Calm Posted January 25, 2017 Posted January 25, 2017 4 hours ago, Johnnie Cake said: I've also emailed the BYU ROTC program at afrotc@byu.edu EDIT to Add: That my email was returned undeliverable at this BYU address...while not definitive...its a good sign of the correctness of my OP The claim was the move would occur in Fall 2017, was it not?
Calm Posted January 25, 2017 Posted January 25, 2017 4 hours ago, bsjkki said: So, it looks like you UVU and BYU have a cross-enrollment agreement. UVU students must abide by the honor code while on BYU campus and during all ROTC activities. Why can't the non-member commander be held to this standard like the UVU students who have a class at BYU? Cross-Enrollment Agreement The University offers ROTC through a cross-enrollment agreement with Brigham Young University (BYU). Compliance with BYU standards, as listed in the current BYU catalog, is an obligation while participating in ROTC activities and at all times on the BYU campus. General information on Aerospace Studies (Air Force ROTC) and Military Science (Army ROTC) is given below. More detailed information is available in the appropriate BYU catalog listing. http://www.uvu.edu/catalog/current/departments/air-force-and-army-rotc/ I would assume if the story is accurate, it becomes UVU running the program as opposed to BYU and thus its standards being the ones globally applied, with BYU standards only applying while on BYU campus. 2
bsjkki Posted January 25, 2017 Posted January 25, 2017 5 minutes ago, Calm said: I would assume if the story is accurate, it becomes UVU running the program as opposed to BYU and thus its standards being the ones globally applied, with BYU standards only applying while on BYU campus. And I think having the programs coordinated at UVU would be a lot easier overall for staff and students instead of forcing BYUs Honor Code standards on non member leaders and students from the other campuses. I think this move makes a lot of sense.
3DOP Posted January 25, 2017 Posted January 25, 2017 (edited) 7 hours ago, Yirgacheffe said: BYU is not the employer of the ROTC fellow, the US government is, should the government be able to tell it's soldiers which religious practices they have to follow depending on the circumstances they are in? Governments can in justice see that there are consequences for soldiers who observe the practices of a religion that is an enemy of the state, unless the soldier is conscripted. America is currently all volunteer. There are no slave soldiers here. Currently, this would merely mean that the members of suspect sects could be in justice be excluded from military service. I agree that nothing would be gained if the military tried to force a soldier to observe a religion against a soldier's will. That would be wrong. But It does not appear to me that the BYU/ROTC question is about anyone being forced to observe a religion. No one's freedom is being violated. There is freedom on both sides. -------------------------------- In general, I do not see any reason why national security should be compromised if a particular religious sect is understood to be in conflict with the interests of a nation. It seems unreasonable to me to assume that religious enemies are by nature less dangerous to national security than non-religious enemies. I don't see any reason to be softer with religious enemies than with non-religious enemies. No discrimination! If in some unforeseen future the Vatican declared war on the United States, it would seem reasonable that Roman Catholics could be more closely scrutinized and even excluded from military service in the US armed forces. This is not to say that any government should "be able to tell it's soldiers which religious practices they have to follow". But Catholics would need to be aware that they might not have any chaplains. Seems fair to me. I don't have different principles that apply to America than I do for Russia, or Nepal, or Saudi Arabia. A question for you...Do you think that the nation of Israel, should be required under universal norms of justice, to accept into its military, members of religious sects which have an expressed agenda to take Israel back from the Jews? I think it is always natural (good) for any nation to exclude possible enemies from military service. Military service is a privilege, not a right. That is not to say which side is ultimately in the right. I tend to be against Israel, but I surely understand if they don't want certain Islamic sects in their military! I am merely suggesting that it is a bad principle, and an entirely impractical idea, to hold that anyone's religion must be exempted from consideration in determining who might qualify to serve in the armed services of any particular nation. Think of all the religious wars. Do you blame Saladin of an injustice if he did not welcome professing Christians to serve with him as the crusading Christians approached? I think surely not. Saladin would not be guilty of telling his "soldiers which religious practices they have to follow". But surely he would be well within his rights to exclude those who had good reason to favor the enemy. Do you disagree? I use Saladin as an example because I am a Christian defending the Muslim on this principle. I think the Crusaders had other reasons to oppose the Muslims. If a religion is inimical to a nation, the nation can in justice seek to preserve itself from the religion, without imposing on soldiers the obligation to observe a religion with which they disagree. Edited January 25, 2017 by 3DOP 1
Yirgacheffe Posted January 25, 2017 Posted January 25, 2017 7 hours ago, Bernard Gui said: Read the employment terms I cited above. The ROTC folks are also employees of the school or university at which they work and are subject to rules and regulations in those institutions. And the military can re-think this at any time.
