Bombshell BYU announcement

[Meadowchik]

11 minutes ago, AtlanticMike said:

I'm going to give my opinion one time on this thread then leave because I don't do political threads, and this has turned into a political thread. The only reason I'm even typing this is for the youth reading this thread. To the youth reading this, what you see on display in this thread is a bunch of people trying to put you in categories to make themselves feel better, it has way more to do with their "guilt" then has to do with you. So I come to offer you a different opinion!!! College has become a cesspool. While in high school most kids are brainwashed into believing that the only way they can make something of themselves is to go to college, that's a lie! There are many trades you can make $60 to $130 an hour by becoming self employed, no college bullxxxx needed. For instance, I'm a contractor and I'll regularly pay plumbers $90 an hour to work on my customers houses. Hvac contractors make bank also. Landscapers make great money, along with 100s of other trades. Starting your own business, working extremely hard and being 100% honest with customers can be very rewarding emotionally and monetarily. Now to anyone who isnt white, I want to say this because this thread is ridiculous, 99.5% of white people love you. As a contractor I hire people from all cultures and with different skin tones. I dont care what they look like, as long as they work hard. I promise you, if you choose to become self employed and work hard, no one will care what color your skin is, and they won't care if you don't have a college degree. 

    I'm going to tell you one story to make my point. I'm a roofer and I hire all kinds of people with different skin colors when they come out jail, mostly people with possession charges, but I've also hired people who have rape charges or assault charges.  I took a chance an hired a black guy who just got out of jail on assault charges, I was a little worried because he had beat up a cop and tried to take his gun. Well, he was a terrible roofer so I offered to help him start his own business and he became a landscaper. I bought him a used riding lawnmower, pushmower, weedeater and a trailer for a total of $1900. After getting a business license and insurance he was in debt a total of $2200. He paid me back within 6 months and now, 7 years later he has over 40 yards he maintains, including my yard. He drives a $60,000 truck and owns his own home, no college neccessary. And by the way, all his customers are white. If a felon with an assault charge can find a way to be successful, so can you!!! 

    Read above what the poster, The Nehor wrote. He thinks ridicule and shame are the way you change society, be careful of people who think like this, most of them live miserable lives and thinking like that can be contagious.

    Be glad you live in America, be glad with the way you look and go out there and make something of yourself. There's all kinds of people who are just waiting for you to help them out. If you choose to be self employed and take a chance you'll feel really good about yourself. I love you no matter your skin color and so do most people no matter their skin color. 

 

 

Opportunity and enterprise can coexist with better systemic structures. They are not mutually exclusive ideas. Read up on a very extensive example, the Pigford vs Glickman, a case surrounded discriminatory treatment of black farmers. Imagine how most farmers in an area depend on yearly loans, which they then pay back after the harvest. Now imagine being a farmer whose loan gets approved 2 months late and at only half the amount. This kind of thing happened and on a wide scale, up into the 90s and beyond and it destroyed family legacies and homesteads, affected thousands and thousands of black farmers, all but eliminating them from the industry.

The overemphasis on university over vocational training can be addressed AND problems that inhibit BIPOC in both types of institutions can be addressed. It's not one or the other. 

There really is something trickle-up about everyone having a better chance at making their way in the world. We will all be better for it.

[Calm]

 

Quote

 I promise you, if you choose to become self employed and work hard, no one will care what color your skin is, and they won't care if you don't have a college degree. 

Not according to research:

http://bogan.dyson.cornell.edu/doc/research/jseweb.pdf

Quote

However, comparisons with immigrant groups points to a different explanation. Consistently throughout history, discriminatory practices, institutions, and legislation have restricted African American entrepreneurs at every stage of business development

 

https://chicago.suntimes.com/2020/9/7/21426285/nation-fights-systemic-racism-report-finds-pattern-exclusion-illinois-trade-unions

And yet there may be difficulties getting to the self employed part if the work requires training or moving up from employee to employer.

Quote

Based on U.S. Department of Labor statistics from 1999-2018, the CBUC report finds apprenticeship programs of 62 Illinois trade unions remain mostly white — five of them completely segregated; 15 with less than 20% persons of color; and 13 with 20 to 30% persons of color.

Also:  https://www.constructiondive.com/news/racist-actions-attitudes-nothing-new-on-construction-sites/587210/

 Nor is self employment always a pathway to financial stability even if there may be less issues with racism.

