ALarson Posted August 31, 2017 Posted August 31, 2017 (edited) 5 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said: I want to be a Navy Seal. But not go through the training. That's not what you stated. You stated that "no one is forced to sign" the Honor Code. I guess we can get into semantics, but a person who wants to attend BYU isn't allowed to attend without signing the honor code. Or do you know of waivers given or allowances made? Edited August 31, 2017 by ALarson
Bernard Gui Posted August 31, 2017 Posted August 31, 2017 3 minutes ago, jkwilliams said: If you go to the Creamery on Ninth, they have all these photos of BYU students from days gone by. One photo is of a "beard-growing contest" from the early 1950s. Wouldn't be kosher today. My roommate and I had beards in 1964-5. But not in 65-66. At the time I understood the reason. Today not so much. 1
Tacenda Posted August 31, 2017 Posted August 31, 2017 3 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said: My roommate and I had beards in 1964-5. But not in 65-66. At the time I understood the reason. Today not so much. The church leans legalistic in ways, I hope or wish it could go back to the sixties, but maybe the hippie generation caused the no beard rule, dunno.
Bernard Gui Posted August 31, 2017 Posted August 31, 2017 (edited) 7 minutes ago, ALarson said: That's not what you stated. You stated that "no one is forced to sign" the Honor Code. I guess we can get into semantics, but a person who wants to attend BYU isn't allowed to attend without signing the honor code. Or do you know of wavers given or allowances made? Not sure I understand your point. I don't think we disagree. Most organizations have membership requirements. For example, the Paul Bunyan Rifle Range just down the road requires prospective members to undergo safety training and sign an agreement to observe all club rules. When I joined, I didn't expect to be exempted from their requirements. Nobody held a gun on me and forced me to sign. Want to go to BYU? Sign the code they require or find another place. Edited August 31, 2017 by Bernard Gui 3
Bernard Gui Posted August 31, 2017 Posted August 31, 2017 Just now, Tacenda said: The church leans legalistic in ways, I hope or wish it could go back to the sixties, but maybe the hippie generation caused the no beard rule, dunno. It became a symbol of rebellion/revolution. I wouldn't want to relive the 60s or 70s.
Pete Ahlstrom Posted August 31, 2017 Posted August 31, 2017 1 hour ago, hope_for_things said: If MormonLeaks chose not to release the video, couldn't the person who recorded it just published the video themselves or find another outlet to release the video? I'm still struggling to see why MormonLeaks is getting a large portion of blame for this incident, nobody has explained to me what specifically they did that was so egregious. In my opinion it detracts from the purpose of mormonleaks, which is church disclosure, not disclosure of a minor dispute between a football player and his hyper-reactive landlord. It could involve it in some legal action as well. I wish the landlord would come forward and explain why he thought it necessary to film the player in the first place and what happened to make Mr. Bernard react the way he did. Did the pesky landlord goad Bernard into the reaction? Was there permission to record? The landlord's actions could be considered an invasion of privacy as Bernard was within the dwelling. Anyway, that's the problem I see. 3
bsjkki Posted August 31, 2017 Posted August 31, 2017 17 minutes ago, jkwilliams said: My dad was at BYU when they instituted the honor code in the mid-1950s. Back then, the common expression was that the campus had become "Kimballized." According to him (and I have no way of verifying this), then-apostle Spencer W. Kimball visited BYU and was appalled at the sloppy dress, beards, and strapless dresses he saw on campus. He went back to the board of regents (essentially the FP and Qof12) and asked that they institute a code of conduct, including dress and grooming standards. I've read articles referring to the "Kimballized" dresses at BYU. I can't find the original PDF history I had referenced in the past but here is another source using that term. http://juvenileinstructor.org/a-style-of-our-own/ and the Trib. had a historical oultine of the Honor Code. http://archive.sltrib.com/article.php?id=3854493&itype=CMSID It keeps changing so I don't see why it won't continue to change.
