Letter Clarifies Intent of Byu Honor Code Change

[bluebell]

27 minutes ago, ALarson said:

And another article from the Trib (I'm posting the entire articles for those who can't access them):

https://www.sltrib.com/news/education/2020/03/04/after-byu-honor-code/

 

I'm trying, I really am, but I don't understand most of these reactions to the news.  I can understand disappointment, even severe disappointment, but I don't understand "when I thought BYU was going to let me date SS partners I believed they cared about me, but now that they say SS dating is against the spirit of the honor code, I know they don't.  I'm now so afraid when I wasn't a month ago when I knew the honor code didn't allow it."

All this angst and feelings of betrayal and fear seem so incredibly over the top compared to what actually has happened.  Can someone explain it in a way that maybe I'll be able to understand?

[provoman]

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

Edited March 5, 2020 by provoman

[bluebell]

Just now, provoman said:

 My opinion is that those who felt comfortable being "out" now have to "hide" and deal with the fear of being "outed" and thus scholastic standing is potentially threatened.  

I can see that, but didn't they have that fear three weeks ago?  Why fear now when it didn't exist before?

[smac97]

1 hour ago, bluebell said:

I'm trying, I really am, but I don't understand most of these reactions to the news.  I can understand disappointment, even severe disappointment, but I don't understand "when I thought BYU was going to let me date SS partners I believed they cared about me, but now that they say SS dating is against the spirit of the honor code, I know they don't.  I'm now so afraid when I wasn't a month ago when I knew the honor code didn't allow it."

All this angst and feelings of betrayal and fear seem so incredibly over the top compared to what actually has happened.  Can someone explain it in a way that maybe I'll be able to understand?

Essentially, it's an effort to manipulate and coerce BYU (and the Church) through guilt tripping.  

I think there are three potential phenomena/ingredients here:

1. Outrage Culture / Call-Out Culture / Public Shaming:

Quote

Call-out culture (also referred to as outrage culture) is a form of public humiliation or shaming that aims to hold individuals and groups accountable for actions perceived to be offensive by other individuals or groups, who then call attention to this behavior, usually on social media.

Outrage Culture doesn't rely on reasoning or persuasion.  To the contrary, folks resorting to this mentality and strategy seek to subdue and set aside such things in favor of, well, bullying.  Fomenting ill will.  Building a mob mentality.

2. Oppression Olympics:

Quote

Oppression Olympics is a characterization of marginalization as a competition to determine the relative weight of the overall oppression of individuals or groups, often by comparing race, gender, socioeconomic status or disabilities, in order to determine who is the worst off, and the most oppressed. The characterization often arises within debates about the ideological values of identity politics, intersectionality, and social privilege.

BYU students are there by choice.  They knew about and voluntarily accepted the Honor Code as a condition to admission.  And there are literally thousands of other schools they could attend that do not have the Honor Code provisions in question.  Given these circumstances, students who oppose the Honor Code need to find some sort of rationale for their righteous indignation.  Cue the "I'm being oppressed!" stuff.

The Honor Code therefore becomes a tool of oppression, even though the students voluntarily agreed to abide by it, and even though there is nothing keeping them at BYU anyway.  Claims of oppression therefore become obviously ridiculous, which leads to...

3. Virtue Signalling:

Quote

Virtue signalling is a pejorative neologism for the conspicuous expression of moral values.

False claims of oppression + outrage/call-out/shaming = virtue signalling.  On a grand scale.

Protests on campus to show how brave they are.  Protesting a set of moral and religious principles they agreed to abide by as a condition for attending BYU.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited March 5, 2020 by smac97

[Navidad]

18 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

It has become all too common in this entitlement age to characterize something you don’t agree with as “hurtful.”

One profound truth does not negate another. Perhaps this is also true: It has become all too common in this church to characterize something you agree with as "not hurtful," especially if you are not the one hurt."

[Duncan]

2 hours ago, Sunslight said:

A link or some context?

are you kidding?

“Same-sex romantic behavior cannot lead to eternal marriage and is therefore not compatible with the principles in the honor code,” said the letter, which was written by Elder Paul V. Johnson,  from page 1 on here

Elder Gary E. Stevenson:

“All of us look at our lives sometimes and try to evaluate where are we; where am I in my life? I’ve always said that when you begin to compare yourself one with another, it either leads to discouragement or it leads to pride. Neither of those are good, but that’s often what happens when people began comparing. They start to think, ‘My lot in life is better, or my lot in life is much worse.’ And so it’s not a constructive exercise for us to try to compare our circumstance to another. Blessings come in the near term; blessings come in the long term. Sometimes blessings are in store for us, I believe, after we pass through the veil, in our post-mortal existence. And so we’re in a very finite space right now, and in this finite space, it’s just not beneficial to try to compare adversity that we’ve had or to try to compare the blessings that we have.

