BYU Makes Drudge Report

The place for religious discussions -- doctrinal or cultural, Mormon or otherwise.

Moderators: Lady Celtic, Eric's Moderator Brother, seespot, Sara without the H

jds88
Posts: 410
Joined: Wed 02 Nov, 2005 03:52 pm
Location: Sandy, UT

BYU Makes Drudge Report

Postby jds88 » Tue 10 Apr, 2007 04:39 pm

Over the Dick Cheney protests. The actual article is here.

--Jim

User avatar
robcan2
Posts: 994
Joined: Fri 26 Sep, 2003 10:19 am
Contact:

Postby robcan2 » Thu 12 Apr, 2007 09:28 am

They mentioned on the news last night that some students want to have an "alternative graduation" with Ralph Nader speaking. Nader said he would do it, if they can make his $15,000 speaking fee.

My SIL is graduating, but she's probably not going to go. Not to protest, but because the students have to be in their seats 2 hours before it starts.

jds88
Posts: 410
Joined: Wed 02 Nov, 2005 03:52 pm
Location: Sandy, UT

Postby jds88 » Thu 12 Apr, 2007 12:40 pm

And now it's in the New York Times.

--Jim

User avatar
Zapato
Posts: 53
Joined: Thu 02 Oct, 2003 02:07 pm
Location: the desert

Postby Zapato » Thu 12 Apr, 2007 02:16 pm

It was on Al-Jazeera about a week ago, too. Remarkable.

User avatar
Jersey Girl
Posts: 1357
Joined: Thu 12 Sep, 2002 08:31 am
Location: Virginia
Contact:

Postby Jersey Girl » Thu 12 Apr, 2007 04:56 pm

[quote="Zapato"]It was on [url=http://www.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/abb10d38-25cf-4a14-8b41-6aea4a838d46.htm]Al-Jazeera[/url] about a week ago, too. Remarkable.[/quote]

Too bad I can't read Arabic. I'd love to know what they said.
"Chicken legs were moved, roads were crossed, motives were questioned."--EFB

User avatar
Zapato
Posts: 53
Joined: Thu 02 Oct, 2003 02:07 pm
Location: the desert

Postby Zapato » Thu 12 Apr, 2007 05:57 pm

Basically, it says that:
-there were over 200 students at the demonstration,
-BYU officials say they will not cancel the invitation despite the protest,
-a Heather Marsh is quoted as saying she's bothered by Cheney's insinuation of an Iraq/al-Qaeda link (I wonder if she knows she's on al-Jazeera...),
-and there is an online petition to protest the invitation.

I hope that helps :).

User avatar
jebelmuus
Posts: 1006
Joined: Tue 22 Oct, 2002 06:01 pm
Location: Virginia is for lovers
Contact:

Postby jebelmuus » Tue 01 May, 2007 05:44 am

I've been following this story a little, and I thought this article was interesting:


http://www.deseretnews.com/dn/view2/1,4 ... 43,00.html

User avatar
Huzzak
Posts: 265
Joined: Wed 14 Jan, 2004 06:24 am
Location: Provo, UT
Contact:

Postby Huzzak » Wed 02 May, 2007 06:55 am

The implication at the very beginning of the article is that the club membership has ballooned. I guess that might be true, but there were only about twelve or so folks going to the meetings before and there are only about twelve or so going now. So attendance has remained stable.

glaxo
Posts: 8
Joined: Sat 07 Jul, 2007 08:33 pm

BYU

Postby glaxo » Tue 10 Jul, 2007 04:35 pm

the article says

"Students seldom even stray from campus sidewalks, leaving its lawns pristine.

"Cougars don't cut corners," is how one saying describes students."

Is that really what it is like at BYU? I mean...I guess it wouldn't surprise me since you can be worthy to get into the temple but no worthy enough for BYU.

If I have a beard, I can visit the most holy of holy - the Lord's temple, but this is just far to much for the pundits at BYU.

That has always cracked me up. Actually, it's sad really - to think that people at BYU actually think that God cares whether or not a person has facial hair.

Ya know what else is funny - and off topic (will I get banned?) - is that people in the church somehow think that taking the sacrament with your right hand is more righteous than taking it with your left hand.

User avatar
Momma Snider
Posts: 9072
Joined: Wed 14 Aug, 2002 08:50 am

Postby Momma Snider » Tue 10 Jul, 2007 06:59 pm

I don't think that will ban you, glaxo, but I have another point of view. I have never, ever heard of anyone thinking they were more righteous for taking the sacrament with the right hand, but it's the way they've been taught. There is significance in the right hand.

I don't really think the facial hair/BYU issue is a matter of "thinking God cares" about it, either. I think it's a matter of image. Those who set the policy are trying to keep the image clean.

