," or "institute" anyway.  After all, MIT doesn't call itself a "university," but it has employed Noam Chomsky for the last 60 years, so it seems to have melded some university into its institute.

 

POV

 

As usual you are out in left field straining at gnats.  After rereading your post(this time for comprehension) maybe not so much this time.  See my post below.

Edited July 24, 2015 by ERayR

[ERayR]

As we have seen over and over on this board, when someone leaves the Church, they often turn against the Church and become advocates

for the Dark Side. Some become militant objectors. BYU is not the place for that to happen.

 

Would it be worse to insist on a "silence clause" for students who loose faith in exchange for their continued enrollment at non-member tuition rates?

 

Can't you just hear the out cry against censorship?

[sheilauk]

A university is supposed to be a place where young people go for more than just credentials, but to be exposed to new and different ideas that challenge their pre-existing presuppositions.  As former Princeton professor Cornel West is apt to say, "At some point, I want my students to leave my class experiencing intellectual vertigo and ontological dizziness, in which they realize that their worldview rests on pudding."

In my experience, a university is merely a place where one can obtain a qualification post 18 years of age (High School in the US).  I have been to university - the courses I did never came close to intellectual vertigo - they taught me about law and business and what I would need to succeed at both.  I did have interesting experiences, and living away from home when i was 18 was a good education, but there was little debate and very little exposure to new and different ideas. I was on a law course - no time for very much except study and there is no incentive in law for new and different ideas.  Maybe philosophy (and other) courses are different and maybe different universities offer different perspectives - mine was very work focused, I think Oxford and Cambridge espouse loftier ideals which is probably why I didn't go there - i just wanted to know how to do the job i wanted to do.  I came away with a good working knowledge of law, a boost in confidence, reinforced views in some areas, slightly better people skills and improved cooking skills!  So i disagree with you and Prof West - university is whatever the establishment thinks will sell and whatever the student wants from it and at most its supposed to be a place where you get the information and skills to pass exams and obtain a degree/masters/diploma or whatever.  Most unis are not lofty establishments and if BYU wants to be more of a work horse than a challenge to existing ideas - it can be.  

[ERayR]

This is obviously not what BYU is hoping to produce in its students.  In fact, the "reward" for reassessing one's worldview is expulsion.  And that's fine.  Westpoint isn't looking to have its cadets reassess their ideas about pacifism either.  And Westpoint also provides a wonderful technical education for its students, which employers also greatly value.  It just doesn't pretend to be more than it is.  It trains military officers.  BYU trains tithe-paying, calling-fulfilling, temple-attending Mormons.  I think there is a great case to be made that this is the most important training that one could ever receive.

 

And maybe I'm just straining at gnats (it's happened once or twice).  Perhaps, no one pays much attention to designations like "college," "university," "academy," or "institute" anyway.  After all, MIT doesn't call itself a "university," but it has employed Noam Chomsky for the last 60 years, so it seems to have melded some university into its institute.

 

Horrors, I actually agree with this. 

[cinepro]

Just so we're all clear, here's the current BYU Tuition rates:

 

https://admissions.byu.edu/tuition-charges

 

Basically, it's exactly 2x for non-LDS. 

 

I'm intrigued by Scott's suggestion that faltering students should get back-charged for semesters already completed.  How would that work?  The rates above seem to imply that it is "LDS at the time of study", since there is no stipulation that the student be "LDS in perpetuity".  Else, even students who have graduated and left the university but then leave the Church could just as logically be sent a bill for the difference (and the Church could refuse to remove their names from the records until their debt is paid).

 

I suspect like many policies, the apostate-student policy was made by a group of men long ago who didn't really think through the whole situation (and with little input from students who had lost their faith during their studies), and now that there are real situations where this is happening, and an internet where there stories can be told and discussed, the absurdity of it all will become too overwhelming even for the BYU leadership, and we'll see a compromise like the one outlined in the OP within a few years.

Edited July 24, 2015 by cinepro

[Tacenda]

Seth Payne,

I appreciate the effort of the OP. Getting rid of the holds would be a great start. But forcing someone to transfer based on their honest portrayal of belief still seems very heavy handed because in many cases BYU credits don't transfer well to other schools. For example, if I were in my 3rd year studying psychology and was being forced to transfer because of my beliefs I might be able to transfer 1/3 of my credits to my state university, setting my education back 2 years.

The simplest solution I see is to keep the honor code but include the stipulation that LDS subsidy only applies if you are LDS. If you choose to be honest and disafilliate with LDS you will then pay the non-LDS tuition. It seems fair to me. BYU upholds its honor code, the student maintains his education credit and everyone benefits by the honest relationship between student and school.

I like this idea. If a student loses their faith in the church then pay non LDS tuition, perfect solution. And if they are faking it, It's between them and the Lord. But I think they'd rather not fake it.

[Tacenda]

Not graduated yet (again)...can't tell

Nah, they're just not worth mentioning. Most people have broken it a little at least once. Kinda like those other commandments that are actually eternally binding.

