BYU now a target for LGBT groups

[bluebell]

7 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

But the behavior is only inappropriate because of the orientation of the individuals engaging in it.

 

The same can be said for single and married couples and sex though.  The behavior-sex-is only inappropriate because of the status of the individuals engaging in it.  BYU doesn't threaten discipline for all students who have sex.  They only threaten to discipline certain students who have sex.   Sex is perfectly acceptable for some and incredible unacceptable for others.

 

 

[rockpond]

16 minutes ago, bluebell said:

But acting on those feelings of attraction is a choice as well, and it is the action that is being regulated by BYU, not the attraction.  

And i agree with your second point, but i was asking about your feelings and not what other people think about our morals. It seems like, as far as BYU policies are concerned, that you are comfortable with discrimination as long as you believe that God is behind it (such as that which exists with single couples compared to married couples) but that you disagree with discrimination if you believe that God has not sanctioned it.

 

Yes, acting on one's attractions is a choice.  BYU encourages marriage for straight students and punishes marriage for gay students.  That is discrimination based on orientation.

Regarding the second point, for a couple to make the decision to formally commit to one another and legally marry is an action.  To the extent that the standard is applied uniformly across all students, I am comfortable with BYU setting a standard of behavior.

[rockpond]

18 minutes ago, USU78 said:

So I should be able to study, based upon my example above, at Yeshiva Rabbinical University?  As a Dano-British goyische Mormon boy?  And the government should be empowered to make them take me?

I don't know anything about Yeshiva Rabbinical University so it's tough to say.  Should they be legally allowed to declared that it is a school only for Jewish people?  Yes.

Should the government be empowered to make them take you?  Absolutely not!  I'm curious what I have said that would make you think such a thing?

[jkwilliams]

2 minutes ago, rockpond said:

I don't know anything about Yeshiva Rabbinical University so it's tough to say.  Should they be legally allowed to declared that it is a school only for Jewish people?  Yes.

Should the government be empowered to make them take you?  Absolutely not!  I'm curious what I have said that would make you think such a thing?

I don't think the issue is whether BYU has the right to set its policies regarding LGBT students. We have a good family friend who organized an "underground salsa" club when she attended Abilene Christian University, where apparently Latin dancing is verboten. Does ACU (which makes BYU look like Berkeley in comparison) have every right to prohibit Latin dancing based on its religious principles? Of course, just as BYU has the right to prohibit same-sex hugging, kissing, and intercourse. 

We're talking about joining the Big 12, not about the government forcing BYU to allow sexually active LGBT students to attend. Given recent history at Baylor and other Big 12 schools, it would be pretty hypocritical of them to exclude BYU based on the rape/honor code issue or LGBT issues, but then I expect the Big 12 to make a decision based on financial and political reasons, neither of which favor BYU. The Texas schools want the University of Houston, and another group of schools favors Cincinnati. BYU is a logical choice, but it doesn't seem like the stars are aligned currently.

[USU78]

10 minutes ago, rockpond said:

I don't know anything about Yeshiva Rabbinical University so it's tough to say.  Should they be legally allowed to declared that it is a school only for Jewish people?  Yes.

Should the government be empowered to make them take you?  Absolutely not!  I'm curious what I have said that would make you think such a thing?

I'm exploring, via cross-examination, the boundaries of your church/state sensibilities.

[USU78]

2 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

I don't think the issue is whether BYU has the right to set its policies regarding LGBT students. We have a good family friend who organized an "underground salsa" club when she attended Abilene Christian University, where apparently Latin dancing is verboten. Does ACU (which makes BYU look like Berkeley in comparison) have every right to prohibit Latin dancing based on its religious principles? Of course, just as BYU has the right to prohibit same-sex hugging, kissing, and intercourse. 

We're talking about joining the Big 12, not about the government forcing BYU to allow sexually active LGBT students to attend. Given recent history at Baylor and other Big 12 schools, it would be pretty hypocritical of them to exclude BYU based on the rape/honor code issue or LGBT issues, but then I expect the Big 12 to make a decision based on financial and political reasons, neither of which favor BYU. The Texas schools want the University of Houston, and another group of schools favors Cincinnati. BYU is a logical choice, but it doesn't seem like the stars are aligned currently.

The issue, to my thinking, is imperialism and enslavement via mandatory branding with the Mark of the Beast in order to participate in commerce.

