BYU Student Flashes Rainbow Flag at Graduation

[california boy]

12 hours ago, Amulek said:

I understand where you are coming from, but it isn't like BYU is refusing to allow people from withdrawing from the university. The reality, however, is that withdrawing from a university - any university - isn't a cost free endeavor, and I don't know that BYU can (or should be expected to) do anything about that.

 

That's fair. But if it is both within the interest of BYU and the student to withdraw from the university, then maybe there is a way to make that withdraw more viable for both of them.

[bluebell]

3 hours ago, MorningStar said:

Does the BYU honor code allow married men to have girlfriends as long as they're not having sex with them? 

It doesn’t. My post was concerning single students. 

Edited April 30, 2022 by bluebell

[bluebell]

3 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I answered a similar question here earlier but their changed status is not comparable to that of one who has never accepted the restored gospel message in the first place. They have forsaken their faith and essentially become covenant breakers and apostates. 

Then why don’t we excommunicate them for apostasy?  Apostasy is an excommunicable offense, right?

 

[SeekingUnderstanding]

1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

I think there is a bit of a mixed message though. I suspect that the apostles are happy when kids go to other schools willingly and happily because the Church education system isn’t big enough to take everyone who “wants” to go. I think parents see it as ‘safer’ and some might try to push it the same way some parents push for missions in the hopes it will convert the child (or retain the conversion). Local church leaders might feel the same way. I served under one bishop who was almost desperate to get a teenager into a church school. Getting them away from their family for a while in a semi-structured environment was seen as a boon. The family was dysfunctional and the kid was holding onto their testimony but only barely and sticking around would probably not go well.

I do think there is a pressure to go to church schools coming from a less healthy and more possessive and controlling desire from some local leaders and (especially) parents.

The pressure more often comes from parents. You are right and I over stepped

[sunstoned]

6 hours ago, rongo said:

Deleted. Calm posted what I was looking for. 

I didn't know that former Mormons are ineligible for ecclesiastical endorsements.

I believe former Mormons are also ineligible to work or teach there.

[sunstoned]

5 hours ago, Calm said:

I had a friend who was a Baptist who wanted to come to see what Mormons were really like and maybe even show them the light originally if I am recalling our conversations correctly. She had been previously an anti-Mormon by her own description and then got more curious about us after online interaction with Saints, including some of our BYU scholars (late 1990’s, early 2000s).  Was good friends with several of them. She married a member, it did not turn out well (he never grew up as far as I could tell and she gave him many chances he was too selfish to take advantage of), though lovely children.  She seems to have a great life now doing what she loves, so happy about that. 

There was a guy in my Freshman dorm was not a member, but came because of the good ROTC program that BYU has.

[The Nehor]

2 hours ago, Amulek said:

I know this isn't a perfect analogy, but I guess I kind of think of this like joining the armed services, attending one of the military academies for three years, and then quitting the military but expecting them to still let you finish out your degree at West Point (or wherever). And then being resentful when they tell you to go pound sand.*

*Technically, at that point, I believe what they actually tell you is that you now get to pay back your tuition and immediately go into active duty or face the consequences associated with being dishonorably discharged. 

The difference is that when you belong to the military they pay you. It is a two way contract. It is a legal agreement with both sides (usually) benefitting materially. Church membership doesn’t come with a paycheck and a duration on the contract and baptism isn’t an enforceable agreement. Nor do I think we would want church membership to be a contract of coercion or for it to hold hostage years of your life. It violates some of our basic tenets.

[The Nehor]

3 hours ago, Calm said:

Or make it easier for them to fall in love with an active member. 

Only reason I kind of wish I had gone but I also realize that my marrying is a potential disaster (especially that young) so it might have saved people a lot of pain.

[Calm]

1 hour ago, sunstoned said:

I believe former Mormons are also ineligible to work or teach there.

You need endorsements for those as well, iirc.

[Kenngo1969]

6 hours ago, The Nehor said:

The difference is that when you belong to the military they pay you. It is a two way contract. It is a legal agreement with both sides (usually) benefitting materially. Church membership doesn’t come with a paycheck and a duration on the contract and baptism isn’t an enforceable agreement. Nor do I think we would want church membership to be a contract of coercion or for it to hold hostage years of your life. It violates some of our basic tenets.

Enrollment at BYU is seen by both parties (or by all parties, if one wishes to count BYU and the Church of Jesus Christ as separate entities) at least at the time the contract is made) as beneficial, however.

[SeekingUnderstanding]

9 hours ago, Amulek said:

Is the potential gain from allowing these disaffected members to remain outweigh the potential drain from having them stick around? I'm thinking mainly about them displacing other faithful members, but I suppose there's also a concern about their potential subversive influence over other students as well. 

I'll probably need to think about it more, but my initial inclination is that the scales probably tilt in favor of letting them go. 