User avatar
AdamOndi
Posts: 1731
Joined: Fri 26 May, 2006 11:29 pm
Location: Universal City, TX (Outside of San Antonio)
Contact:

Re: BYU

Postby AdamOndi » Wed 11 Jul, 2007 03:45 pm

glaxo wrote:If I have a beard, I can visit the most holy of holy - the Lord's temple, but this is just far to much for the pundits at BYU.

That has always cracked me up. Actually, it's sad really - to think that people at BYU actually think that God cares whether or not a person has facial hair.


You are missing the entire point of the "no facial hair" rule. It is not a matter of God caring whether or not a person has facial hair. It is a matter of students being clean-cut, presentable, and generally tidy. I have yet to meet any college student with facial hair that didn't look homeless or lazy. If all of the students could keep their facial hair neatly trimmed and tidy, then maybe the rule wouldn't be necessary. And if everyone could control themselves when drinking alcohol, the Word of Wisdom would probably still be a suggestion rather than a commandment. However, since these sorts of things are geared toward the "weakest of the Saints," then everyone must abide by the same strict rule, rather than a more relaxed guideline.

glaxo wrote:Ya know what else is funny - and off topic (will I get banned?) - is that people in the church somehow think that taking the sacrament with your right hand is more righteous than taking it with your left hand.


It is not a matter of it being "more righteous." Rather, it is a matter of using your "covenant hand" to perform important rites. Is it more righteous to raise your right hand than your left when saying a baptismal prayer? Is it more righteous to raise your right hand than your left to sustain someone? Or perhaps we are simply instructed to use our right hand to perform or participate in ordinances and rites of the Gospel.
Check out our blog [url=http://adamandlisahansen.blogspot.com]at this link[/url].

jds88
Posts: 410
Joined: Wed 02 Nov, 2005 03:52 pm
Location: Sandy, UT

Postby jds88 » Wed 11 Jul, 2007 06:13 pm

I agree--I actually had a reply about the right hand being the "covenant hand" ready to go to this thread last night, but the board crashed right when I hit "submit".

But it is, of course, important to bear in mind the following counsel from Joseph F. Smith to his son Alvin:

The question you ask about anointing seems very simple to me. I think it is the general practice to pour the oil with the right hand. I suppose because most people are right-handed. But there is no law or rule against anointing . . . with the left. We shake with the right hand. In the endowments the signs and tokens are made and given with the right hand. When we lay but one hand on the sick it should be the right. We take the Sacrament with the right hand. The practice makes the rule. But always remember that it is not the rule, or practice, which gives life or force, but the true spirit. There is no good in splitting hairs nor in tickey-technical rules. "The letter killeth, but the Spirit giveth life."
(Source: Joseph F. Smith, From Prophet to Son: Advice of Joseph F. Smith to His Missionary Sons, compiled by Hyrum M. Smith III and Scott G. Kenney [Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1981], 92.)


Oh, and while I can confirm that I was admonished in 1998 during freshman orientation week that "cougars don't cut corners", as an alumni of the BYU grounds crew I can also confirm that this dictum is frequently ignored.

--Jim

User avatar
Momma Snider
Posts: 9072
Joined: Wed 14 Aug, 2002 08:50 am

Postby Momma Snider » Wed 11 Jul, 2007 06:42 pm

Thanks, Jim. That was one of the quotes I was thinking of but didn't have time to find. And thanks, Adam, for saying what I was trying to say, only more coherently.

But welcome to the board, glaxo!

User avatar
Karenins_SuperSon
Posts: 1081
Joined: Tue 09 Aug, 2005 03:30 pm
Location: Not in Australia anymore. :(

Postby Karenins_SuperSon » Wed 11 Jul, 2007 07:35 pm

I concur with Adam's post as well, with the caveat that as a Temple Worker, we were instructed to not put too much adherance to the "right-hand" thing, due to the fact that some people:
a. May not have a right hand
b. May be crippled in their right hand
c. Other various reasons

We were instructed to allow whatever way they were able to, since as Joseph F. Smith put it, it is more the spirit, and not the practice. Thus, the spirit behind their sacrifice and efforts was known to the Lord, despite whatever outward manifestation of that effort that I was seeing.
Her lips were saying "no," but her eyes were saying, "read my lips."---Dr. Niles Crane

User avatar
Audrey
Posts: 2583
Joined: Tue 13 Aug, 2002 08:34 pm
Location: off eating Ben & Jerry's somewhere
Contact:

Postby Audrey » Thu 12 Jul, 2007 08:23 am

1. Amen to that, SuperSon. I understand that there's symbolism and everything, but it's probably not so important that you take the sacrament or do anything else with the right hand than that you do it with the right spirit.