Quote

But the researchers were quick to note that self-employment did not necessarily translate into great financial success. In fact, they found self-employed black survey respondents were generally in worse financial situations than those working for somebody else.

https://www.futurity.org/self-employment-blacks-racism-2313622-2/

And there are customers who care a great deal about what color the boss is:

https://www.totallandscapecare.com/business/article/15042152/african-americans-in-the-green-industry-address-lack-of-diversity
 

Quote

Draughon ran his business in Columbus, Ohio, for nine years and says it was always an uphill battle with both clients and suppliers. He says he would never show his face with suppliers because if he did, he was often accused of swindling or stealing bricks.

“If a client found out we owned the company, they would make up stuff on the Better Business Bureau,” he says. “It was almost they felt as if we tricked them because we didn’t tell them that I was the owner.”

Once when Draughon was moving the company’s office into a new space, the cops were called, and someone claimed they were robbing the place. After being harassed by the police for almost two years, Draughon decided to leave Ohio and move to Chicago.

“It was just too much,” he says. “And so, I had to walk away from a business that we started from $18 and took to $6 million in sales. I had to pretty much just walk away from it and start all over again.”

Not saying entrepreneurship isn’t an effective way for many to get ahead for minorities and women. My husband teaches entrepreneurship classes, promotes entrepreneurship, and many of his students have been successful, some highly successful (a number became young millionaires and have grown their businesses even bigger or sold them for hefty profits).  One of his now wealthy students started with a landscape company, we were his first customers.  In fact we were first customers for many.  

Just saying it isn’t as rosy of a picture for racism as described by you unfortunately.  I am mentioning this so that any false expectations of limited to no racism in self employment don’t have a chance to undermine those who might be taking your advice....though likely those at risk are much more familiar with such than either of us through experiences shared with them from others in their communities.
 

On a side note, my husband’s favorite advice to become a successful entrepreneur is “work smarter, not harder” (Scrooge McDuck).  Being willing to work hard is important, but that hard work may be wasted if invested into the wrong aspect of the business. 

Edited March 3, 2021 by Calm

[smac97]

9 hours ago, Calm said:

Quote

And they who ignore history are doomed to repeat it. 

And that you think this comment strengthens your position when you ignore actual history presented by someone who has lived it is one of the bewildering aspects. 

What "actual history" have I ignored?

Thanks,

-Smac

[Calm]

3 minutes ago, smac97 said:

What "actual history" have I ignored?

Bluedreams’ post. 

[smac97]

11 minutes ago, Calm said:

Bluedreams’ post. 

Not responding to a post that was not directed at me = ignoring actual history?

Thanks,

-Smac

[smac97]

10 hours ago, juliann said:

And ignoring a very detailed and long post by a POC deserves mention In a thread about people of color that is dominated by older white men complaining about losing out.

First, Bluedream's post did not appear to be directed to me.

Second, not specifically responding to a post does not mean I am "ignoring" it.

Third, I have not ignored it.  I both read it, considered it, and later responded to it.

Fourth, you continue to attempt to shame me into silence.  An increasingly common MO on your part.  

Fifth, again, I have concerns about the proposals referenced in the OP.  I am trying to sort out my position by reading what other people have said (including Bluedreams) and posting my own thoughts.  I think we should be able to have civil discussions about difficult topics like this, to have the "due deliberations" Pres. Worthen referenced.  But people like you make that difficult.  Apparently to disagree with you is to be racist, even though I have repeatedly stated that I am opposed to racism and discrimination.

Sixth, having concerns about a remedy proposed to reduce or alleviate racism does not make me racist.  I very much dislike racism.  I think it's a terrible thing.

Seventh, here's an recent experience I have had that illustrates my perspective about your behavior toward me.  I had a client who felt she was cheated on a real estate transaction.  She hired me to review her case and possibly file a lawsuit about it.  I knew she has limited resources, and I also came to feel that the proposed lawsuit we had discussed at the beginning of the case would likely A) cost her a fair amount of money, and B) ultimately not work (because the legal theory is difficult to prove, because we had very little evidence to support our position, etc.).  Now, it's possible that I was wrong about one or both of these things.  However, the client did not want to hear my reasoning for being cautious in proceeding with a lawsuit.  She just wanted me to file it.  She wanted to "go to court."  It took a number of discussions for us to come back to a consensus about how to proceed.  This was a process that took some time because A) there was something of a language barrier, B) there was a great deal of emotion involved, and C) my client seemed to have an expectation that merely going to court would fix everything and get her what she wanted.  I explained, several times over, that I was on her side, that I wanted to help her, that I believed her, but also that I was concerned about her proposed course of action adding to her difficulties rather than fixing them.