 

I get the sentiment, I really do. I attended BYU. It’s a special place and I really enjoyed my time there. 
 

But you are laying out a false choice. BYU doesn’t have the ability to track down people who have mentally apostatized and kick them out. These students, when faced with a loss of faith, are choosing to live unauthentically for a year or two until graduation rather than accept a two year set back in their lives. 
 

So the choice for BYU is whether to offer these students a pathway to legitimacy or not. The students will be there taking up spots regardless. 

[Senator]

13 hours ago, Calm said:

It could be an issue of association, those who do those things are more likely to find others who want to do those things…so if she happens to know some who are a part of that group (roommates or classmates), she may have been pulled into contact with more intentional HC violators than the typical student, just like I got to know quite a few students from Alabama, more I am guessing than most students at the time because I had two roommates from there who were very social and others came to hang out with them.

Perhaps. I have no way of knowing if her circle of friends and acquaintances are atypical. She did specifically  mention the student wards she’s attended in making that determination.

[Amulek]

7 hours ago, The Nehor said:

The difference is that when you belong to the military they pay you.

Well, technically, the service academies don't actually require you to enlist until your third year. You can walk away any time before that point without penalty - though, in practice, nobody takes this route as a way of gaming the system to get two free years of college. But yes, I am aware there are differences - that's why I said it wasn't a perfect analogy. 

At a high level though, I think it helps communicate what I was trying to express. There are other organizations which exist and grant (directly or indirectly) certain benefits, and membership in those organizations is completely voluntary. In my view, leaving the church and wanting to stay at BYU is like leaving one of these other organizations and expecting to retain the benefits which derive from membership. 

 

[Scott Lloyd]

On 4/29/2022 at 6:59 PM, MiserereNobis said:

What covenant have they broken? (aren't covenants made in temples?)

There are covenants made at baptism which, I believe, preclude abandonment of the faith. That said, a large portion of enrollees at BYU, including all returned missionaries, have made temple covenants. I’m certain this includes a good many of those who renounce the faith after they have enrolled. 

Edited May 1, 2022 by Scott Lloyd

[why me]

What usually happens after a brief moment of attention and popularity, she will be forgotten. And then she will need to justify her lies and deceit every now and then, and be applauded for her courage. At the end of the day, the 'high' will fade and normal life will come. But will she be trusted by an employer? Or by others who wish to be friends? Deceit is never an one off thing.

[Scott Lloyd]

On 4/29/2022 at 9:45 PM, bluebell said:

Then why don’t we excommunicate them for apostasy?  Apostasy is an excommunicable offense, right?

 

I don’t think it has to be either/or. If anything, Church leaders tend to err on the side of leniency with regard to holding membership councils (new term), but such leniency does not bind the Church or its university to grant the same privileges to those who have engaged in problematic behavior as it does to other Church members or even non-members. 

Edited May 1, 2022 by Scott Lloyd

[The Nehor]

17 hours ago, Kenngo1969 said:

Enrollment at BYU is seen by both parties (or by all parties, if one wishes to count BYU and the Church of Jesus Christ as separate entities) at least at the time the contract is made) as beneficial, however.

It seems to be a coercive process. I don’t think it is intentional but it is the reality. The student and/or their parents (or possibly a scholarship) are paying for a student to go to a school. They can’t exit the ‘contract’ without being stuck because BYU credits are a pain to transfer. The school can, on the other hand, throw them out.

Yes, they knew about the Honor Code going in but it still feels coercive. What does the university risk? I hate unequal contractual relationships like this. I hope a better way can be found.

[Raingirl]

4 hours ago, The Nehor said:

It seems to be a coercive process. I don’t think it is intentional but it is the reality. The student and/or their parents (or possibly a scholarship) are paying for a student to go to a school. They can’t exit the ‘contract’ without being stuck because BYU credits are a pain to transfer. The school can, on the other hand, throw them out.

Yes, they knew about the Honor Code going in but it still feels coercive. What does the university risk? I hate unequal contractual relationships like this. I hope a better way can be found.

I’ve worked at both public and private universities. They all have rules, policies, etc., that students agree to as part of attendance. As do faculty and staff. Students know the deal going in.  If they don’t want to abide by it the rules, there are plenty of other schools to attend. Most students have more than one acceptance from which to choose. No coercion involved. 
 

I worked at a Catholic university. Some students got all outraged that the Health Center didn’t provide free condoms. Not that it’s anyone else’s responsibility to provide you with free birth control, but to expect a Catholic university to provide it was a special level of stupidity and entitlement. If you’re old enough to have sex, you’re old enough to go to the drugstore and buy your own condoms. 

it’s pretty simple, actually, the concept of honoring an agreement you’ve freely chosen to enter into. Surprised that some can’t or won’t grasp this, and even think it’s laudable to not live up to your end of the agreement. 

[Kenngo1969]

10 hours ago, The Nehor said:

It seems to be a coercive process. I don’t think it is intentional but it is the reality. The student and/or their parents (or possibly a scholarship) are paying for a student to go to a school. They can’t exit the ‘contract’ without being stuck because BYU credits are a pain to transfer. The school can, on the other hand, throw them out.

Yes, they knew about the Honor Code going in but it still feels coercive. What does the university risk? I hate unequal contractual relationships like this. I hope a better way can be found.

While BYU isn't nearly as ruthless as some cable providers, cell phone providers, and so on, the vast majority of contracts (for cable, cell phone, leased premises, and so on, ad infinitum) are contracts of adhesion.  There is no negotiating of terms: "Take it or leave it."  Rarely are two parties to a contract on perfectly equal footing.  There is nothing unique or special about BYU in that regard.   

I don't know if you had a chance to read my previous contribution to the thread.  It is quite lengthy.  I will summarize it for you.  If a student experiences a change of heart during the course of his or her education, and if he or she confides that change of heart to a religious leader, to a parent, or to some other trusted party, I think there is room, in such a case, for the parties to work together to determine how to proceed.  On the other hand, if someone lies to an ecclesiastical leader to maintain an endorsement, while I don't think, in a million years, BYU ever would do this, the university and its powers-that-be could argue, credibly, that such a lie or lies is a fraud that induced BYU to continue to offer the tuition rate reserved for faithful members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. 

I applied to BYU and was rejected.  My credentials weren't all that great (and I doubt I would have graduated from law school if I had gone anywhere but where I did, though, probably, I will spend the rest of my life wondering if that is a good thing), so I'm not saying this ever would happen, but I would hate to think my spot was taken by some other law student who said, "Sweet!  All I have to do to get the tuition rate that is for members of the Church of Jesus Christ is lie for a few years!  I know Bar associations look askance at admitting people who lie, but in this case, it's just about religion, so it's not that big a deal ..."

Edited May 1, 2022 by Kenngo1969

[bluebell]

9 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I don’t think it has to be either/or. If anything, Church leaders tend to err on the side of leniency with regard to holding membership councils (new term), but such leniency does not bind the Church or its university to grant the same privileges to those who have engaged in problematic behavior as it does to other Church members or even non-members. 

According to the handbook, if apostasy is believed then the bishop has to counsel with the stake president, who then promptly counsels with the area authority.  So it's a serious accusation.  I haven't seen any other sins listed as requiring a membership counsel where counseling with the AA is also required (but I could have missed it).

The church defines apostasy as public opposition to the church, teaching false doctrine in church and refusing to quit when asked, intentionally trying to weaken the testimony of church members, following the teachings of apostate sects after being spoken to about it by a church leader, and/or formally joining another church and advocating its teachings.

The breaking of covenants alone is not listed as making someone an apostate.

So don't know think that we aren't seeing membership councils for these students because the church is erring on the side of leniency.  I think we aren't seeing them because the church does not agree with your personal definition of apostasy.

[bluebell]

On 4/30/2022 at 8:00 AM, Amulek said:

In my view, leaving the church and wanting to stay at BYU is like leaving one of these other organizations and expecting to retain the benefits which derive from membership. 

 

What if the student doesn't want to continue to retain the benefits which derive from membership, but instead wants to retain the benefits that the church grants to nonmembers?

[The Nehor]

1 hour ago, Kenngo1969 said:

While BYU isn't nearly as ruthless as some cable providers, cell phone providers, and so on, the vast majority of contracts (for cable, cell phone, leased premises, and so on, ad infinitum) are contracts of adhesion.  There is no negotiating of terms: "Take it or leave it."  Rarely are two parties to a contract on perfectly equal footing.  There is nothing unique or special about BYU in that regard.   

I don't know if you had a chance to read my previous contribution to the thread.  It is quite lengthy.  I will summarize it for you.  If a student experiences a change of heart during the course of his or her education, and if he or she confides that change of heart to a religious leader, to a parent, or to some other trusted party, I think there is room, in such a case, for the parties to work together to determine how to proceed.  On the other hand, if someone lies to an ecclesiastical leader to maintain an endorsement, while I don't think, in a million years, BYU ever would do this, the university and its powers-that-be could argue, credibly, that such a lie or lies is a fraud that induced BYU to continue to offer the tuition rate reserved for faithful members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. 

I applied to BYU and was rejected.  My credentials weren't all that great (and I doubt I would have graduated from law school if I had gone anywhere but where I did, though, probably, I will spend the rest of my life wondering if that is a good thing), so I'm not saying this ever would happen, but I would hate to think my spot was taken by some other law student said, "Sweet!  All I have to do to get the tuition rate that is for members of the Church of Jesus Christ is lie for a few years!  I know Bar associations look askance at admitting people who lie, but in this case, it's just about religion, so it's not that big a deal ..."

