Meadowchik Posted March 4, 2020 Posted March 4, 2020 1 minute ago, Scott Lloyd said: I don’t know. I don’t think it would have made much difference. Apparently he got a lot of people exercised for naught. I checked the transcript. He deliberately consulted with a full-time counselor at the HCO and repeated the conversation precisely to his students. See my post above: 1
Calm Posted March 4, 2020 Posted March 4, 2020 57 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: But I think back on how Randy Bott was pilloried after he gave that interview about the priesthood ban. What this guy did was not much better, IMO. Bott did not have others in the university backing him up. The professor did, even this morning according to ALarson's bishop. 1
JulieM Posted March 4, 2020 Posted March 4, 2020 3 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: I don’t know. I don’t think it would have made much difference. Apparently he got a lot of people exercised for naught. He wasn’t the only one reporting this information from the honor code office was he? Iirc, it matched what was reported in the press by those who had spoken to them.
Meadowchik Posted March 4, 2020 Posted March 4, 2020 2 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: I don’t think you can say with any degree of certainty this is what happened. In discussing irresponsible messaging, best not to commit a similar error by spreading unfounded conjecture. I express my opinion admittedly and invite those who know more to clarify, or those responsible for the messaging to explain what happened.
Scott Lloyd Posted March 4, 2020 Author Posted March 4, 2020 14 minutes ago, Meadowchik said: I just read the transcript of Brau's remarks. He specifically consulted a full-time counselor at the Honor Code office to have clarity before conveying the remarks very precisely to his students. If the HCO was at fault, then all indications are that all communicants from it spoke a consistent message, one reasonably based on the handbook changes. It appears more likely to me that the confusion happened above their level of authority. Here's a couple excerpts from the transcript: He may have confirmed with somebody in the office, but I still think he was overzealous in getting people worked up. 1
Meadowchik Posted March 4, 2020 Posted March 4, 2020 Just now, Scott Lloyd said: He may have confirmed with somebody in the office, but I still think he was overzealous in getting people worked up. It sounds to me like he was trying to bring clarity to a confusing situation by becoming informed through those in authority and sharing the clarification. 3
Amulek Posted March 4, 2020 Posted March 4, 2020 20 minutes ago, Teancum said: If someone tells me they love me and care for me but put artificial rules in place that are hurtful to me [...] Don't be so melodramatic. A rule isn't "hurtful" just because one doesn't like it. And let's not forget: every kid at BYU knew exactly what they were getting into when they signed up. To complain about well known, completely disclosed rules after voluntarily agreeing to abide by them is such a wimp move. If you don't want to be at BYU you can always leave. Last I checked it was still a university - not a prison. 3
Scott Lloyd Posted March 4, 2020 Author Posted March 4, 2020 5 minutes ago, Calm said: Bott did not have others in the university backing him up. The professor did, even this morning according to ALarson's bishop. I still think he jumped the gun. And in retrospect caused some havoc.
Scott Lloyd Posted March 4, 2020 Author Posted March 4, 2020 Just now, Amulek said: Don't be so melodramatic. A rule isn't "hurtful" just because one doesn't like it. And let's not forget: every kid at BYU knew exactly what they were getting into when they signed up. To complain about well known, completely disclosed rules after voluntarily agreeing to abide by them is such a wimp move. If you don't want to be at BYU you can always leave. Last I checked it was still a university - not a prison. It has become all too common in this entitlement age to characterize something you don’t agree with as “hurtful.” 2
Meadowchik Posted March 4, 2020 Posted March 4, 2020 2 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: It has become all too common in this entitlement age to characterize something you don’t agree with as “hurtful.” And all too easy to be dismissive of how beliefs can harmfully impact individuals. 4
Robert F. Smith Posted March 4, 2020 Posted March 4, 2020 3 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said: So this just came across the transom........................................... Great opening post, Scott. However, what is a "transom"?
Scott Lloyd Posted March 4, 2020 Author Posted March 4, 2020 4 minutes ago, Meadowchik said: It sounds to me like he was trying to bring clarity to a confusing situation by becoming informed through those in authority and sharing the clarification. Well, it didn’t work too well, did it? If you’re going to claim such startling implications, you’d better have a more solid source than some functionary you spoke with on the phone. i still have the impression he was unduly carried away in his zeal.