Now, I'm not saying this is perfectly analogous to the current situation.  I may very well be ultimately wrong here.  The proposed policies may work out fabulously for BYU.  Or . . . they may not.  In any event, I think people of good will, people who are on the same side of things, should be able to have reasoned discussions about difficult topics.  I just don't get that from you.  You come across as a bully.  To disagree with you is to be stupid.  Or ignorant.  Or racist.  Or opposed to the Church.  I just don't think that's right.  I have 12,000+ posts and 17 years on this board.  I feel I have demonstrated a real affection for and devotion to the Church.  I also went to BYU twice.  And I live in Provo.  I have no axe to grind against BYU at all.  I very much want it and the Church to improve and grow.  I very much support the ends under discussion here, which are to reduce and alleviate racism.  I just have questions and concerns about the proposed means (explicitly race-based policies pertaining to admissions, students, faculty, etc.).  And for that you hector and nag.  You attempt to shame me into silence.  I don't think that's appropriate.

Quote

It is telling that you consider that observation... and correction...as shaming.

No.  I see your remarks non-substantive and accusatory.  You aren't responding to what I have to say, you are instead trying to silence what I have to say.  I find that unfortunate.

Quote

And no, you are not going to draw me into arguing against what the church is trying to accomplish.  

I've done nothing of the sort.  You are bearing false witness.

Quote

All you want to offer is all the wrongs you think have been committed elsewhere.

I have not done this.

Quote

We have a chance, as a church, to provide an example and template for mending some significant wounds to many people. Im backing these efforts 100% and hope to see BYU represent a vibrant global church in every respect. 

Again, I have reservations and concerns about the proposed policies.  I am not opposed to them per se, but I think there is risk of them creating some real problems, as has occurred in other schools.  I have participated in this thread to express my views and learn from others.  

I too want to mend wounds, and I also want BYU to succeed.  I question whether adopting explicitly race-based policies pertaining to admissions, students and faculty will advance those objectives.

I think we should be allowed to raise and discuss such concerns without being hectored and bullied.  

Thanks,

-Smac

 

Edited March 3, 2021 by smac97

[Calm]

9 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Not responding to a post that was not directed at me = ignoring actual history?

Thanks,

-Smac

Not responding to a post of actual experiences  highly relevant to the discussion and instead continuing with speculation instead is ignoring actual history. 

[CV75]

12 hours ago, smac97 said:

To be honest, I'm not sure I "oppose" the recommendations.  I have some real reservations about them, but I also have quite a bit of respect for Pres. Worthen and the Board of Trustees.

I have not been talking about "unlawful" discrimination.

Not really.  

Yale and Harvard wouldn't describe their race-based admissions policies as "discrimination" either.  But if it walks like a duck, talks like a duck...

The issue seems to be that race-based discrimination is seen as socially acceptable provided that the targets are approved (Whites, obviously, but also Asians and Jews re: collegiate admissions).

Thanks,

-Smac

Thank you; in this case I’d agree that “oppose” was too strong a word – President Worthen likewise expressed a desire for due deliberation over some of the recommendations.

The determination of unlawful discrimination sometimes has to be settled retrospectively in the courts when not prevented proactively through policy and other controls.

"Discrimination" in this case seems to be a matter of personal or group discernment, differentiation and distinction and not a matter of legality.

12 hours ago, smac97 said:

I am not.  I am using "discrimination" as "discrimination."  I am assuming that whatever policies BYU puts in place will be lawful.

I'm not sure any of them do.  That's for the Courts to determine.

Thanks,

-Smac

In that case, almost everything we do involves discernment, differentiation and distinction, and allow for the legal and emotional semantics to run together.

12 hours ago, smac97 said:

I am.  I think it will happen.  It's happened at other schools who have adopted explicitly race-based policies.  I don't think BYU will be able to avoid the problems inherent in discriminating based on race.

I provided several examples.  You disagree.  I'm okay with that.

Why would it?  Harvard and Yale wouldn't advertise their race-based discrimination against Asians, Whites and Jews as "racial injustice," either.

Thanks,

-Smac

I don’t think the term you used, “racial injustice,” is missing from the article or the recommendations to avoid advertising BYU’s need for improvement but because the transparently enumerated areas for improvement are not appropriately represented that way.

At any rate, there are two ways to use "discrimination" in a discussion, which is why it reminds me of the old gay marriage discussions. I can see how you might, on an emotional level, consider the recommendations to be discriminatory against whites and at the same time consider them to be carried out in a perfectly legal manner.

Edited March 3, 2021 by CV75

[smac97]

14 minutes ago, CV75 said:

Thank you; in this case I’d agree that “oppose” was too strong a word – President Worthen likewise expressed a desire for due deliberation over some of the recommendations.

And yet some folks in this thread don't seem to be much in the mood for "due deliberation."

Quote

The determination of unlawful discrimination sometimes has to be settled retrospectively in the courts when not prevented proactively through policy and other controls.

I agree.  But I'm not really focusing on whether the proposed policies are legal.  I think they very well may be.

Quote

"Discrimination" in this case seems to be a matter of personal or group discernment, differentiation and distinction and not a matter of legality.

Agreed.  That race-based discrimination can be legal is not my point, though.

Quote

In that case, almost everything we do involves discernment, differentiation and distinction, and allow for the legal and emotional semantics to run together.

Sure.  Lots of emotion on this thread.  I have repeatedly declared my opposition to racism, and yet I am being hectored and bullied and tacitly accused of racism for trying to have some of that "due deliberation" Pres. Worthen referenced.

Quote

I don’t think the term you used, “racial injustice,” is missing from the article or the recommendations to avoid advertising BYU’s need for improvement but because the transparently enumerated areas for improvement are not appropriately represented that way.

Could you elaborate?  If race-based policies at other universities have resulted in what can reasonably be called "racial injustice," I think it's reasonable to be concerned that BYU might, in implementing similar policies, end up with similar results.

Quote

At any rate, there are two ways to use "discrimination" in a discussion, which is why it reminds me of the old gay marriage discussions. I can see how you might, on an emotional level, consider the recommendations to be discriminatory against whites and at the same time consider them to be carried out in a perfectly legal manner.

Whites and Asians and Jews.

And again, whether such discrimination is legal or not is not my point.

And no, it's not just "on an emotional level."  I posted some links to news items that lay out precedents for my concerns.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited March 3, 2021 by smac97

[smac97]

22 minutes ago, Calm said:

Quote

Not responding to a post that was not directed at me = ignoring actual history?

Not responding to a post of actual experiences  highly relevant to the discussion and instead continuing with speculation instead is ignoring actual history. 

Well, I disagree.  One person's anecdote doth not "history" make.

And I did read Bluedream's post.  

And I disagree that not responding to a post is tantamount to ignoring it.

And I have responded to it.

Thanks,

-Smac

[rongo]

2 hours ago, AtlanticMike said:

I'm going to give my opinion one time on this thread then leave because I don't do political threads, and this has turned into a political thread. The only reason I'm even typing this is for the youth reading this thread. To the youth reading this, what you see on display in this thread is a bunch of people trying to put you in categories to make themselves feel better, it has way more to do with their "guilt" then has to do with you. So I come to offer you a different opinion!!! College has become a cesspool. While in high school most kids are brainwashed into believing that the only way they can make something of themselves is to go to college, that's a lie! There are many trades you can make $60 to $130 an hour by becoming self employed, no college bullxxxx needed. For instance, I'm a contractor and I'll regularly pay plumbers $90 an hour to work on my customers houses. Hvac contractors make bank also. Landscapers make great money, along with 100s of other trades. Starting your own business, working extremely hard and being 100% honest with customers can be very rewarding emotionally and monetarily. 

I do unskilled day labor construction during the summer --- which generally means "construction cleanup." Since the trades ***do not*** do their own cleanup, and throw junk all over the place all the time, there is endless job security. I've seen that the trades make much more than I do as a teacher. For me, it's supplemental, on-the-side money when I'm off for the summer. It's also been a good summer job for my children (18+). My son made $5000 before his mission just in a few months, and both he and my daughter are looking forward to making a few thousand this summer in preparation for the upcoming school year (and beyond). 

The trades are very hard work, though, and hard on the body. The atmosphere also isn't the best (as I'm sure you can attest to). I think it is a wonderful work opportunity for those who want a very good income, are willing to work hard, and enjoy it. Many people don't want to do that for a lifetime (several decades), and are less disposed to blue collar work. It all depends on the person, but as you mention, there is plenty of work out there right now with the construction boom.

It's also cyclical. When the real estate bubble burst from 2007-2010, there was very little commercial or residential construction. My summer work dried up, which wasn't catastrophic since it was supplemental for me, but it was catastrophic for those whose livelihood it was.  

[rongo]

4 minutes ago, rongo said:

I do unskilled day labor construction during the summer --- which generally means "construction cleanup." Since the trades ***do not*** do their own cleanup, and throw junk all over the place all the time, there is endless job security. I've seen that the trades make much more than I do as a teacher. For me, it's supplemental, on-the-side money when I'm off for the summer. It's also been a good summer job for my children (18+). My son made $5000 before his mission just in a few months, and both he and my daughter are looking forward to making a few thousand this summer in preparation for the upcoming school year (and beyond). 

The trades are very hard work, though, and hard on the body. The atmosphere also isn't the best (as I'm sure you can attest to). I think it is a wonderful work opportunity for those who want a very good income, are willing to work hard, and enjoy it. Many people don't want to do that for a lifetime (several decades), and are less disposed to blue collar work. It all depends on the person, but as you mention, there is plenty of work out there right now with the construction boom.