I agree that such contracts are normal. I don't particularly like that normalcy either. I have done a lot of independent contracting and some companies act miffed when I actually negotiate terms beyond price. Thankfully I usually have enough leverage to get them to bend.

While the 'get together and discuss' sounds good the end result is still probably leaving the university. Honesty is not rewarded. Deception is. That is also normal in lots of areas of life and I am not particularly fond of that state of affairs either.

4 hours ago, Raingirl said:

I’ve worked at both public and private universities. They all have rules, policies, etc., that students agree to as part of attendance. As do faculty and staff. Students know the deal going in.  If they don’t want to abide by it the rules, there are plenty of other schools to attend. Most students have more than one acceptance from which to choose. No coercion involved. 
 

I worked at a Catholic university. Some students got all outraged that the Health Center didn’t provide free condoms. Not that it’s anyone else’s responsibility to provide you with free birth control, but to expect a Catholic university to provide it was a special level of stupidity and entitlement. If you’re old enough to have sex, you’re old enough to go to the drugstore and buy your own condoms. 

it’s pretty simple, actually, the concept of honoring an agreement you’ve freely chosen to enter into. Surprised that some can’t or won’t grasp this, and even think it’s laudable to not live up to your end of the agreement. 

It is not laudable. It just happens. I understand why religious colleges do it but rules about changing one's faith costing you your education are encouraging deception. I am sure there are some who go to BYU already not believing but I am guessing many of them had parents applying pressure to go there. The rest realized they did not believe it or did not wish to live it later. Again, the smart thing to do in that case is to lie.

 

[california boy]

1 hour ago, Kenngo1969 said:

While BYU isn't nearly as ruthless as some cable providers, cell phone providers, and so on, the vast majority of contracts (for cable, cell phone, leased premises, and so on, ad infinitum) are contracts of adhesion.  There is no negotiating of terms: "Take it or leave it."  Rarely are two parties to a contract on perfectly equal footing.  There is nothing unique or special about BYU in that regard.   

I don't know if you had a chance to read my previous contribution to the thread.  It is quite lengthy.  I will summarize it for you.  If a student experiences a change of heart during the course of his or her education, and if he or she confides that change of heart to a religious leader, to a parent, or to some other trusted party, I think there is room, in such a case, for the parties to work together to determine how to proceed.  On the other hand, if someone lies to an ecclesiastical leader to maintain an endorsement, while I don't think, in a million years, BYU ever would do this, the university and its powers-that-be could argue, credibly, that such a lie or lies is a fraud that induced BYU to continue to offer the tuition rate reserved for faithful members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. 

I applied to BYU and was rejected.  My credentials weren't all that great (and I doubt I would have graduated from law school if I had gone anywhere but where I did, though, probably, I will spend the rest of my life wondering if that is a good thing), so I'm not saying this ever would happen, but I would hate to think my spot was taken by some other law student said, "Sweet!  All I have to do to get the tuition rate that is for members of the Church of Jesus Christ is lie for a few years!  I know Bar associations look askance at admitting people who lie, but in this case, it's just about religion, so it's not that big a deal ..."

I think the lying to church leaders has a lot to do with the fact that the person can't trust that those leaders will work in their best interests to resolve the issue. They are more likely to work for the best interest of the Church.  It is a leadership roulette that most students would be unwilling to take.

[Raingirl]

31 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

I agree that such contracts are normal. I don't particularly like that normalcy either. I have done a lot of independent contracting and some companies act miffed when I actually negotiate terms beyond price. Thankfully I usually have enough leverage to get them to bend.

While the 'get together and discuss' sounds good the end result is still probably leaving the university. Honesty is not rewarded. Deception is. That is also normal in lots of areas of life and I am not particularly fond of that state of affairs either.

It is not laudable. It just happens. I understand why religious colleges do it but rules about changing one's faith costing you your education are encouraging deception. I am sure there are some who go to BYU already not believing but I am guessing many of them had parents applying pressure to go there. The rest realized they did not believe it or did not wish to live it later. Again, the smart thing to do in that case is to lie.

 

“Rules encourage deception”? The mental gymnastics some people will go through to justify lying.  And always blaming someone else for one’s choices. Then refusing to accept the consequences of said choices. Once again, if you don’t like the rules, or the terms of the contract, don’t enter in to the agreement.

I work in contracting. Both parties freely agree to sign the contact. Or not.  If either party violates the contract, there are consequences.  It boggles my mind that members of the church support lying and deception in order to save money. 

[Kenngo1969]

The vast majority of students who enroll at BYU would never dream of lying to maintain their endorsement.  I suppose (if this thread is any indication), according to some, that those who would are a special category to whom 2 Nephi 9:34 does not apply.