Yirgacheffe Posted January 25, 2017 Posted January 25, 2017 (edited) 13 hours ago, Buckeye said: The ROTC's freedom is not really religious freedom. I doubt the officer is claiming that alcohol consumption is required by his faith. And the church does not discipline catholic students/faculty who take wine during the Eucharist. The ROTC's freedom is simple freedom of association. The government is not obligated to require its officers to abide by the religious tenants of schools that wish to have ROTC chapters. For example, suppose a school required all men to have beards; that wouldn't fly with the ROTC either. So here there is no conflict of freedoms. The conflict is that the two organizations are exercising their freedoms to uphold mutually-exclusive positions and so must part ways. I doubt the officer is claiming that alcohol consumption is required by his faith Not being forced into religious practice is fundamentally a religious freedom issue. Edited January 25, 2017 by Yirgacheffe 2
Yirgacheffe Posted January 25, 2017 Posted January 25, 2017 12 hours ago, thesometimesaint said: You don't have a right to do whatever you like on another person's dime. Who's dime is it, BYU or the US government?
Yirgacheffe Posted January 25, 2017 Posted January 25, 2017 12 hours ago, Bernard Gui said: taste or need for alcohol above his obligations as a professional soldier to function appropriately in a position of authority to which he is assigned Or he doesn't believe as a member of the military it should be required of him to abide by the religious restriction of a faith he does not believe in, perhaps he doesn't consume alcohol but does like coffee or tea, you make it out like he's an angry alchie that wants his liquor, but that is not necessarily the case and IMO more than likely not the the case. Freedom of religion starts at not being forced into a religion. 1
Yirgacheffe Posted January 25, 2017 Posted January 25, 2017 9 hours ago, Calm said: They do elsewhere. The army requires soldiers to conform to religious practice that is not their own where in the US?
Yirgacheffe Posted January 25, 2017 Posted January 25, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, 3DOP said: But It does not appear to me that the BYU/ROTC question is about anyone being forced to observe a religion Not drinking alcohol, coffee, and tea are LDS specific religious requirements, and any non-member who is required to observe these restrictions if their religion does not hold them is forced to observe the religious practice of the LDS. The military installed what they see as a proper, qualified person in the position BYU objects. The military did the proper thing and moved to a nearby university where the rotc commander can decided his religious participation. Quote No one's freedom is being violated. There is freedom on both sides. How is it freedom if one has to abide by religious restrictions of a faith they are not a member of? Why does "freedom of religion" require that the religious are able to impose their activities on non-members? Edited January 25, 2017 by Yirgacheffe 3
Bernard Gui Posted January 25, 2017 Posted January 25, 2017 54 minutes ago, Yirgacheffe said: Who's dime is it, BYU or the US government? They are paid by the DOD, but are considered employees of the school. They may achieve status of full professor. 1
Bernard Gui Posted January 25, 2017 Posted January 25, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, Yirgacheffe said: Or he doesn't believe as a member of the military it should be required of him to abide by the religious restriction of a faith he does not believe in, perhaps he doesn't consume alcohol but does like coffee or tea, you make it out like he's an angry alchie that wants his liquor, but that is not necessarily the case and IMO more than likely not the the case. Freedom of religion starts at not being forced into a religion. I'm not making him out to be anything, mainly because we know nothing about this situation. It's been pure speculation from the start and is probably fake news or hopelessly garbled rumor. Choosing to apply for a job at a religious institution entails some effort to understand the religion and what is required at that school. Even if this story has some substance or if it as it has been presented here, it is one of the goofiest things I have heard for a very long time. Edited January 25, 2017 by Bernard Gui 3