Tacenda Posted August 31, 2017 Posted August 31, 2017 7 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said: It became a symbol of rebellion/revolution. I wouldn't want to relive the 60s or 70s. When I say go back to the sixties, I mean't how the church was back then. Not the drug scene or free love scene. Just the way it use to be in the church, but I guess we all look back on some childhood things with fondness. Hopefully the church will keep up the social functions and not try to simplify too many things. (short on posts, back to the subject, I read that John Dehlin is interviewing the Mormonleaks guy right now on John's FB about the video. If anyone is interested)
rodheadlee Posted August 31, 2017 Posted August 31, 2017 (edited) UCLA will gladly take Bernard off of your hands. Edited August 31, 2017 by rodheadlee
jkwilliams Posted August 31, 2017 Posted August 31, 2017 1 minute ago, Tacenda said: When I say go back to the sixties, I mean't how the church was back then. Not the drug scene or free love scene. Just the way it use to be in the church, but I guess we all look back on some childhood things with fondness. Hopefully the church will keep up the social functions and not try to simplify too many things. (short on posts, back to the subject, I read that John Dehlin is interviewing the Mormonleaks guy right now on John's FB about the video. If anyone is interested) Yeah, Ryan just told me a bit ago he was doing that.
jkwilliams Posted August 31, 2017 Posted August 31, 2017 28 minutes ago, bsjkki said: I've read articles referring to the "Kimballized" dresses at BYU. I can't find the original PDF history I had referenced in the past but here is another source using that term. http://juvenileinstructor.org/a-style-of-our-own/ and the Trib. had a historical oultine of the Honor Code. http://archive.sltrib.com/article.php?id=3854493&itype=CMSID It keeps changing so I don't see why it won't continue to change. Thanks for that. So my dad's memory wasn't too far off.
Teancum Posted August 31, 2017 Posted August 31, 2017 14 hours ago, clarkgoble said: So Deseret News is reporting the latest MormonLeaks and I think it's an outrage to the point something ought be done. It's video of Francis Bernard and the police. He of course is being forced to redshirt this year due to unknown honor code violations. But whereas previous leaks were about the church and the corporate meetings this is of a young college kid who had his privacy violated. Unless it was Bernard releasing the video this seems outrageous. What ought to be done? What can you or the Church legally do about it?
Kenngo1969 Posted August 31, 2017 Posted August 31, 2017 4 hours ago, jkwilliams said: My run-ins were as follows: After my mission, I got a letter from University Standards every Fall because my bishop in California had forgotten to send off my ecclesiastical endorsement. I once went to the testing center at 6 p.m. and was turned away because they said I needed to shave. I had shaved that morning, but apparently that wasn't good enough. Bearded Apostate!!!
Pete Ahlstrom Posted August 31, 2017 Posted August 31, 2017 1 hour ago, Teancum said: What ought to be done? What can you or the Church legally do about it? I'd like to know a little more about the surrounding events. I'd like to know the landlord's or manager's motivation for videotaping the incident and why they thought it needed to be released. More facts are needed to see if there is something legally that could be done and Mr. Bernard would be the one to do it, if a case can even be made.
clarkgoble Posted August 31, 2017 Author Posted August 31, 2017 1 hour ago, Teancum said: What ought to be done? What can you or the Church legally do about it? Not much beyond complain. There's freedom of speech. We can just point out how big a slimeball MormonLeaks is for doing this. 2
clarkgoble Posted August 31, 2017 Author Posted August 31, 2017 3 hours ago, Bernard Gui said: It's alleged defects are a regular topic here. I think there's a big difference between the honor code, which I have few if any problems with, and the honor code office which I could complain a long time about. 2
clarkgoble Posted August 31, 2017 Author Posted August 31, 2017 5 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said: Is it wrong for Mormon Leaks to release personal info on a private citizen? That's a good ethical question to consider. I'm not a fan of releasing this info, yet they are merely distributing content that already existed. Deseret News is now sharing the same info. Are they just as culpable? Deseret News did not link to the video but just made some pretty vague statements about it. That's a huge difference. In the same way newspapers vaguely described the Hulk Hogan video of Gawker but didn't link to it. 3 hours ago, hope_for_things said: see my other response, I think this falls into the category in the MormonLeaks mission statement for trying to expose an issue they believe is institutional and harmful, and that is the honor code. I'm not sure this qualifies as 100% wrong, I think its a gray area for sure and I'm torn and can see both sides of it. I personally am not comfortable having the video out there, but I can see why they did it and can't completely fault them. You don't think they could do that without showing the video? There was no middle ground? 3 hours ago, ALarson said: I think that each circumstance would need to be evaluated as it happened. But having sex is not a violation of anything for most (if it's consensual sex) and I think that's a different matter if someone tapes this without your knowledge and then makes it public (and I disagree that it's "going to get out there" anyway). However Francis Bernard was violating the Honor Code or there would have been nothing to tape and release to the public. That's why I feel he is the one mainly responsible here. Once again though, I don't agree with publishing the video and I feel bad for him and for his family. So you'd be fine with someone taping something during a moment of weakness on your part and publicizing it to the world? Would you say you were the one responsible? 4 hours ago, hope_for_things said: If MormonLeaks chose not to release the video, couldn't the person who recorded it just published the video themselves or find another outlet to release the video? I'm still struggling to see why MormonLeaks is getting a large portion of blame for this incident, nobody has explained to me what specifically they did that was so egregious. Generally when you do something that undeniably harms someone the burden of proof is on that person to be able to explain why it is ethical. You're trying to invert that. But more to the point there's a general presumption of privacy. We've all done things we've regretted. To have those trotted out on video to knowingly make us the object of ridicule and damage us personally would be wrong in basically every ethical system I can think of. If you can think of an ethic where that would be fine I'm open. But I can't see MormonLeaks increasing the happiness of everyone as in a Utilitarian ethic. I can't see applying the golden rule and wanting it done were we in his shoes. I can see it harming someone with basically no benefits. (Sorry a vague "put focus on the honor code" in no way justifies harming someone in this way) 2
ALarson Posted August 31, 2017 Posted August 31, 2017 (edited) 57 minutes ago, clarkgoble said: So you'd be fine with someone taping something during a moment of weakness on your part and publicizing it to the world? Would you say you were the one responsible? I never said that. However Francis Bernard was in violation of the law (or a city noise ordinance....), the police had been called, and it was not the first time. He'd already been ticketed and fined once and was warned earlier in the evening. I'd imagine the manager was recording it for their own protection possibly or just to have a record of what took place when the police arrived. Francis was very much responsible for the choice he made regarding the law infraction and also the violation of the honor code. Of course he's not responsible for the video being made public (others share in that), but there would have been no video if he hadn't been doing what he was doing. I just believe that he is the main one here who is responsible. I don't agree with anyone publishing the video (as I've stated numerous times). ETA: If this was one of my own kids involved, I would not be happy about any of it. But most of all, I'd be talking to my son or daughter and asking them what they were thinking and why they continued doing something that had already gotten them into trouble with the law and with BYU. I would hold them responsible. Edited August 31, 2017 by ALarson 1
hope_for_things Posted August 31, 2017 Posted August 31, 2017 5 minutes ago, ALarson said: 6 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said: Is it wrong for Mormon Leaks to release personal info on a private citizen? That's a good ethical question to consider. I'm not a fan of releasing this info, yet they are merely distributing content that already existed. Deseret News is now sharing the same info. Are they just as culpable? Deseret News did not link to the video but just made some pretty vague statements about it. That's a huge difference. In the same way newspapers vaguely described the Hulk Hogan video of Gawker but didn't link to it. 4 hours ago, hope_for_things said: see my other response, I think this falls into the category in the MormonLeaks mission statement for trying to expose an issue they believe is institutional and harmful, and that is the honor code. I'm not sure this qualifies as 100% wrong, I think its a gray area for sure and I'm torn and can see both sides of it. I personally am not comfortable having the video out there, but I can see why they did it and can't completely fault them. You don't think they could do that without showing the video? There was no middle ground? 5 hours ago, ALarson said: I think that each circumstance would need to be evaluated as it happened. But having sex is not a violation of anything for most (if it's consensual sex) and I think that's a different matter if someone tapes this without your knowledge and then makes it public (and I disagree that it's "going to get out there" anyway). However Francis Bernard was violating the Honor Code or there would have been nothing to tape and release to the public. That's why I feel he is the one mainly responsible here. Once again though, I don't agree with publishing the video and I feel bad for him and for his family. So you'd be fine with someone taping something during a moment of weakness on your part and publicizing it to the world? Would you say you were the one responsible? 5 hours ago, hope_for_things said: If MormonLeaks chose not to release the video, couldn't the person who recorded it just published the video themselves or find another outlet to release the video? I'm still struggling to see why MormonLeaks is getting a large portion of blame for this incident, nobody has explained to me what specifically they did that was so egregious. Generally when you do something that undeniably harms someone the burden of proof is on that person to be able to explain why it is ethical. You're trying to invert that. But more to the point there's a general presumption of privacy. We've all done things we've regretted. To have those trotted out on video to knowingly make us the object of ridicule and damage us personally would be wrong in basically every ethical system I can think of. If you can think of an ethic where that would be fine I'm open. But I can't see MormonLeaks increasing the happiness of everyone as in a Utilitarian ethic. I can't see applying the golden rule and wanting it done were we in his shoes. I can see it harming someone with basically no benefits. (Sorry a vague "put focus on the honor code" in no way justifies harming someone in this way) I think their argument would be that there is a greater societal good that can be done by exposing the problems in a public way and that this transparency will be a catalyst towards change similar to the sexual harassment scandal and how that brought about change that otherwise wouldn't have happened without the public exposure of the problems. And sometimes a video is more powerful than mere words. I'm not saying I'm entirely comfortable with this, I'm not. It's complicated for me.
