Bernard Gui Posted February 28, 2017 Posted February 28, 2017 2 minutes ago, sjdawg said: Here is a different example. I live in the middle east. I am assigned to work within an organization that is primarily Muslim. A middle east organization pays my salary (but the funding comes through my american company). Should I be required to fast during Ramadan like my Muslim coworkers? I am not required to do so. What I am required to do is be respectful of those who are fasting. I don't eat or drink in front of them. If I am eating I make sure my office door is closed. No one cares. I guess Muslims are more open minded than BYU. Probably not. But if it were a requirement for your employment and you knew it, would you not react differently? Would you insist they change the requirement or you would take your coworkers to another company?
Bernard Gui Posted February 28, 2017 Posted February 28, 2017 7 hours ago, sjdawg said: would either drinking (or abstaining from) coffee impact the quality of the program in any way? Absolutely, if it were to violate a code one agreed to keep. Moreover, why should the cadets be required to honor the code when their commander would not?
Bernard Gui Posted February 28, 2017 Posted February 28, 2017 7 hours ago, sjdawg said: When I was a teenager I played hockey. Usually we didn't have league games on Sundays but in tournaments the championship games were often held on Sundays. My parents did not allow me to participate in these games. Should I have been kicked off the team? I appreciate that my team allowed me to remain on the team and respected my religion. It could have easily replaced me with someone who would be there for the most important games. No one asked "when did you learn about Sunday games?" They simply accommodated our different beliefs and got on with life. What if you had signed an agreement as a condition of being on the team that you would play all games including Sunday tournaments, you were the team captain, and then when the tournament came, you informed the coach that you were not going to honor your contract. In fact, you were going to take the team with you and join another league that did not have to play on Sunday?
sjdawg Posted February 28, 2017 Posted February 28, 2017 3 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said: What if you had signed an agreement as a condition of being on the team that you would play all games including Sunday tournaments, you were the team captain, and then when the tournament came, you informed the coach that you were not going to honor your contract. In fact, you were going to take the team with you and join another league that did not have to play on Sunday? That would be different. I didn't sign such an agreement and neither did the ROTC commander. He couldn't agree to the agreement and so alternate arrangements were made.
sjdawg Posted February 28, 2017 Posted February 28, 2017 (edited) 25 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said: Probably not. But if it were a requirement for your employment and you knew it, would you not react differently? Would you insist they change the requirement or you would take your coworkers to another company? I wouldn't insist they change the requirement but locating elsewhere wouldn't be out of the question. It seems like a reasonable solution Edited February 28, 2017 by sjdawg
Bernard Gui Posted February 28, 2017 Posted February 28, 2017 29 minutes ago, sjdawg said: I understand what you are saying but I don't understand how the rating is developed. What is contributing to the score? BYU or the ROTC commander? Or something else entirely? This is the cover page. Unfortunately, I could not find a description of the ranking system. https://ink.niche.com/rotc-programs-experience-resurgence/ 1
Calm Posted February 28, 2017 Posted February 28, 2017 (edited) 43 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said: But at what cost? Apparently you missed my post showing the ratings of all college and university ROTC programs. BYU's AFROTC program is one of the few rated A+. This is an odd thing to do to an A+ program, what? https://ink.niche.com/schools-offer-air-force-rotc/ The program has been running with UVU as partners. Besides location of offices, very little might change. Same classes, same teachers, same students. What has been the Army rating? Edited February 28, 2017 by Calm 1
Bernard Gui Posted February 28, 2017 Posted February 28, 2017 (edited) 9 hours ago, Calm said: According to BG's research iirc, they are being paid by the school...though my husband just shared the schools are probably receiving federal funding for it and if so, if BYU is only in essence managing federal money, which does change my view on how much input they would have. No...they are paid by the DOD but are considered employees of the school. The commander is given a full professorship. i realize that BYU students can travel just a little way to attend ROTC over at UVU. While BYU students may still participate in another school's cadre, the powerful program, ownership, unit pride, and valued traditions built over decades of service including maintaining the integrity and strength of the program in the face of sometimes violent opposition during the Vietnam protest years (when I was at BYU) ought to count for something, in my opinion. I know how much the military values traditions. BYU had a distinguished and honored ROTC tradition that has now been sullied, making BYU and the Church objects of ridicule as per comments on this board and in the press. Seems to me a pretty shabby way to treat a good and faithful friend of over 65 years. Edited February 28, 2017 by Bernard Gui