It's also cyclical. When the real estate bubble burst from 2007-2010, there was very little commercial or residential construction. My summer work dried up, which wasn't catastrophic since it was supplemental for me, but it was catastrophic for those whose livelihood it was.  

ETA: When I was a bishop, I always sent people needing assistance who were out of work to the day labor agency. Only non-members would do it (except for one member). There was a stigma among LDS members about doing relatively low-paying manual labor. I had "standing," as I was doing it myself during the summer, and it put it on the line for people who just didn't want to work but wanted "full services" church assistance. 

I will say that ditch digging in Arizona heat is . . . just the worst. Pick and shovel, back-breaking work. Most right now is construction cleanup, but there have been a variety of jobs over the years. Once, the agency placed 24 of us for two mock juries a prosecutor wanted to test drive a case on. That one was air conditioned and catered.  Some jobs require a clean drug test (and a lot of the day laborers are working for drug money, gas, food and utilities, etc.). 

[bluebell]

12 hours ago, smac97 said:

And yet, as schools that adopt race-based admissions policies, we see discrimination against White students.  And Asians.  And Jews.

Whether de facto or de jure, the result seems to end up there.

Thanks,

-Smac

Do you have any references you can share from schools run by the church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints that support your assertion?  

[bluebell]

13 hours ago, smac97 said:

Race-based programs will benefit applicants, students and faculty who belong to favored racial groupings (BIPOCs) and will disadvantage applicants, students and faculty who do not belong to those groupings (Whites, Asians, Jews).

That's a statement of fact that I'm going to request a reference for. 

It's going to be difficult to find them, because your use of the word "will" implies things that will happen in the future (as opposed to statements concerning what has occured or what is occuring) but I'm going to hold you to your words (unless you'd prefer to retract them) and request that you find references that support the specific timing of your statement.

 

Edited March 3, 2021 by bluebell

[SteveO]

13 minutes ago, bluebell said:

That's a statement of fact that I'm going to request a reference for. 

It's going to be difficult to find them, because your use of the word "will" implies things that will happen in the future (as opposed to statements concerning what has occured or what is occuring) but I'm going to hold you to your words (unless you'd prefer to retract them) and request that you find references that support the specific timing of your statement.

 

The OP is also referring to recommended policies that will be implemented in the future...so why are you insisting that he find outcomes at church schools that do not currently, and have not in the past, had these policies in place?  All he has to go off are the outcomes from other schools that have had these policies in place for quite some time.  What would make you think the outcome at church schools would be different if they implemented similar policies?

 

Maybe I haven’t read enough through the thread and am missing something.

[smac97]

28 minutes ago, bluebell said:

Quote

Race-based programs will benefit applicants, students and faculty who belong to favored racial groupings (BIPOCs) and will disadvantage applicants, students and faculty who do not belong to those groupings (Whites, Asians, Jews).

That's a statement of fact that I'm going to request a reference for. 

It's not a statement of fact, as it pertains to events which have not yet occurred ("will benefit ... will disadvantage...").

I am not claiming prophecy.  I am expressing a concern about what may happen.  I have provided several examples of how this has happened at other schools, and also the specific concerns about how some of the proposed policies may work out after implementation.  See here, here, here, here, here, here, and here.

Quote

It's going to be difficult to find them, because your use of the word "will" implies things that will happen in the future (as opposed to statements concerning what has occured or what is occuring)

Not "implies."  I have repeatedly saying that I am expressing concern about what may "happen in the future."

Quote

but I'm going to hold you to your words

I'm fine with that.

Quote

(unless you'd prefer to retract them)

Why should I retract them?  How many times do I need to denounce racism and discrimination in order to successfully rebut implications that I am racist?

Is is possible for us to have a civil discussion without resorting to such tactics?  Look at what Pres. Worthen said:

Quote

“All of the recommendations are extremely helpful,” said Worthen. “Some of them, such as making curricular changes to general education, religion and elective courses that educate students on race, unity and diversity, as well as establishing college-wide statements on race and belonging, are already in process,” said Worthen. “Others will take more time; some will require additional consideration. The committee’s full report and the recommendations will help us better nurture and retain our BIPOC students and employees. There is hard work ahead, but the committee has outlined some important steps we need to take and provided a model for how this can be done.”

"Some of {the recommendations} ... are already in process."

"Others will take more time..."

"{S}ome will require additional consideration..."

I am on board with making changes and improvements at BYU regarding alleviating racism.  I may not ultimately agree with each and every policy, but it's not reasonable to expect BYU to comply with my personal preferences in every respect.