“We remember when Adam and Eve left the Garden of Eden, one of the things that was introduced when they left was thorns and thistles, and we all have them in our lives. But, we can have confidence that all of those can be overcome, whatever those might be that are placed in front of us. The Lord tells us that there’s going to be adversity along the way, and he even suggests to us that our afflictions will be consecrated for our gain. Now sometimes we have to wait some years for this, but, ultimately, we can be assured that the promise of eternal life is for everyone. Everyone will be rewarded for their faithfulness equally. If you endure to the end, you’ll be blessed. It might be hard today and tomorrow and next month, but it will not always be hard. You can do this.

from page 6 on here

How can Elder Johnson say that gay behaviour cannot lead to eternal marriage, as we know, no eternal marriage=no exaltation but Elder Stevenson said that "we can be assured that the promise of eternal life is for everyone" this is a repeat performance from yestarday

[Duncan]

1 hour ago, CV75 said:

I don't extrapolate that logic from an academic behavioral code, as principles-based as the code is. Getting away from labels, all members no matter the label are children of God and can be exalted despite the apparent obstacles in this life along the path to baptism, personal temple ordinances, couples sealing, etc.

the church is the obstacle (unless Elder Johnson represents someone else?) and that is crazy to me, just as it was to Elder Packer not being able to talk about Temples to the Tongan Saints

Edited March 5, 2020 by Duncan

[provoman]

8 minutes ago, bluebell said:

I can see that, but didn't they have that fear three weeks ago?  Why fear now when it didn't exist before?

opps, yes, I missed the last part of the persons statement, so I do not have an opinion as to fear now but not when it was part of the written honor code.

[longview]

45 minutes ago, smac97 said:

No mention of the physical assault on the counter-protesting student who dared read out the Proclamation.

Doesn't fit the narrative, I guess.

Kudos to that dude.

I saw the twitter video.  I had to click on it twice to get past the censoring imposed by twitter.  It was appalling to see many in the crowd yelling and chanting to drown out this student.  All kinds of intimidations and borderline physical assault.  I really wonder if many of them are not actual students but are people who traveled from around the state (probably orchestrated by leftist underground organizations).  These tactics are very similar to those perpetrated on many colleges campuses (most notoriously at Berkeley).

[Duncan]

1 minute ago, longview said:

I saw the twitter video.  I had to click on it twice to get past the censoring imposed by twitter.  It was appalling to see many in the crowd yelling and chanting to drown out this student.  All kinds of intimidations and borderline physical assault.  I really wonder if many of them are not actual students but are people who traveled from around the state (probably orchestrated by leftist underground organizations).  These tactics are very similar to those perpetrated on many colleges campuses (most notoriously at Berkeley).

yeah, they just showed hoping something would happen, i.e. I very highly doubt it. A video that hardly shows anything wouldn't be worth the trip, ya think?

[pogi]

Quote

Same-sex romantic behavior cannot lead to eternal marriage and is therefore not compatible with the principles in the honor code

The more I think about this, the more I find the rationale problematic.  It suggests that gay people should be seeking eternal marriage in mortality or they are not living principles compatible with the honor code.  Do we really believe or teach that all gay people should seek to marry someone from the opposite sex?  It not, then I don't see the rationale for banning gay romantic behavior for the reasons mentioned.  For example, it would be equally true if we replace "same-sex romantic behavior" with "celibate behavior/lifestyle" -  "A celibate lifestyle cannot lead to eternal marriage and is therefore not compatible with the principles in the honor code."  It seems that the only option for gay people to live the principles of the honor code is to date the opposite sex.  That is problematic. 
 

Edited March 5, 2020 by pogi

[longview]

2 minutes ago, Duncan said:

yeah, they just showed hoping something would happen, i.e. I very highly doubt it. A video that hardly shows anything wouldn't be worth the trip, ya think?

They apparently thought it important enough to try to squelch this student's First Amendment Rights to free speech, freedom to assemble, and freedom of religion.  It is telling that you seem unfazed by thuggish behavior.

[smac97]

9 minutes ago, longview said:

Quote

No mention of the physical assault on the counter-protesting student who dared read out the Proclamation.

Doesn't fit the narrative, I guess.

Kudos to that dude.

I saw the twitter video.  I had to click on it twice to get past the censoring imposed by twitter.  It was appalling to see many in the crowd yelling and chanting to drown out this student. 