What watching MTV?

Wait a minute, this rule was in the late 80's, you're young.

Edited July 24, 2015 by Tacenda

[ERayR]

I like this idea. If a student loses their faith in the church then pay non LDS tuition, perfect solution. And if they are faking it, It's between them and the Lord. But I think they'd rather not fake it.

 

I am more in favor of opening up that position for a faithful member to occupy.

[ttribe]

I am more in favor of opening up that position for a faithful member to occupy.

 

Does that mean you are also in favor of not allowing any Non-LDS to attend BYU?  Presumably, those spots could be filled by "faithful" members as well.

[ERayR]

Does that mean you are also in favor of not allowing any Non-LDS to attend BYU?  Presumably, those spots could be filled by "faithful" members as well.

 

What I really favor is letting BYU administrators handle the problems of BYU and not having to listen to the cacophony of bleating goats complain about the consequences that befall those who haven't the integrity to keep covenants.

[Scott Lloyd]

Just so we're all clear, here's the current BYU Tuition rates:

 

https://admissions.byu.edu/tuition-charges

 

Basically, it's exactly 2x for non-LDS. 

 

 

Yes. And I'm not certain even that covers the full cost of educating the student without a subsidy from tithepayers. But it is a rough indication, at least, of how extensively each LDS student who attends BYU is being subsidized.

 

I'm intrigued by Scott's suggestion that faltering students should get back-charged for semesters already completed.

 

I hope you saw what I stated repeatedly: that I'm not advocating this nor even seriously proposing it. I just floated to get a reaction from the critics and see how fair-minded they really were. Not very, it turns out.

 

 

How would that work? 

 

I've already acknowledged I don't think it's workable.

 

 

The rates above seem to imply that it is "LDS at the time of study", since there is no stipulation that the student be "LDS in perpetuity". 

 

 

 

I think it's more than obvious that the expectation is the student will remain a member in good standing throughout his time at the university, otherwise the current enrollment policy would not be in place.

 

Else, even students who have graduated and left the university but then leave the Church could just as logically be sent a bill for the difference (and the Church could refuse to remove their names from the records until their debt is paid).

 

 

No one can control what the student does after he graduates. At best, the enrollment policy reduces the risk somewhat that the tithe payer subsidy to the student will be wasted.

 

 

 

 

I suspect like many policies, the apostate-student policy was made by a group of men long ago who didn't really think through the whole situation ....

 

 

I, on the other hand, fervently believe the policy was implemented and has remained in place because it is logical, fair and prudent.

 

... (and with little input from students who had lost their faith during their studies), and now that there are real situations where this is happening, and an internet where there stories can be told and discussed, the absurdity of it all will become too overwhelming even for the BYU leadership, and we'll see a compromise like the one outlined in the OP within a few years.

 

As has already been discussed (I think it was on the other thread) there is good reason to believe this thing doesn't have any legs at all, that it amounts to the whining and trouble making of a small but vocal minority, and that the phenomenon of the Internet and social media age is that fringe groups such as this can be made to appear they have far more stature than they actually do.

 

By the way, did you see my link in the other thread to the Eagles' song "Get Over It"? I think it has application here.

 

But be warned:  If you have politically correct or entitlement sensitivities, DO NOT, under any circumstances, click on the link. You are likely to be offended by it. 

 

Edited to add;

 

Quote formatting on this post is screwed up, and I'm unclear on how to fix it. If I try to do it, I'm afraid I'll lose the text. I hope everyone is clear on what cinepro is saying and what I am saying.

Edited July 24, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[ttribe]

What I really favor is letting BYU administrators handle the problems of BYU and not having to listen to the cacophony of bleating goats complain about the consequences that befall those who haven't the integrity to keep covenants.

 

Well, I'm pretty sure no one's forcing you to "listen to the cacophony of bleating goats complain about the consequences that befall those who haven't the integrity to keep covenants."

 

So, do you have no answer to my question?

Edited July 24, 2015 by ttribe

[Scott Lloyd]

Does that mean you are also in favor of not allowing any Non-LDS to attend BYU?  Presumably, those spots could be filled by "faithful" members as well.

For its own reasons, the university makes a few slots available to friendly non-members. That does not mean they should be used as a safety net for LDS students who apostatize and thus fail to live up to the terms of their contract.

[ttribe]

For its own reasons, the university makes a few slots available to friendly non-members. That does not mean they should be used as a safety net for LDS students who apostatize and thus fail to live up to the terms of their contract.

 

I'm aware of that, but the blanket statement to which I was responding made no such allowance, so I inquired.  Do you speak for ERayR and have insights into thoughts?

[Scott Lloyd]

I'm aware of that, but the blanket statement to which I was responding made no such allowance, so I inquired.  Do you speak for ERayR and have insights into thoughts?

I've noticed we are remarkably consistent in our views. But he is free to speak in his own behalf.