Kenngo1969 Posted August 31, 2017 Posted August 31, 2017 Like many others here, I see "through a glass, darkly" when it comes to issues surrounding the BYU Honor Code and its application in specific cases. That's the way it's supposed to be. BYU should allow students and student-athletes their privacy, and the issue of whether to disclose any Honor Code issues and, if so, how much to disclose, should be left to the student. (I haven't had a chance to watch the video; I'm at work). However, one thing that sets Francis Bernard's case apart a bit for me from that of the typical BYU student-athlete is that Brother Bernard already had been on a mission. Reasonable or not, the expectation of many is that post-mission behavior will evince a certain level of maturity which may not be evident in pre-mission behavior.
Bernard Gui Posted August 31, 2017 Posted August 31, 2017 1 hour ago, clarkgoble said: I think there's a big difference between the honor code, which I have few if any problems with, and the honor code office which I could complain a long time about. Indeed. Human frailty, getting a little authority as one supposes, unrighteous dominion, etc. Fraught with difficulties when you try to enforce a code of any kind. 1
Tacenda Posted August 31, 2017 Posted August 31, 2017 4 hours ago, jkwilliams said: Thanks for that. So my dad's memory wasn't too far off. I have my parent's yearbooks from BYU, and I happen to look recently at their photos. The dance photos showed many women in spaghetti straps!
Kenngo1969 Posted August 31, 2017 Posted August 31, 2017 10 minutes ago, Tacenda said: I have my parent's yearbooks from BYU, and I happen to look recently at their photos. The dance photos showed many women in spaghetti straps!
provoman Posted September 1, 2017 Posted September 1, 2017 (edited) 20 hours ago, clarkgoble said: So Deseret News is reporting the latest MormonLeaks and I think it's an outrage to the point something ought be done. It's video of Francis Bernard and the police. He of course is being forced to redshirt this year due to unknown honor code violations. But whereas previous leaks were about the church and the corporate meetings this is of a young college kid who had his privacy violated. Unless it was Bernard releasing the video this seems outrageous. What privacy violation? What is more disturbing is that a "manager" for BYU student housing would claim "I have to" secretly (possible violation of the law) and overtly record. Why would that person "have to" make the recording? Edited September 1, 2017 by provoman
strappinglad Posted September 1, 2017 Posted September 1, 2017 In today's society, there is no more an expectation of privacy. Police have body cams. Cars have dash cams. Everyone has a cell phone , usually with video capacity. As for personal integrity and honor, it is in short supply when a mere click can get money or fame or revenge. And then there is the aspect of legal self protection. For those who want a more consistent application of the Honor Code, how about we take a leaf from Big Brother and have cameras everywhere so that no bad action is ever missed and all are punished, ( except those who bring fame and cash to an institution , there will be wrist slapping allowed ) When I attended BYU it was a well establish fact/rumor that the on- campus dorms where the athletes were housed were filled with code breakers and not the NSA types. All BYU students were/are equal , but some were/are more equal than others. As for Mormonleaks, the road to hell is paved with good intentions, or so I have been told. I refuse to supply my source though.
Recommended Posts