I lack the energy to be appalled at these bullying tactics.  I've been witnessing them for too long, I guess.

Screaming in lieu of civility.  Bullying (even violence) in lieu of reasoning and persuasion.

Ho hum.

Quote

All kinds of intimidations and borderline physical assault.  I really wonder if many of them are not actual students but are people who traveled from around the state (probably orchestrated by leftist underground organizations). 

Probably students.  This protest took place just a few hours after yesterday's letter was released.  I don't think there was time to recruit traveling whingers.

Quote

These tactics are very similar to those perpetrated on many colleges campuses (most notoriously at Berkeley).

Yep.  Cancel Culture is at BYU now.

Hopefully the administration will sort out this stuff.

And hopefully some of the feckless, sreaming yahoos will get a grip.

😁

-Smac

Edited March 5, 2020 by smac97

[Duncan]

1 minute ago, longview said:

They apparently thought it important enough to try to squelch this student's First Amendment Rights to free speech, freedom to assemble, and freedom of religion.  It is telling that you seem unfazed by thuggish behavior.

or that guy did the same to them, without the "freedom of religion" bit. I'm assuming you're in the States but do get off your high horse lecturing me as a Non US Citizen, about thuggish behaviour 🤔  

[Navidad]

11 hours ago, sunstoned said:

Another possibility is that  perhaps all the "brethren" are not in complete lock step on this.  Having conflicting information released from an organization can be a symptom of political infighting.

Between 1890 and 1910 or so the Brethren were not united on how to respond to the 1890 Manifesto or the importance or appropriateness of plural marriage in this dispensation. 

[california boy]

1 hour ago, ALarson said:

And another article from the Trib (I'm posting the entire articles for those who can't access them):

https://www.sltrib.com/news/education/2020/03/04/after-byu-honor-code/

 

Yet another article about the BYU fiscal  If the goal was to generate more bad publicity and reinforce the anti gay image of the Church, it seems to be working.

https://www.towleroad.com/2020/03/did-byu-trick-gay-students-into-coming-out-so-it-could-discipline-them-video/

 

From the article';

 

 

Quote

 

Did BYU Trick Gay Students Into Coming Out So It Could Discipline Them? (VIDEO)

Last month, we told you how Mormon church-owned Brigham Young University had removed a ban on “homosexual behavior” from its honor code.LGBT students, who have long suffered in the shadows at the Provo school, celebrated the decision by coming out, sharing same-sex kisses on campus, and gathering for a large Rainbow Day Celebration. 

BYU

 

✔@BYU

 

 

Today this letter from Elder Paul V. Johnson, Commissioner of the Church Educational System, regarding the updated Honor Code was sent to students and employees at all CES schools.

 

1,145

7:14 PM - Mar 4, 2020

Twitter Ads info and privacy

 

936 people are talking about this

 

 

 

Then, on Wednesday, BYU’s administration formally backtracked, saying “same-sex romantic behavior” — which presumably includes things like kissing and holding hands — still violates the school’s honor code. 

Heartbroken and betrayed, LGBT students staged a powerful protest, and some even suggested they were tricked into coming out as part of a sting, according to the Salt Lake Tribune.

 

 

[smac97]

20 minutes ago, pogi said:

Quote

Same-sex romantic behavior cannot lead to eternal marriage and is therefore not compatible with the principles in the honor code

The more I think about this, the more I find the rationale problematic.  It suggests that gay people should be seeking eternal marriage in mortality or they are not living principles compatible with the honor code. 

I don't think there is any ssch suggestion.

Quote

Do we really believe or teach that all gay people should seek to marry someone from the opposite sex? 

No.  Nobody is suggesting that.

Quote

It not, then I don't see the rationale for banning gay romantic behavior for the reasons mentioned. 

I think it speaks to the larger view.  Marriage between a man and a woman is the sole venue for sex.  Some measure of "romantic behavior" (dating, holding hands, etc.) is a necessary predicate to marriage.  "Testing grounds," as it were.  Consequently, it was fine for me to date a number of different women in my young twenties, provided that my behavior was within the bounds of decorum.  Once I found The One, and persuaded her to marry me, this behavior became off-limits.

Same-sex marriage is categorically incompatible with the Restored Gospel.  I know that's a hard thing for some to hear, but I think it's the truth.  Consequently, the actions associated with it ("romantic behavior" like dating/kissing, sex) are understandably inappropriate for those under covenant, and all the more so for students who specifically agreed to abide by the Honor Code as a condition for attending BYU.