Meadowchik Posted March 4, 2020 Posted March 4, 2020 2 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: Well, it didn’t work too well, did it? If you’re going to claim such startling implications, you’d better have a more solid source than some functionary you spoke with on the phone. i still have the impression he was unduly carried away in his zeal. Nah, I think you're making the classic mistake of blaming the operator rather than a fault in the system, Scott. 1
Calm Posted March 4, 2020 Posted March 4, 2020 4 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: I still think he jumped the gun. And in retrospect caused some havoc. I agree. It added weight to the speculation that a BYU professor was teaching his class this as so many have the perception that BYU profs are rather monolithicly conservative, etc when that is not reality. I think an adult who must have been aware of how change occurs in the Church since it was important to him should have stopped and asked himself "where did this come from? Is this consistent with teachings in the past? Is this interpretation consistent with how the Church is currently teaching about 'same sex attraction'"? And then noting how the Handbook pointed to standards in FTSOY and the changes in the MormonandGay website to a more conservative approach (imo)...it would be most reasonable imo for him to consider something had been bollixed and waited for clarification or even pushed for it from the Admin. 2
Scott Lloyd Posted March 4, 2020 Author Posted March 4, 2020 1 minute ago, Robert F. Smith said: Great opening post, Scott. However, what is a "transom"? Something “coming over (or across) the transom” is an expression applied to the unexpected arrival of something such as news or a document. It is derived from the bygone practice of submitting an unsolicited manuscript to a publisher by tossing it over the transom above the doorway to the publisher’s office, the transom being the cross piece below the window above the doorway. Much of my news gets to me unbidden these days in the form of alerts that appear on my iPhone. Maybe I used the expression too loosely in my haste to get my message posted. 1
smac97 Posted March 4, 2020 Posted March 4, 2020 8 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: Well, it didn’t work too well, did it? If you’re going to claim such startling implications, you’d better have a more solid source than some functionary you spoke with on the phone. i still have the impression he was unduly carried away in his zeal. I credit the professor for attempting "due diligence" (contacting the Honor Code Office). However, I think the professor should have used common sense. I don't think he did. I also question the propriety of a professor using class time to talk about a sensitive topic that has little to no bearing on the subject matter of the class. Basically, it seemed like he turned his class into his personal soap box. BYU students are not paying to listen to him pontificate about his personal sociopolitical opinions. -Smac 4
Meadowchik Posted March 4, 2020 Posted March 4, 2020 5 minutes ago, Calm said: I agree. It added weight to the speculation that a BYU professor was teaching his class this as so many have the perception that BYU profs are rather monolithicly conservative, etc when that is not reality. I think an adult who must have been aware of how change occurs in the Church since it was important to him should have stopped and asked himself "where did this come from? Is this consistent with teachings in the past? Is this interpretation consistent with how the Church is currently teaching about 'same sex attraction'"? And then noting how the Handbook pointed to standards in FTSOY and the changes in the MormonandGay website to a more conservative approach (imo)...it would be most reasonable imo for him to consider something had been bollixed and waited for clarification or even pushed for it from the Admin. Except he did directly consult the handbook, and those in authority at the school. He looked at the changes, and got explicit confirmation. 1
Scott Lloyd Posted March 4, 2020 Author Posted March 4, 2020 (edited) 40 minutes ago, Meadowchik said: Nah, I think you're making the classic mistake of blaming the operator rather than a fault in the system, Scott. Maybe it’s because I spent 30-odd years in a profession in which one prospers or perishes by the credibility of his sources. But I would have waited for more solid confirmation before spreading it about. YMMV. Edited March 4, 2020 by Scott Lloyd 2
Teancum Posted March 4, 2020 Posted March 4, 2020 (edited) 29 minutes ago, smac97 said: The Law of Chastity is not an "artificial" rule. And it's an entirely voluntary one. Nonsense. Membership in the Church is a voluntary thing. Attending BYU, which is conditioned on agreement to follow the Honor Code, is a voluntary thing. Now you're doing it. -Smac I am doing it because it deserves to be done. Arbitrary ever changing rules, rules that are hurtful and lack evidence to support valid reasons for the rules deserve to be challenged and robustly so. This seems to me a lot like the p[priesthood restriction which also deserved to be challenged. Edited March 4, 2020 by Teancum
Nacho2dope Posted March 4, 2020 Posted March 4, 2020 20 minutes ago, Meadowchik said: It sounds to me like he was trying to bring clarity to a confusing situation by becoming informed through those in authority and sharing the clarification. I disagree with this, I think he has been pushing for this change. When he states that all of those who don't immediately agree with this don't have a testimony of the First Presidency and Quorum of the 12. That does not strike me as someone trying to bring clarity. I could very well be wrong and this is my opinion. Thanks 1
Calm Posted March 4, 2020 Posted March 4, 2020 1 minute ago, Meadowchik said: Except he did directly consult the handbook, Did he study it though to ensure his understanding of one section was consistent with the entire context of the Handbook? I have my doubts given the clear references to using FTSOY to teach what the standards are.
Meadowchik Posted March 4, 2020 Posted March 4, 2020 Just now, smac97 said: I credit the professor for attempting "due diligence" (contacting the Honor Code Office). However, I think the professor should have used common sense. I don't think he did. I also question the propriety of a professor using class time to talk about a sensitive topic that has little to no bearing on the subject matter of the class. Basically, it seemed like he turned his class into his personal soap box. BYU students are not paying to listen to him pontificate about his personal sociopolitical opinions. -Smac Listen to it. It directly relates to the topic of his class, and he ties it in. He explains that the HCO office is adamant that disrespect of LGB students can be reported to the HCO, and he mentions that a BYU student was fired from a recruitment firm for a homophobic remark at work, and that these new Honor Code rules can better prepare the students for working in the real world. 1
Calm Posted March 4, 2020 Posted March 4, 2020 3 minutes ago, Nacho2dope said: I think he has been pushing for this change. I know of reports of activist professors at BYU (not saying they are wrong to be so), I don't know if he has been known as one of them, but it wouldn't surprise me given his wording. 1
Meadowchik Posted March 4, 2020 Posted March 4, 2020 7 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: Maybe it’s because I spent 30-odd years in a profession in which one prospers or perishes by the credibility of his sources. But I would have waited for more solid information before noosing it about. YMMV. What did the Deseret News report about it? Did it cite HCO officials? 1
Meadowchik Posted March 4, 2020 Posted March 4, 2020 1 minute ago, Calm said: I know of reports of activist professors at BYU (not saying they are wrong to be so), I don't know if he has been known as one of them, but it wouldn't surprise me given his wording. He could also be speaking as one who doesn't want BYU graduates to get fired for homophobic remarks in the workplace.
Recommended Posts