Bernard Gui Posted February 28, 2017 Posted February 28, 2017 (edited) 3 hours ago, sjdawg said: That would be different. I didn't sign such an agreement and neither did the ROTC commander. He couldn't agree to the agreement and so alternate arrangements were made. Did he not have a contract to work at BYU? The sticking point was signing the Honor Code. The real question is when did he find out about the Honor Code? Edited February 28, 2017 by Bernard Gui
Bernard Gui Posted February 28, 2017 Posted February 28, 2017 4 hours ago, sjdawg said: I wouldn't insist they change the requirement but locating elsewhere wouldn't be out of the question. It seems like a reasonable solution You locating yourself elsewhere of course would not be out of the question, but taking the company away with you is not reasonable. In this case, it was an option for the officer not to accept the position if he objected to the conditions. Taking the job with him to another school seems unreasonable to me. Maybe even a bit petulant. I'll let it rest at that. 1
california boy Posted February 28, 2017 Posted February 28, 2017 4 hours ago, Bernard Gui said: Probably not. But if it were a requirement for your employment and you knew it, would you not react differently? Would you insist they change the requirement or you would take your coworkers to another company? I think the point is that requiring someone to practice the religious beliefs of their employeer is unreasonable. In this case, the military found it unreasonable for their officers to live by Mormon beliefs on the WoW. 3
california boy Posted February 28, 2017 Posted February 28, 2017 4 hours ago, Bernard Gui said: Absolutely, if it were to violate a code one agreed to keep. Moreover, why should the cadets be required to honor the code when their commander would not? In the privacy of their own home? Really? With this kind of autocratic attitude, I definitely think the military made the right decision to move the program. 1
Storm Rider Posted February 28, 2017 Posted February 28, 2017 11 hours ago, sjdawg said: I don't know how you say this with a straight face. One issue specifically mentioned was BYU's desire to prevent the military officer from drinking coffee even while in his own home. That portion of the honor code exists only because of mormon belief. You can say that drinking coffee is a minor enjoyment that someone could realistically live without and I would agree with that. Saying that there is no mixing of LDS religion within the honor code is false. I will agree it applies to both LDS and Non-LDS BYU attendees in the same way but it is absolutely an LDS requirement. If BYU had only said don't drink coffee on campus I would support them. When they start dictating that the military office can't have a cup of coffee in his own home they lose me. Sjdawg, you are conflating the motivation for including a small part of the Honor Code with a relgious belief. It is an error that several are making. You would be correct IF the Honor Code stated: "You must observe the Word of Wisdom as recorded in the D&C". However, that is not what it says at all. There is no direct line to religious belief. What the Honor Code states is what drinks are not allowed. Do you see the difference? Read the entire Honor Code and it is easily seen that the entire code of behavior does not come from religious belief or doctrine. As an aside, for those who drink coffee, tea, or alcohol I think the sacrifice is significant and I am not trying to minimize that at all. However, it is more than evident that when only 64% of the population drinks coffee it is obvious that there are many people that could easily abide by the Honor Code and comfortably serve in the ROTC or any other organization at BYU and other universities that have similar types of codes of conduct. No, the Honor Code is about installing a way of life while in attendance at BYU. The university is committed to a more significant ideal than only attending a university for a few years. Just as in the military, BYU is trying to create lifetimes scholars and leaders. Whether you or I think this is the way to go about is irrelvent. It is what they have chosen and if we don't like we don't have to attend or serve there. 1
california boy Posted February 28, 2017 Posted February 28, 2017 4 hours ago, Bernard Gui said: No...they are paid by the DOD but are considered employees of the school. The commander is given a full professorship. i realize that BYU students can travel just a little way to attend ROTC over at UVU. While BYU students may still participate in another school's cadre, the powerful program, ownership, unit pride, and valued traditions built over decades of service including maintaining the integrity and strength of the program in the face of sometimes violent opposition during the Vietnam protest years (when I was at BYU) ought to count for something, in my opinion. I know how much the military values traditions. BYU had a distinguished and honored ROTC tradition that has now been sullied, making BYU and the Church objects of ridicule as per comments on this board and in the press. Seems to me a pretty shabby way to treat a good and faithful friend of over 65 years. The trouble with your argument is, this is NOT BYU's program. It is the military's. The ROTC program has been distinguished NOT BYU. BYU has only been the location of the program. BYU does NOTHING in the running of the program. If a landlord rents a building to Mother Teressa, do they get all the credit for the work Mother Teressa does? 1
Storm Rider Posted February 28, 2017 Posted February 28, 2017 10 hours ago, Yirgacheffe said: The issue is not who chooses to drink coffee or tea but if it is religiously forbidden. I'm having a hard time finding anything other than alcohol, and many of the cases I see forbid underage consumption. Could you give a link to your results? What I stated was "similar" codes of conduct. The google research I did was similar to yours and addressed alcohol, which I think is similar - it is a restriction on what one eats or drinks.
california boy Posted February 28, 2017 Posted February 28, 2017 27 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said: You locating yourself elsewhere of course would not be out of the question, but taking the company away with you is not reasonable. In this case, it was an option for the officer not to accept the position if he objected to the conditions. Taking the job with him to another school seems unreasonable to me. Maybe even a bit petulant. I'll let it rest at that. It is not BYU's company. It was the militaries. Certainly the owner of the company has the right to relocate their business. 2
Bernard Gui Posted February 28, 2017 Posted February 28, 2017 (edited) 4 hours ago, Calm said: The program has been running with UVU as partners. Besides location of offices, very little might change. Same classes, same teachers, same students. What has been the Army rating? I think something far more important than a change of venue happened. BYU AFROTC started in 1951. For 66 years the BYU Honor Code was not objectionable. Then one day, it is not only objectionable, it is dishonorable. This from the SLT seems to be the consensus, but I don't buy it..... Quote But, as a member of the BYU faculty, he was expected to sign a document pledging to hew to the school's Honor Code. That standard, among other things, forbids the consumption of alcohol, coffee and tea, in keeping with the teachings of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which owns the university. Hogan refused to sign. He said he would abide by the school's standards while on campus and at any time when representing BYU and its ROTC program. But, he said, BYU had no business controlling his life in the privacy of his own home or otherwise off duty. BYU would not budge on its requirement and, as a result, documents obtained by The Salt Lake Tribune indicate that the Pentagon is preparing to move Air Force ROTC Detachment 855 to the nearby state-owned Utah Valley University. That is exactly what should happen. The shift would not make that much difference, as BYU students could still be part of the program. It is common for ROTC detachments to be based at one college and include students from other schools. BYU waives the Honor Code requirement for faculty on one-year appointments. But, because Hogan's hitch was to be three years, its officials refused to do so for him. School leaders are entitled to their belief that such inflexibility is a sign of moral fiber. But, to the rest of the world, it smacks of mindless intransigence, an inability to make allowance for the fact that other people's standards can be no less ethical, even when they are not identical. And if anyone is interested in a real lesson in ethics, consider: Hogan could have signed the Honor Code, just to be agreeable, then proceeded to violate it, perhaps on a daily basis, reasonably believing that nobody would ever know. Nobody, that is, but him. Not having been in the military, but having friends, roommates, and close relatives who were in BYU AFROTC, I know the pride they had in participating in the outstanding program. BYU stood its ground during the Vietnam era protests against ROTC, some of which were violent. Over the years it has provided many good officers for the Air Force. So, it's not just a parting of ways, but a lesson to the Church in what true ethics are? 66 years of faithful honored service to the military come down to a cup of coffee? I wonder what the Tribune had to say about anti-military/ROTC protests back in the 60s. Funny that that mindset is now calling BYU unethical. I would like to hear from former members and leaders of the BYU corps. If they are ok with this, then I'll gladly fold up my tents and slink off into the sunset. I'll leave it there. Edited February 28, 2017 by Bernard Gui 1
Johnnie Cake Posted February 28, 2017 Author Posted February 28, 2017 What is so frustrating about this incident...at least to me...is that the Y and the ROTC could not even find a reasonable compromise. I am so sick and tired of this black and white, my way or the highway mentality...surely something could have been done on the part of the Y that could have allowed this man to drink his morning joe at home before heading over to the campus...he on the other hand was willing to forgo drinking coffee on campus...Both seem like reasonable compromises...but no...why can't reasonable people find compromise. Everyone is so freaking entrenched in their respective camps... 3
Storm Rider Posted February 28, 2017 Posted February 28, 2017 10 hours ago, Yirgacheffe said: I don't see any social activism here just the military saying we won't force people into the religious practices of any religion. And that is what sends me over the edge. No where is does the Honor Code demand a religious beliefs in a specific think. It is a nice bit of knee-jerk reaction, but it completely based in the minds of the people who make this illogical leap. The Honor Code has nothing to do with religious beliefs and there is no requirement for such. Universities, military organizations, social groups, etc. all have codes of behavior. The fact that any code of behavior is acceptable UNLESS it is motivated by some form of religious belief is being anti-religious. The military has a strict code of conduct about committing adultry. No problems with that. BYU has a similar type of prohibtion in the Honor Code is it bad because it is also motivated by relgious belief? Your logic would be good or correct if the Honor Code clearly stated that its code is tied to a religious belief that is required of all who serve or attend BYU. It doesn't. It just states of the code of conduct is when at BYU and nothing about religion. 1
Bernard Gui Posted February 28, 2017 Posted February 28, 2017 6 minutes ago, california boy said: It is not BYU's company. It was the militaries. Certainly the owner of the company has the right to relocate their business. ROTC instructors are employees of the school. The commander has a full professorship as a school employee.The school voluntarily serves as host. The military is a guest at the school and is given access to its students. The military will do as it wishes.