Quote

For example, it would be equally true if we replace "same-sex romantic behavior" with "celibate behavior/lifestyle" -  "A celibate lifestyle cannot lead to eternal marriage and is therefore not compatible with the principles in the honor code." 

No, that's not "equally true" at all.  "A celibate lifestyle" (that is, abstaining from sex outside of marriage) is a necessary predicate to eternal marriage.

Quote

It seems that the only option for gay people to live the principles of the honor code is to date the opposite sex.  That is problematic. 
 

That or not date at all.

These options apply across the board, though.  Nobody is allowed to date members of the same sex.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited March 5, 2020 by smac97

[Duncan]

Just now, smac97 said:

I don't think there is any usch suggestion.

No.  Nobody is suggesting that.

I think it speaks to the larger view.  Marriage between a man and a woman is the sole venue for sex.  Some measure of "romantic behavior" (dating, holding hands, etc.) is a necessary predicate to marriage.  "Testing grounds," as it were.  Consequently, it was fine for me to date a number of different women in my young twenties, provided that my behavior was within the bounds of decorum.  Once I found The One, and persuaded her to marry me, this behavior became off-limits.

Same-sex marriage is categorically incompatible with the Restored Gospel.  I know that's a hard thing for some to hear, but I think it's the truth.  Consequently, the actions associated with it ("romantic behavior" like dating/kissing, sex) are understandably inappropriate for those under covenant, and all the more so for students who specifically agreed to abide by the Honor Code as a condition for attending BYU.

No, that's not "equally true" at all.  "A celibate lifestyle" (that is, abstaining from sex outside of marriage) is a necessary predicate to eternal marriage.

That or not date at all.

These options apply across the board, though.  Nobody is allowed to date members of the same sex.

Thanks,

-Smac

but we can date though, gay people can't. Heterosexuals can date to marry, gay people can't do that or be affectionate apparently

[carbon dioxide]

23 minutes ago, pogi said:

  It seems that the only option for gay people to live the principles of the honor code is to date the opposite sex.  That is problematic. 
 

Or just remain celibate.  What is problematic is saying on one hand that homosexual behavior is sinful but looking the other way to allow people to do it because their lives will be easier.  Their lives will be easier right up to when they are judged by the Lord.   God is going to look at people according to their circumstances in regards to eternal marriage. Many people die young.  They are not going to be denied an eternal marriage.  I assume that perhaps "dating" occurs in the Spirit World.  Some people do not get married during their life for various reasons.  I don't think they will be denied either.  Some people say that genetics plays a role in same sex attraction. OK since genetics plays no role in our decisions or orientation after we die, then in the spirit world or the resurrection,  then whatever role genetics plays will be gone. 

We all play a part.  For the heterosexual member, be loving, kind, and understanding to those who are gay.   For the church, teach the same things will maintaining the standards.  It will always remain true that God can not look upon sin with the least degree of allowance.  For those who are gay, wait upon the Lord.  Be faithful and if that requires some sacrifice, the blessing in the end will be far greater than what one had to sacrifice.  Play the long game and not the short one.

Edited March 5, 2020 by carbon dioxide

[smac97]

2 minutes ago, Duncan said:

but we can date though, gay people can't.

Yes, they can.  The same parameters for dating apply to everyone. 

Unmarried persons, regardless of sexual orientation, can date members of the opposite sex. 

Unmarried persons, regardless of sexual orientation, cannot date members of the same sex.

2 minutes ago, Duncan said:

Heterosexuals can date to marry, gay people can't do that or be affectionate apparently

Nobody, regardless of sexual orientation, can engage in same-sex relations or same-sex romantic behavior.

Thanks,

-Smac

[california boy]

1 hour ago, bluebell said:

I'm trying, I really am, but I don't understand most of these reactions to the news.  I can understand disappointment, even severe disappointment, but I don't understand "when I thought BYU was going to let me date SS partners I believed they cared about me, but now that they say SS dating is against the spirit of the honor code, I know they don't.  I'm now so afraid when I wasn't a month ago when I knew the honor code didn't allow it."

All this angst and feelings of betrayal and fear seem so incredibly over the top compared to what actually has happened.  Can someone explain it in a way that maybe I'll be able to understand?

I can give you my perspective.  I knew that when I came out to Church members, my relationship with them would never been the same.  That proved to be true.  Of all of the friends both in the ward as well as the stake, I had at Church there were only 2 or 3 that ever talked to me again.  When you are gay, you already feel marginalized.  There is a constant struggle in your mind questioning whether you should stay in the Church, or just leave.  Family, friends, a lot of the teachings and that sense of community wants you to stay in the church.  But attitudes towards being gay and the kind of life the Church expects you to live, which seems unreasonable and even self destructive makes you want to leave the Church behind.  \When there is even the slightest hope that perhaps these two conflicts might somehow be resolved, to the point where you can at least date someone of the same sex, to have those hopes dashed once again becomes pretty devastating.  

Eventually, most gay members solve the conflict by simply leaving the Church.  I am not sure what the exact retention rate of gay members, but I do know it is not very big. I probably know well over 50 former gay members and only one that is now still in the Church.  I personally am glad to be watching all of this from the sidelines and not have to be emotionally involved in what happens.  Given the ups and downs of the Church's attitudes towards gays, it is quite the rollercoaster of emotions and disappointments.

Hope that helps you understand what their viewpoint might be.

 

[Sunslight]

17 minutes ago, Duncan said:

are you kidding?

“Same-sex romantic behavior cannot lead to eternal marriage and is therefore not compatible with the principles in the honor code,” said the letter, which was written by Elder Paul V. Johnson,  from page 1 on here

Elder Gary E. Stevenson:

“All of us look at our lives sometimes and try to evaluate where are we; where am I in my life? I’ve always said that when you begin to compare yourself one with another, it either leads to discouragement or it leads to pride. Neither of those are good, but that’s often what happens when people began comparing. They start to think, ‘My lot in life is better, or my lot in life is much worse.’ And so it’s not a constructive exercise for us to try to compare our circumstance to another. Blessings come in the near term; blessings come in the long term. Sometimes blessings are in store for us, I believe, after we pass through the veil, in our post-mortal existence. And so we’re in a very finite space right now, and in this finite space, it’s just not beneficial to try to compare adversity that we’ve had or to try to compare the blessings that we have.

“We remember when Adam and Eve left the Garden of Eden, one of the things that was introduced when they left was thorns and thistles, and we all have them in our lives. But, we can have confidence that all of those can be overcome, whatever those might be that are placed in front of us. The Lord tells us that there’s going to be adversity along the way, and he even suggests to us that our afflictions will be consecrated for our gain. Now sometimes we have to wait some years for this, but, ultimately, we can be assured that the promise of eternal life is for everyone. Everyone will be rewarded for their faithfulness equally. If you endure to the end, you’ll be blessed. It might be hard today and tomorrow and next month, but it will not always be hard. You can do this.

from page 6 on here

How can Elder Johnson say that gay behaviour cannot lead to eternal marriage, as we know, no eternal marriage=no exaltation but Elder Stevenson said that "we can be assured that the promise of eternal life is for everyone" this is a repeat performance from yestarday

Im not seeing what you ate seeing.

[Scott Lloyd]

17 minutes ago, california boy said:

Yet another article about the BYU fiscal  If the goal was to generate more bad publicity and reinforce the anti gay image of the Church, it seems to be working.

https://www.towleroad.com/2020/03/did-byu-trick-gay-students-into-coming-out-so-it-could-discipline-them-video/

 

From the article';

 

 

 

And so the conspiracy theories begin to emerge. 

[california boy]

7 minutes ago, carbon dioxide said:

Or just remain celibate.  What is problematic is saying on one hand that homosexual behavior is sinful but looking the other way to allow people to do it because their lives will be easier.  Their lives will be easier right up to when they are judged by the Lord.   God is going to look at people according to their circumstances in regards to eternal marriage. Many people die young.  They are not going to be denied an eternal marriage.  I assume that perhaps "dating" occurs in the Spirit World.  Some people do not get married during their life for various reasons.  I don't think they will be denied either.  Some people say that genetics plays a role in same sex attraction. OK since genetics plays no role in our decisions or orientation after we die, then in the spirit world or the resurrection,  then whatever role genetics plays will be gone. 

We all play a part.  For the heterosexual member, be loving, kind, and understanding to those who are gay.   For the church, teach the same things will maintaining the standards.  It will always remain true that God can not look upon sin with the least degree of allowance.  For those who are gay, wait upon the Lord.  Be faithful and if that requires some sacrifice, the blessing in the end will be far greater than what one had to sacrifice.  Play the long game and not the short one.

How do you think this all plays out if a gay person marries someone on earth to someone of the same sex?  Are they forever blacklisted from the Celestial Kingdom?

[Scott Lloyd]

46 minutes ago, Navidad said:

One profound truth does not negate another. Perhaps this is also true: It has become all too common in this church to characterize something you agree with as "not hurtful," especially if you are not the one hurt."

Hmm. All too common? Nah.