But Pres. Worthen has said that some of these proposals "will take time," and that others "will require additional consideration."

Well, I sure hope Pres. Worthen doesn't come to this "discussion" board.  Because he'd likely be accused of racism for daring to attempt some of that "additional consideration" here.

This board has occasionally encouraged its members to have "discussions" about race.  But some folks don't seem to really mean it.  "Discussion" must be limited to pre-approved thoughts and arguments.  

Again, I find racism and discrimination deplorable and bad.  I am fully on board with the "ends" (reducing/alleviating racism at BYU).  In this thread I am laying out my concerns about possible ramifications arising from implementing some of the proposed "means" referenced in the OP.  I am trying to sort things out.  To try some of that sweet sweet "additional consideration" referenced by Pres. Worthen.

Quote

and request that you find references that support what will happen in the future.

You are asking me to "find references that support what will happen in the future?"  Are you sure this is a reasonable CFR?  Are you also sure that I have not provided references already that provide some justification for my concerns about what might happen in the future at BYU?  Several times over, in fact?

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited March 3, 2021 by smac97

[Scott Lloyd]

14 hours ago, smac97 said:

And yet, as schools that adopt race-based admissions policies, we see discrimination against White students.  And Asians.  And Jews.

Whether de facto or de jure, the result seems to end up there.

Thanks,

-Smac

 

1 hour ago, bluebell said:

Do you have any references you can share from schools run by the church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints that support your assertion?  

Having scanned this thread, I have to say I share Smac’s misgivings. Even if he’s wrong, he doesn’t deserve to be shamed or shouted down merely for raising concerns that the university might follow in the misguided footsteps of Yale and other institutions. 
 

BYU is my alma mater. I love it and support its mission. 
 

That said, BYU has demonstrated that it is not immune to error and the conditions in broader society that can lead to it. A couple of glaring examples  come to mind. 
 

One is the episode in the 2010s in which internal politics brought about the hijacking of the Maxwell Institute, leading ultimately to a rather substantial course correction being mandated by the Brethren. 
 

The other is the unfortunate scenario that played out last year with regard to a change to the honor code and the resulting false assumption that dating and public displays of affection between persons attracted to the same gender would thenceforth be tolerated. A lot of misunderstanding, miscommunication, misguided assumption, misdirection and rancor could have been avoided with better planning, wiser judgment and more timely attention to detail in that incident. 

Edited March 3, 2021 by Scott Lloyd

[bluebell]

25 minutes ago, SteveO said:

The OP is also referring to recommended policies that will be implemented in the future...so why are you insisting that he find outcomes at church schools that do not currently, and have not in the past, had these policies in place?  All he has to go off are the outcomes from other schools that have had these policies in place for quite some time.  What would make you think the outcome at church schools would be different if they implemented similar policies?

 

Maybe I haven’t read enough through the thread and am missing something.

Smac (and most members) believes that BYU is run by men with the authority to act for God, with a prophet of God helping to make the decisions.  That's why it's reasonable to require an apples to apples comparison.  Comparing BYU to a secular school would be an apples to oranges comparison and not very helpful.

[strappinglad]

smac97 has given examples of where discrimination against Asians and whites has crept in at Harvard and Yale.  He has said that such WILL arise at BYU if the proposed recommendations are instituted. I would have preferred that he had used the phrase " may well arise " instead but that is just me hedging. Some think that because it is BYU , that such discrimination simply will not happen. Last time I looked, the folks running BYU were fallible humans albeit with good intentions. Of course we can always just  implement these recommendations and stand back and watch what happens hoping for the best. Or there could be open and free discussion about potential pitfalls and do so without shame and ridicule and knee jerk reaction. The current climate doesn't give me much hope for that last sentence. 

[SteveO]

2 minutes ago, bluebell said:

Smac (and most members) believes that BYU is run by men with the authority to act for God, with a prophet of God helping to make the decisions.  That's why it's reasonable to require an apples to apples comparison.  Comparing BYU to a secular school would be an apples to oranges comparison and not very helpful.

...............................

 

But you can’t make that comparison...

 

So the answer is to implement policies that have proved detrimental elsewhere (and they are detrimental, read “The Coddling of the American Mind”) and expect that “Zion”will make them not detrimental?

Have you ever heard the definition of insanity?

[smac97]

5 minutes ago, bluebell said:

Smac (and most members) believes that BYU is run by men with the authority to act for God, with a prophet of God helping to make the decisions. 

Broadly speaking, yes.  And yet I don't believe them to be inerrant or infallible.

5 minutes ago, bluebell said:

That's why it's reasonable to require an apples to apples comparison. 

Not when none of the apples has implemented the proposed policies under discussion.