Every discussion on homosexuality ends up at the same place:  we must comply or die economically.

I choose not to comply.

[ERMD]

I'm in good company.  I'm a Baylor grad, and my kids to go BYU.

Either that, or bigotry and hatred are deeply ingrained in our family.

As Neil Young said, "Don't feel like Satan, but I am to them."

 

 

[jkwilliams]

Just now, ERMD said:

I'm in good company.  I'm a Baylor grad, and my kids to go BYU.

Either that, or bigotry and hatred are deeply ingrained in our family.

As Neil Young said, "Don't feel like Satan, but I am to them."

But I try to forget it anyway I can. (Anyone who likes Neil Young can't be bad.)

BYU grad here, with kids who have attended BYU, BYU-Idaho, USU, Angelo State, and Snow College. 

[jkwilliams]

4 minutes ago, USU78 said:

The issue, to my thinking, is imperialism and enslavement via mandatory branding with the Mark of the Beast in order to participate in commerce.

Every discussion on homosexuality ends up at the same place:  we must comply or die economically.

I choose not to comply.

I thought you disliked histrionics. Or maybe just the passive-aggressive kind.

[rockpond]

8 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

I don't think the issue is whether BYU has the right to set its policies regarding LGBT students. We have a good family friend who organized an "underground salsa" club when she attended Abilene Christian University, where apparently Latin dancing is verboten. Does ACU (which makes BYU look like Berkeley in comparison) have every right to prohibit Latin dancing based on its religious principles? Of course, just as BYU has the right to prohibit same-sex hugging, kissing, and intercourse. 

We're talking about joining the Big 12, not about the government forcing BYU to allow sexually active LGBT students to attend. Given recent history at Baylor and other Big 12 schools, it would be pretty hypocritical of them to exclude BYU based on the rape/honor code issue or LGBT issues, but then I expect the Big 12 to make a decision based on financial and political reasons, neither of which favor BYU. The Texas schools want the University of Houston, and another group of schools favors Cincinnati. BYU is a logical choice, but it doesn't seem like the stars are aligned currently.

I agree.  And, I think financial rationale will primarily drive the decision.  Not the LGBT protests.  Though I think one complicating factor is the recent stand the Big 12 took regarding states that passed anti-LGBT legislation.   The Big 12 officials may not want to be seen as having looked past BYU's discrimination.   

Still, I'd love to see BYU brought into the Big 12. 

 

[jkwilliams]

Just now, rockpond said:

I agree.  And, I think financial rationale will primarily drive the decision.  Not the LGBT protests.  Though I think one complicating factor is the recent stand the Big 12 took regarding states that passed anti-LGBT legislation.   The Big 12 officials may not want to be seen as having looked past BYU's discrimination.   

Still, I'd love to see BYU brought into the Big 12. 

So would I, but I don't think it's going to happen. Ironically, the Big 12 courted BYU in the past, but because of that experience, Big 12 officials are on record as seeing BYU as being difficult to work with and a little arrogant. 

[bluebell]

9 minutes ago, rockpond said:

Yes, acting on one's attractions is a choice.  BYU encourages marriage for straight students and punishes marriage for gay students.  That is discrimination based on orientation.

Regarding the second point, for a couple to make the decision to formally commit to one another and legally marry is an action.  To the extent that the standard is applied uniformly across all students, I am comfortable with BYU setting a standard of behavior.

The discrimination is based on where BYU believes God has drawn the boundaries.  Marriage is acceptable only within certain boundaries according to our doctrine, and BYU's policies mirror that.  As far as all students are uniformly held to the standard that God has set regardless of their personal desires or individual circumstances, the standard of behavior expected is the same for everyone who attends.

That's not discrimination against orientation any more than enforcing the WoW is accurately labeled as discrimination against people who desire to drink, or enforcing the law of chastity is discrimination against straight people who can't get married.  

[HappyJackWagon]

39 minutes ago, bluebell said:

The same can be said for single and married couples and sex though.  The behavior-sex-is only inappropriate because of the status of the individuals engaging in it.  BYU doesn't threaten discipline for all students who have sex.  They only threaten to discipline certain students who have sex.   Sex is perfectly acceptable for some and incredible unacceptable for others.

Only if they're of a certain orientation.

But you're right that the threats only exist for certain students who engage in the activity, whether married or single. The status that is different is the orientation.