Bernard Gui Posted January 25, 2017 Posted January 25, 2017 (edited) 8 hours ago, california boy said: I know that much of what is being commented on is pure speculation. I find it interesting that most Mormons think the problem with signing the Honor Code must be about the WoW. But what if it isn't that at all? What if the officer is gay and is legally married? Does the church really expect him to divorce his spouse just so he can accept this "sought out position" Perhaps that is why BYU is not willing to sign a waiver for this instructor. We all know how freaked out the church is about gay marriage. And how about the Department of Defense? Should they be expected to discriminate against officers competing for a promotion just because they are gay? For some reason, I just don't see them willing to do this. Those that think the honorable thing for this officer to do is to bow to the discrimination practices of BYU in order to maintain his honor are delusional in my opinion. Standing up against discrimination is never a bad position in my opinion. Just because BYU is willing to discriminate against gay couples, doesn't mean the Department of Defense is willing to discriminate. Like I said, this is just speculation. But if this is the case, I see no compromise from either side. The only solution is to move the ROTC program off of BYU campus. How on earth is having a no-alcohol/drugs clause in an honor code for students and employees an example of discrimination? Edited January 25, 2017 by Bernard Gui 1
Calm Posted January 25, 2017 Posted January 25, 2017 (edited) 2 hours ago, Yirgacheffe said: The army requires soldiers to conform to religious practice that is not their own where in the US? I didn't say the US. When it matters to them enough, they require their people to abide by cultural standards of the community they are embedded in. I am not suggesting it should be mandatory in this case. I think it is more appropriate to find an officer who is willing to do so, either because it is already a standard they live by or one easily adapted to. If they don't want to put the effort in to finding one to work with BYU, then I don't have a problem with them withdrawing from BYU campus as long as accommodations are made for the kids already enrolled so the change to accommodate their commander's leisure choices to drink alcohol does not impinge on their ability to manage getting to classes and any work they are currently employed in or ROTC assignments. If that happens, then I think the DoD have the wrong attitude in what a ROTC commander is there for, imo he is not there to put his own luxury choice of entertainment (as there is no necessity to drink beer, wine, or whatever) over the needs of his charges to get an education (which imo is a necessity). BYU just should reevaluate whether putting some of their resources to the ROTC program still returns adequate value for the school and their students. If it does, great; work with the change. If it doesn't, then downgrade participation or completely phase it out. Edited January 25, 2017 by Calm 3
Calm Posted January 25, 2017 Posted January 25, 2017 (edited) 9 hours ago, california boy said: I know that much of what is being commented on is pure speculation. I find it interesting that most Mormons think the problem with signing the Honor Code must be about the WoW. But what if it isn't that at all? If you are speaking about this thread, I suspect the tendency to believe it is a WoW issue comes from the OPer who claims to have an inside source and constructs the issue as a WoW one. JohnnieCake is not LDS, so you might want to ask him why he chose to frame it that way. " I understand that the new non Mormon commander is only wanting to exercise his freedom as an American to drink alcohol which conflicts with the Y's honor code...Should non Mormon adult (drinks beer) instructors" Edited January 25, 2017 by Calm 2
sunstoned Posted January 25, 2017 Posted January 25, 2017 16 hours ago, Bernard Gui said: Well, here is where we don't agree....BYU can make that a condition of employment and one does not have to seek a job there. True, and apparently this is what happened. The DOD decided not to deal with it and they moved the ROTC to UVU. No loss to the military as UVU is a great school. Maybe a loss for BYU. But hey, they still have the honor code. 1
rongo Posted January 25, 2017 Posted January 25, 2017 8 hours ago, Yirgacheffe said: Who's dime is it, BYU or the US government? That's a good question. As a BYU instructor, I'll bet they get paid by BYU (via tithing and tuition), not the DoD. Lt. Col. Kirksey and Master Seargeant Gregory, the AFROTC commanders at our high school, are employees of the school district, even though they are retired Air Force. They are paid by the school district. 1
california boy Posted January 25, 2017 Posted January 25, 2017 9 hours ago, Bernard Gui said: How on earth is having a no-alcohol/drugs clause in an honor code for students and employees an example of discrimination? The honor code also prohibits gay married couples.
california boy Posted January 25, 2017 Posted January 25, 2017 (edited) 8 hours ago, Calm said: If you are speaking about this thread, I suspect the tendency to believe it is a WoW issue comes from the OPer who claims to have an inside source and constructs the issue as a WoW one. JohnnieCake is not LDS, so you might want to ask him why he chose to frame it that way. " I understand that the new non Mormon commander is only wanting to exercise his freedom as an American to drink alcohol which conflicts with the Y's honor code...Should non Mormon adult (drinks beer) instructors" And if another commander was a married gay officer, then what? It is more the principle that I was addressing since this is all speculation anyway. Should the military discriminate against officers who want to apply for a promotion? Should BYU force its beliefs on someone who is an employee of the government and expect the ROTC to stay on campus? That is really the framework of this question. Edited January 25, 2017 by california boy
Sleeper Cell Posted January 25, 2017 Posted January 25, 2017 10 hours ago, Yirgacheffe said: Not drinking alcohol, coffee, and tea are LDS specific religious requirements, and any non-member who is required to observe these restrictions if their religion does not hold them is forced to observe the religious practice of the LDS. The military installed what they see as a proper, qualified person in the position BYU objects. The military did the proper thing and moved to a nearby university where the rotc commander can decided his religious participation. When a family member joined the Peace Corps, she was assigned to a Muslim country. While there, she conformed to a number of “Muslim-specific requirements,” including covering her head and abstaining from alcohol. There is a difference between “religious participation” and showing a little respect for the community in which you are serving. BTW, if the military objected to “these restrictions,” shouldn’t they have raised the issue long before now? After all, how long has AF ROTC been at BYU? 2
rongo Posted January 25, 2017 Posted January 25, 2017 Just now, california boy said: And if another commander was a married gay officer, then what? I think that would be another level of unacceptable for BYU than wanting to drink coffee at home. Don't you? 1
Rain Posted January 25, 2017 Posted January 25, 2017 17 hours ago, Bob Crockett said: I mis-spelled many words in my post. I laughed when I read it. 1 hour ago, rongo said: That's a good question. As a BYU instructor, I'll bet they get paid by BYU (via tithing and tuition), not the DoD. Lt. Col. Kirksey and Master Seargeant Gregory, the AFROTC commanders at our high school, are employees of the school district, even though they are retired Air Force. They are paid by the school district. And someone mentioned above that BYU has a building for the ROTC? That would something also on BYU's dime. I had that thought about tithing. As much as how tithing has been spent has been ridiculed lately, I still believe it is the Lord's money so it makes perfeCT sense to me that BYU would require one of their instructors to live the honor code. Someone also mentioned that an ROTC officer would teach an Aerospace class. Can non ROTC students go to these classes?
california boy Posted January 25, 2017 Posted January 25, 2017 3 hours ago, sunstoned said: True, and apparently this is what happened. The DOD decided not to deal with it and they moved the ROTC to UVU. No loss to the military as UVU is a great school. Maybe a loss for BYU. But hey, they still have the honor code. I personally don't see how this is not a good solution to the problem. Maybe someone else can explain why this is not the best solution.
california boy Posted January 25, 2017 Posted January 25, 2017 6 minutes ago, rongo said: I think that would be another level of unacceptable for BYU than wanting to drink coffee at home. Don't you? I think this is the same principle. If BYU is freaking out because someone wants coffee in the morning, then I am pretty sure BYU would freak out if the commander is gay and married. Perhaps the military asked the same question and decided that the only long term solution was to remove itself from BYU. 1
california boy Posted January 25, 2017 Posted January 25, 2017 15 minutes ago, Sleeper Cell said: When a family member joined the Peace Corps, she was assigned to a Muslim country. While there, she conformed to a number of “Muslim-specific requirements,” including covering her head and abstaining from alcohol. There is a difference between “religious participation” and showing a little respect for the community in which you are serving. BTW, if the military objected to “these restrictions,” shouldn’t they have raised the issue long before now? After all, how long has AF ROTC been at BYU? The military is not the same as the Peace Corps. Each organization decides how to deal with cultural issues. I am pretty sure soldiers are still allowed alcohol while serving in the Middle East. I also know the embassy employees are allowed alcohol in Muslin countries.
Recommended Posts