5 minutes ago, bluebell said:

Comparing BYU to a secular school would be an apples to oranges comparison and not very helpful.

With respect, I disagree.  BYU runs into all sorts of problems that other colleges and universities face.  It's quite reasonable to suggest that the results of race-based admissions policies at other schools could be indicative of what will happen at BYU if it decides to emulate their course of conduct.

"BYU will get race-based admissions policies right, and will not end up discriminating against Whites, Asians and Jews as we have seen in other schools which have previously implemented race-based policies because BYU is run by people with authority to act for God'" seems to veer toward expectations of infallibility.

It also seems to imply that I am opposing the Brethren or the Church.  Simply for expressing concerns about a topic in which I have an interest, but over which I have no actual control.  

So I don't think comparing BYU's prospective race-based policies to similar policies implemented at other colleges and universities is an apples to oranges comparison.  I think it's more of a Red Delicious Apple to Braeburn Apple comparison.

Thanks,

-Smac

[rongo]

5 minutes ago, smac97 said:

With respect, I disagree.  BYU runs into all sorts of problems that other colleges and universities face.  It's quite reasonable to suggest that the results of race-based admissions policies at other schools could be indicative of what will happen at BYU if it decides to emulate their course of conduct.

The fact that BYU legal counsel is going to analyze (and has yet to have submitted) legal issues with a "race-conscious admissions model for BYU" shows that it isn't the conventional wisdom slam-dunk that many think it is. Especially with the recent hot water Harvard and Yale have been in for intentionally suppressing Asian admissions. 

[SteveO]

8 minutes ago, rongo said:

The fact that BYU legal counsel is going to analyze (and has yet to have submitted) legal issues with a "race-conscious admissions model for BYU" shows that it isn't the conventional wisdom slam-dunk that many think it is. Especially with the recent hot water Harvard and Yale have been in for intentionally suppressing Asian admissions. 

HEY!!

HEY!!

 

OLD WHITE MEN  

 

...or something

Edited March 3, 2021 by SteveO

[Scott Lloyd]

26 minutes ago, bluebell said:

Smac (and most members) believes that BYU is run by men with the authority to act for God, with a prophet of God helping to make the decisions.  That's why it's reasonable to require an apples to apples comparison.  Comparing BYU to a secular school would be an apples to oranges comparison and not very helpful.

This rests on the rather naive assumption that the high leaders of the Church micromanage each and every detail at the university. I don’t believe that’s the case. I don’t think it was the case with the two examples of error I cited earlier. 

[smac97]

36 minutes ago, strappinglad said:

smac97 has given examples of where discrimination against Asians and whites has crept in at Harvard and Yale.  He has said that such WILL arise at BYU if the proposed recommendations are instituted. I would have preferred that he had used the phrase "may well arise " instead but that is just me hedging.

I think I've been pretty clear that I am speaking about concerns and reservations about what may happen in the future, and also that I am opposed to racism:

• "Racism is a horrible thing.  It has been with us a long time, and will take a long time to root out and overcome.  I hope these proposals at BYU work out.  I am concerned that they will foment further racial division and resentments."
• "If there were Whites-only scholarships, or Asian-only scholarships, those would be legitimate counterbalances to the 'prestigious scholarship recipients' that are, I think, going to be restricted to 'BIPOC' candidates (that is, anyone except White and Asian persons)."
• "I am not advocating race-based preferential treatment of applicants to BYU.  I am expressing concern about it."
• "FWIW, I haven't made up my mind about the policy proposals.  I am trying to sort things out by, inter alia, reading how others feel about them and also by laying out some of my own thoughts."
• "I am opposed to racial discrimination.  I don't like it.  I am concerned that calculated and intentional race-based preferential treatment of applicants, students and faculty at BYU may create some real problems."
• "I am concerned about explicitly race-based policies being developed and introduced at BYU.  BIPOCs will receive preferential treatment, and Whites, Asians, and Jews will therefore lose in the 'zero sum game.'" 
• "Well, we're speaking prospectively, right?  What may happen in the future if and when these policies are implemented?  Kinda hard to answer a CFR about something that has yet to happen."
• "To be honest, I'm not sure I 'oppose' the recommendations.  I have some real reservations about them, but I also have quite a bit of respect for Pres. Worthen and the Board of Trustees."
• "Again, I am speaking prospectively.  Other institutions of higher learning that have incorporated explicitly race-based considerations in their admissions processes have ended up discriminating against Whites, Asians and Jews."
• "I think it's fair to surmise that BYU will end up with the same sort of issues that have arisen in other universities with race-based admissions: de facto discrimination against Whites, Asians and Jews."
• "Yes, I think we'll see similar forms of 'racial injustice' as have been seen in other universities that adopt explicitly race-based admissions and other policies."
• "I am.  I think it will happen.  It's happened at other schools who have adopted explicitly race-based policies.  I don't think BYU will be able to avoid the problems inherent in discriminating based on race."
• "Nobody is looking for a guarantee.  I think the concern is that skin color is used to advantage some applicants and disadvantage others."
• "Which doesn't ameliorate the concern about race being a factor in the admissions process at BYU."
• "I hope these comments/questions are taken in the spirit in which they are intended, and not in the spirit some want to impute onto me.  I dislike racism and discrimination.  A lot.  I am opposed to these things."
• "And yet, as schools that adopt race-based admissions policies, we see discrimination against White students.  And Asians.  And Jews.  Whether de facto or de jure, the result seems to end up there."
• "Not 'is happening.'  I am prognosticating that it will happen.  Universities that adopt explicitly race-based admissions policies end up with de facto discrimination against Whites, Asians and Jews."
• "I dunno.  'Yes, we'll use race-based admissions policies, but we'll do it right, not like those dolts at Harvard and Yale' doesn't fill me with confidence.  Again, I am prognosticating de facto discrimination."
• "And they who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.  I think it's hubristic to think that BYU can enact race-based policies but not end up with de facto discrimination against Whites, Asians and Jews."
• "I'm not sure I'm saying 'inevitable.'  Pretty darn likely, tho."
• "I have concerns about the proposals referenced in the OP."
• "{H}aving concerns about a remedy proposed to reduce or alleviate racism does not make me racist.  I very much dislike racism.  I think it's a terrible thing."
• "I may very well be ultimately wrong here.  The proposed policies may work out fabulously for BYU.  Or . . . they may not.  In any event, I think people of good will, people who are on the same side of things, should be able to have reasoned discussions about difficult topics."
• "I have no axe to grind against BYU at all.  I very much want it and the Church to improve and grow.  I very much support the ends under discussion here, which are to reduce and alleviate racism.  I just have questions and concerns about the proposed means (explicitly race-based policies pertaining to admissions, students, faculty, etc.)."
• "Again, I have reservations and concerns about the proposed policies.  I am not opposed to them per se, but I think there is risk of them creating some real problems, as has occurred in other schools. "
• "I too want to mend wounds, and I also want BYU to succeed.  I question whether adopting explicitly race-based policies pertaining to admissions, students and faculty will advance those objectives.  I think we should be allowed to raise and discuss such concerns without being hectored and bullied."
• "I have repeatedly declared my opposition to racism, and yet I am being hectored and bullied and tacitly accused of racism for trying to have some of that 'due deliberation' Pres. Worthen referenced."
• "If race-based policies at other universities have resulted in what can reasonably be called 'racial injustice,' I think it's reasonable to be concerned that BYU might, in implementing similar policies, end up with similar results."
• "I am not claiming prophecy.  I am expressing a concern about what may happen.  I have provided several examples of how this has happened at other schools, and also the specific concerns about how some of the proposed policies may work out after implementation.  See here, here, here, here, here, here, and here."
• "I have repeatedly sa{id} that I am expressing concern about what may 'happen in the future.'"
• "How many times do I need to denounce racism and discrimination in order to successfully rebut implications that I am racist?  Is is possible for us to have a civil discussion without resorting to such tactics?"
• "I am on board with making changes and improvements at BYU regarding alleviating racism.  I may not ultimately agree with each and every policy, but it's not reasonable to expect BYU to comply with my personal preferences in every respect."
• "Again, I find racism and discrimination deplorable and bad.  I am fully on board with the 'ends' (reducing/alleviating racism at BYU).  In this thread I am laying out my concerns about possible ramifications arising from implementing some of the proposed 'means' referenced in the OP.  I am trying to sort things out.  To try some of that sweet sweet 'additional consideration' referenced by Pres. Worthen."
• "BYU runs into all sorts of problems that other colleges and universities face.  It's quite reasonable to suggest that the results of race-based admissions policies at other schools could be indicative of what will happen at BYU if it decides to emulate their course of conduct."

Quote

Some think that because it is BYU , that such discrimination simply will not happen. Last time I looked, the folks running BYU were fallible humans albeit with good intentions. Of course we can always just  implement these recommendations and stand back and watch what happens hoping for the best. Or there could be open and free discussion about potential pitfalls and do so without shame and ridicule and knee jerk reaction. The current climate doesn't give me much hope for that last sentence. 

Same here.  It's sort of disconcerting to have people - fellow members of the Church - publicly implying I am racist despite my numerous and vigorous denunciations of racism.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited March 3, 2021 by smac97