[jkwilliams]

2 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

Only if they're of a certain orientation.

But you're right that the threats only exist for certain students who engage in the activity, whether married or single. The status that is different is the orientation.

Yep. If you're single, acceptable behavior differs by orientation only. 

[rockpond]

27 minutes ago, USU78 said:

The issue, to my thinking, is imperialism and enslavement via mandatory branding with the Mark of the Beast in order to participate in commerce.

Every discussion on homosexuality ends up at the same place:  we must comply or die economically.

I choose not to comply.

Did you support the Church's campaigning against legally recognized marriage for gay couples?

If so, what is fundamentally different about their campaign vs what is being done by LGBT advocacy groups? 

[rockpond]

19 minutes ago, bluebell said:

The discrimination is based on where BYU believes God has drawn the boundaries.  Marriage is acceptable only within certain boundaries according to our doctrine, and BYU's policies mirror that.  As far as all students are uniformly held to the standard that God has set regardless of their personal desires or individual circumstances, the standard of behavior expected is the same for everyone who attends.

That's not discrimination against orientation any more than enforcing the WoW is accurately labeled as discrimination against people who desire to drink, or enforcing the law of chastity is discrimination against straight people who can't get married.  

Yes, all students are uniformly held to the standard that the Church claims is God's standard.  And that standard is discriminatory against gays.

[jkwilliams]

14 minutes ago, rockpond said:

Yes, all students are uniformly held to the standard that the Church claims is God's standard.  And that standard is discriminatory against gays.

Just saw this from Mitch Mayne: "It's OK for BYU to feel like they belong in the Big 12, just so long as they don't act on it."

[rockpond]

10 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

Just saw this from Mitch Mayne: "It's OK for BYU to feel like they belong in the Big 12, just so long as they don't act on it."

Ha!

[Jeanne]

48 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

Yep. If you're single, acceptable behavior differs by orientation only. 

And I am sure God doesn't rate sins this way.

[bluebell]

1 hour ago, rockpond said:

Yes, all students are uniformly held to the standard that the Church claims is God's standard.  And that standard is discriminatory against gays.

And discrimination against single people, and discrimination against people who have the desire to drink, etc.  Anyone who wishes to be able to do that which God condemns with no consequences will be discriminated against.  That is God's standard that we are all held too.

[bluebell]

1 hour ago, jkwilliams said:

Just saw this from Mitch Mayne: "It's OK for BYU to feel like they belong in the Big 12, just so long as they don't act on it."

That's pretty funny!]

[rockpond]

3 minutes ago, bluebell said:

And discrimination against single people, and discrimination against people who have the desire to drink, etc.  Anyone who wishes to be able to do that which God condemns with no consequences will be discriminated against.  That is God's standard that we are all held too.

If that's your view of God.  Yes.

[bluebell]

1 hour ago, HappyJackWagon said:

Only if they're of a certain orientation.

But you're right that the threats only exist for certain students who engage in the activity, whether married or single. The status that is different is the orientation.

From my perspective, the status that is different is whether or not God condone's the activity.  That's what makes the difference.  If you want to do something that BYU believes God does not condone you will be discriminated against.  It doesn't matter if you are male, female, gay, straight, married, or single.

[stemelbow]

2 minutes ago, bluebell said:

And discrimination against single people, and discrimination against people who have the desire to drink, etc.  Anyone who wishes to be able to do that which God condemns with no consequences will be discriminated against.  That is God's standard that we are all held too.

Well, we can argue whether BYU's policy works for BYU or is good in some way.  But that's not really the point.  Some don't like the discrimination in this instance and are wanton to say so.  In so doing they also think another group needs to be aware that the discrimination in their eyes is problematic. 

Why would it be wrong for someone or a group in this case, point out discrimination they don't like?  Are we all really supposed to just agree that BYU's discrimination is reasonable in light of Mormonism's position?  That doesn't really matter as per the discussion. 

[rockpond]

3 minutes ago, bluebell said:

From my perspective, the status that is different is whether or not God condone's the activity.  That's what makes the difference.  If you want to do something that BYU believes God does not condone you will be discriminated against.  It doesn't matter if you are male, female, gay, straight, married, or single.

I assume you understand that those outside of our church don't place much value on the church's understanding of "what God condones" when evaluating discrimination?  Right?