Bernard Gui Posted February 28, 2017 Posted February 28, 2017 (edited) 7 minutes ago, Storm Rider said: And that is what sends me over the edge. No where is does the Honor Code demand a religious beliefs in a specific think. It is a nice bit of knee-jerk reaction, but it completely based in the minds of the people who make this illogical leap. The Honor Code has nothing to do with religious beliefs and there is no requirement for such. Universities, military organizations, social groups, etc. all have codes of behavior. The fact that any code of behavior is acceptable UNLESS it is motivated by some form of religious belief is being anti-religious. The military has a strict code of conduct about committing adultry. No problems with that. BYU has a similar type of prohibtion in the Honor Code is it bad because it is also motivated by relgious belief? Your logic would be good or correct if the Honor Code clearly stated that its code is tied to a religious belief that is required of all who serve or attend BYU. It doesn't. It just states of the code of conduct is when at BYU and nothing about religion. One could reasonably argue that it is a health code, which of course, it is. One could argue that the chastity code is religious, which of course, it is. The Honor Code is simply a condition of employment set by the host institution which employs the ROTC staff as members of its faculty and even grants them professorial status. To require cadets to hold to a code not required of their commander would be unfair. Edited February 28, 2017 by Bernard Gui
Storm Rider Posted February 28, 2017 Posted February 28, 2017 10 hours ago, california boy said: Tell me. Do you freak out like this when someone applies to go to BYU and then finds out they are not allowed to drink coffee, so instead applies and attends UVU? Is this also a social plot by the left to destroy religion? You are so off base on this one. This whole issue is about the military no longer requiring personnel to abide by an honor code that is based partially upon unique religious beliefs that are not a part of the military requirements. The military was gracious enough to allow BYU ROTC students to continue to participate at a place 15 minutes away. Oh the travasty. Religion is being persecuted by the Left. "Pure, unadulterated religious persecution." Really? Yeah, no. You aren't even in the right field of play. I wish what you say would be the way it was, but this reeks of a premeditated act. I would not have a problem, as I have already stated, if the military said, "Hey, BYU. We have enjoyed our relationship, but we are no longer interested in have our ROTC on a private university. We are moving elsewhere and beginning (pick a date) we will be elsewhere. Thanks again." That would have been honorable and honest and it is not what they did. Out of the blue some twit decides "Oh, I cannot do this" and then the giant, ugly card - they are trying to force our boy to have a specific relgious belief!" "We cannot have that, let's move the ROTC to a place where no one is forcing our officers to convert to a religion." Unfortunately, it is complete balderdash. There is no requirement of religious belief, there is not requirement for being a member of a specific church - there is a simply stated Honor Code that I believe was well know in the military community and by Mr. Hogan. These boys have not been living under rocks and their officer corps is filled with LDS. No sir, let's not try to create a story from whole cloth. Just stick to the facts and connect the dots. 1
Bernard Gui Posted February 28, 2017 Posted February 28, 2017 14 minutes ago, Johnnie Cake said: What is so frustrating about this incident...at least to me...is that the Y and the ROTC could not even find a reasonable compromise. I am so sick and tired of this black and white, my way or the highway mentality...surely something could have been done on the part of the Y that could have allowed this man to drink his morning joe at home before heading over to the campus...he on the other hand was willing to forgo drinking coffee on campus...Both seem like reasonable compromises...but no...why can't reasonable people find compromise. Everyone is so freaking entrenched in their respective camps... Cool Hand Luke. Ahhhh.....The noble intransigent rebel breaking himself against the oppressive intransigent Machine. Over a few parking meters .....or a cup of coffee. The saintly new-comer taking down the unholy System. To me the most reasonable thing would be to withdraw from the field of battle and take a position on another more congenial campus. Everyone wins. In my humble opinion.
Bernard Gui Posted February 28, 2017 Posted February 28, 2017 On February 23, 2017 at 9:50 AM, Johnnie Cake said: BYU's President went eye to eye with the Pentagon and didn't blink...Score a victory for BYU Standards and a Loss to BYU ROTC members http://www.sltrib.com/news/4968090-155/with-the-pentagon-on-the-telephone I find it interesting that allowing the ROTC Commander to drink coffee in the privacy of his own home "would fundamentally change who [BYU is] as a university." Not necessarily. Winking at the required 24/7 student/faculty observation of the Honor Code would fundamentally change the university. Allowing some to hold a different standard would be unfair to all.
Johnnie Cake Posted February 28, 2017 Author Posted February 28, 2017 3 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said: Not necessarily. Winking at the required 24/7 student/faculty observation of the Honor Code would fundamentally change the university. Allowing some to hold a different standard would be unfair to all. For what its worth...your point of view prevailed....and everyone lost. 1
Recommended Posts