2. Also? I used to walk across the grass at BYU on purpose. (Oooh, rebellion!) Grass is supposed to be walked on, and anyway the sidewalks were always full of people running into mission companions / newly married friends / old roommates and clogging up the traffic as if 30,000 people weren't all trying to get to the Marriott Center in the same 10-minute period.

3. I like beards. Rrrrow!
If you smile at me I will understand, 'cause that is something everybody everywhere does in the same language.

User avatar
lilcis
Posts: 1778
Joined: Wed 13 Aug, 2003 02:33 pm
Location: Long Beach, CA

Postby lilcis » Thu 12 Jul, 2007 11:41 am

Speaking of beards, my old stake president felt that every man should be clean-shaven, and wouldn't give temple recommends to men with facial hair.

I thought that was ridiculous. My husband has a beard and always keeps it nicely trimmed. And I strongly prefer him bearded. If he had had to shave it off for our wedding I would have been VERY upset.
Why are you the way that you are? Honestly, every time I try to do something fun or exciting, you make it not that way. I hate so much about the things that you choose to be. Michael Scott

EricDSnider
Posts: 2166
Joined: Tue 13 Aug, 2002 03:13 pm
Location: Portland
Contact:

Postby EricDSnider » Thu 12 Jul, 2007 12:00 pm

lilcis wrote:Speaking of beards, my old stake president felt that every man should be clean-shaven, and wouldn't give temple recommends to men with facial hair.



Isn't that against the rules? I don't think you're allowed to add your own whimsical temple-recommend requirements, are you?

User avatar
Karenins_SuperSon
Posts: 1081
Joined: Tue 09 Aug, 2005 03:30 pm
Location: Not in Australia anymore. :(

Postby Karenins_SuperSon » Thu 12 Jul, 2007 12:24 pm

EricDSnider wrote:
lilcis wrote:Speaking of beards, my old stake president felt that every man should be clean-shaven, and wouldn't give temple recommends to men with facial hair.



Isn't that against the rules? I don't think you're allowed to add your own whimsical temple-recommend requirements, are you?


Yes, completely. If it were allowed, what would stop another SP from not giving any T.R.s to overweight people on the grounds that he feels they are violating the Word of Wisdom by not exercising moderation. Or any other personal interpretation of gospel principles?

That's why there is the standard set of questions that they are supposed to adhere to.
Her lips were saying "no," but her eyes were saying, "read my lips."---Dr. Niles Crane

User avatar
lilcis
Posts: 1778
Joined: Wed 13 Aug, 2003 02:33 pm
Location: Long Beach, CA

Postby lilcis » Thu 12 Jul, 2007 02:01 pm

I don't know how he got away with it, and I'm not sure how he brought it up in the actual interview. He may have just been very persuasive in convincing the men of why it would be more appropriate to enter the temple clean shaven. I do remember him talking about it in Sacrament meeting, though.

We didn't worry too much about it. Since we weren't getting sealed in the temple we just waited until we were in our new ward for my husband to update his recommend.

He was my bishop in the singles ward, and I absolutely loved him. But then when he became stake president he got a little self-righteous. I hate being so judgemental, but he became very critical and vocal, and it was hard listening to him.
Why are you the way that you are? Honestly, every time I try to do something fun or exciting, you make it not that way. I hate so much about the things that you choose to be. Michael Scott

User avatar
AdamOndi
Posts: 1731
Joined: Fri 26 May, 2006 11:29 pm
Location: Universal City, TX (Outside of San Antonio)
Contact:

Postby AdamOndi » Thu 12 Jul, 2007 02:05 pm

Karenins_SuperSon wrote:
EricDSnider wrote:
lilcis wrote:Speaking of beards, my old stake president felt that every man should be clean-shaven, and wouldn't give temple recommends to men with facial hair.



Isn't that against the rules? I don't think you're allowed to add your own whimsical temple-recommend requirements, are you?


Yes, completely. If it were allowed, what would stop another SP from not giving any T.R.s to overweight people on the grounds that he feels they are violating the Word of Wisdom by not exercising moderation. Or any other personal interpretation of gospel principles?

That's why there is the standard set of questions that they are supposed to adhere to.


Well, allowed or not, I have seen and experienced similar issues. When I turned in my mission papers and went to meet with my stake president, I was overweight (a little over 300 pounds). My stake president refused to submit my papers to Salt Lake until I lost some weight. So I had to spend the next four or five months trying to lose enough weight to satisfy his completely arbitrary weight restriction on missionaries. As if I was not already bitter enough about that, when I got to the Missionary Training Center, there was an elder in my MTC district that weighed over 400 pounds.

So it is almost certainly not allowed to make up personal rules like that, but it happens all the time. It is just that there aren't a whole lot of people who feel comfortable calling BS when their stake president or bishop try to do it.
Check out our blog [url=http://adamandlisahansen.blogspot.com]at this link[/url].


Return to “Religion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests