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

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

Postby EricDSnider » Thu 12 Jul, 2007 02:16 pm

AdamOndi wrote:
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.



Actually, Adam, your experience is completely different from what we were talking about. There is a specific set of questions that leaders are supposed to ask in temple recommend interviews. There is NOT a specific set of questions that they're supposed to ask when determining whether to submit someone's mission papers.

User avatar
pizzocalabro
Posts: 752
Joined: Wed 12 Oct, 2005 04:55 pm
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Contact:

Postby pizzocalabro » Thu 12 Jul, 2007 02:32 pm

EricDSnider wrote:
AdamOndi wrote: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.



Actually, Adam, your experience is completely different from what we were talking about. There is a specific set of questions that leaders are supposed to ask in temple recommend interviews. There is NOT a specific set of questions that they're supposed to ask when determining whether to submit someone's mission papers.


Still not fair, and extremely aggravating. But different.

The way I understood it, bishops and SPs are given a certain amount of leeway in temple recommend interviews--not in the questions (those are fixed) but in how they interpret them, to allow room for the gift of discernment. Still, I don't see how they could actually justify denying recommends to overweight OR bearded individuals.

As far as the BYU Grooming Standards go, I have a piece of complete hearsay (supposedly thirdhand) to impart: a BYU friend of mine was in a play (I don't recall if it was a BYU or a community play), and he had to grow a beard for the role. When he went in to get the "beard card" (an exemption to the no-beard rule), he was told that BYU has a ceiling on the allowable number of total beard cards--in other words, if the quota had been full, he would have been denied an exemption, no matter how justified his reason. The lady at the Honor Code Office explained that the main reason for the beard rule--and for the quota--was that many of BYU's main private donors were very conservative on that issue and would withdraw funding if the rule were dropped or weakened. I felt quite disillusioned when I heard this story, but remember that a) it's 3rd-hand hearsay and b) it supposedly comes from a flunky at the Honor Code Office who probably didn't know what she was talking about.

I was still really happy to leave BYU and start growing facial hair, though. :D

User avatar
Eric's Fat Brother
Posts: 2964
Joined: Tue 13 Aug, 2002 03:21 pm
Location: Pleasant Grove, UT
Contact:

Postby Eric's Fat Brother » Fri 13 Jul, 2007 12:40 am

Just in case there is any question, here is a blurry photo of the applicable section of the Church Handbook of Instructions, taken with my camera phone this evening:

<img src="/images/0712072028.jpg" width="550" border="0">

In case you can't read it, here is what it says:

General Guidelines for Issuing Recommends

Authorized Church officers conduct worthiness interviews for temple recommends as outlined in the temple recommend book. Church officers are responsible to see that no unworthy person enters the house of the Lord.

Temple recommend interviews must be private. They should not be rushed. Interviewers should not add any requirements to those that are outlined in the temple recommend book.
Jeff J. Snider
"I'm crazy but I get the job done."
***
My NEW weight-loss blog

User avatar
Susannah
Posts: 1784
Joined: Tue 13 Aug, 2002 05:37 pm
Location: Orem, UT

Postby Susannah » Fri 13 Jul, 2007 02:21 am

AdamOndi wrote: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.


Isn't there now a BMI limit restriction for turning in your mission papers? I seem to remember reading that recently in some "preparing for a mission" paperwork and thinking that was just another reason I am not going on a mish, as I am not of the skinny variety of girls.

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

Postby Karenins_SuperSon » Fri 13 Jul, 2007 07:07 am

Yes, but just remember that we've now spun off on two separate topics:

1. Additional "requirements" in order to get a temple recommend (i.e. clean shaven)

2. Requirements in order to be endorsed to serve a full-time mission, whether arbitrary or not.

And Susannah, yes, there is a BMI recommendation now. Just as there are other health requirements that must be met in order for the Church to consider sending an individual.

Adam, I'm sorry for your experience. It's never fun to be subjected to one set of rules and then see someone else not have to follow those same rules but get the same benefits. I hope, though, that the experiences from your mission help to alleviate any of the deserved bitterness that you may have felt at the time when you saw that other Elder that didn't have a S.P. like yours. Again, sorry.
Her lips were saying "no," but her eyes were saying, "read my lips."---Dr. Niles Crane

User avatar
WiseNLucky
Posts: 2796
Joined: Thu 22 Sep, 2005 09:50 am
Location: Twin Cities, MN
Contact:

Postby WiseNLucky » Fri 13 Jul, 2007 07:17 am

Susannah wrote:Isn't there now a BMI limit restriction for turning in your mission papers? I seem to remember reading that recently in some "preparing for a mission" paperwork and thinking that was just another reason I am not going on a mish, as I am not of the skinny variety of girls.


I thought the new rules were more of a height/weight thing, but that translates into BMI so it is pretty much the same thing. I'm glad they didn't have those rules when I went on my mission or I would not have been able to go. I checked into the MTC at 6'2" and 304 pounds. In 1979 pounds, that was pretty big. It actually worked to my benefit in the mission field (Germany) as people would stop to talk to us sometimes just because of my size. The reason given for the new rules (ability to do the tasks like walking and bike riding) is understandable but wouldn't have applied to me then. I was actually in better aerobic condition than probably a third of the much thinner missionaries.

Suze, I don't think you are out of the bounds of the new rules from the pictures you've shared. Your extra height gives you quite a few more pounds of leeway.
WiseNLucky

Horizontally gifted since . . . .

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

Postby AdamOndi » Fri 13 Jul, 2007 09:37 am

Susannah wrote:
AdamOndi wrote: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.


Isn't there now a BMI limit restriction for turning in your mission papers? I seem to remember reading that recently in some "preparing for a mission" paperwork and thinking that was just another reason I am not going on a mish, as I am not of the skinny variety of girls.


I had not heard about any new BMI restrictions. However, I can't imagine the impact it would have had on me if I had been told that I just plain could not go on a mission because I am fat. Sure, it sucked to have to lose some weight before I could go, but there are those of us who will pretty much never get down to a certain height/weight ratio without intense and expensive personal training and starving ourselves. After a childhood of hearing "every worthy young man should go on a mission" followed up by "every worthy young man who is not overweight should go on a mission," who knows how many people would just say screw it, then? I probably would have.
Check out our blog [url=http://adamandlisahansen.blogspot.com]at this link[/url].

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

Postby AdamOndi » Fri 13 Jul, 2007 09:45 am

Karenins_SuperSon wrote:Adam, I'm sorry for your experience. It's never fun to be subjected to one set of rules and then see someone else not have to follow those same rules but get the same benefits. I hope, though, that the experiences from your mission help to alleviate any of the deserved bitterness that you may have felt at the time when you saw that other Elder that didn't have a S.P. like yours. Again, sorry.


Don't get me wrong, I had a good time on my mission. I spent most of it on buses, on foot, and on a bicycle, and I was much more physically durable than a lot of the much skinnier elders that I had as companions or with whom I went on splits. However, I still get a little annoyed at times when I think back on how it all went down. In the grand scheme of things, four months' delay didn't make that much of a difference, but at the time it really sucked.
Check out our blog [url=http://adamandlisahansen.blogspot.com]at this link[/url].

Benny
Posts: 390
Joined: Tue 14 Sep, 2004 10:50 am
Location: Provoland

Postby Benny » Fri 13 Jul, 2007 10:46 pm

I got called in to the Stake Pres for an interview because they said I was too fat. But he didn't make me wait. I went to Houston in May and my first area was on bike. I lost all the weight pretty quick. from 294 to 226 in 5 months. In fact, my mission president stuck everyone overweight on a bike. We had this Tongan elder who weighed around 450 pounds. He was maybe 5'7" or so. He lost most of 200 pounds on his mission.

Really, the way I look at it is that us fat people already have huge muscles just from dragging our bulk around. Once the mission life burns that off you're left with missionaries with enormous muscley legs. Its like a super-missionaries breeding program.
When you have fat friends there are no see-saws, only catapults.

User avatar
Lady Celtic
Posts: 1680
Joined: Sat 08 Feb, 2003 07:51 pm
Location: Texas

Postby Lady Celtic » Sat 14 Jul, 2007 11:49 am

Benny wrote:Its like a super-missionaries breeding program.


And now we have a new rumor to spread to go with the "all Mormons have horns" one.

Thanks for the laugh, Benny!
You're unique, just like everyone else!

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

Postby Huzzak » Sat 14 Jul, 2007 12:02 pm

This explains the pot lucks.

User avatar
Lowdoggy Dogg
Posts: 1770
Joined: Thu 21 Aug, 2003 08:08 am
Location: Gatortown, FL
Contact:

Postby Lowdoggy Dogg » Tue 24 Mar, 2009 08:02 am

It looks like Notre Dame will not be outdone by BYU.

Some students and alumni are upset that President Obama will serve as their commencement speaker, due to his stance on abortion.

Obama Faces Backlash

User avatar
WiseNLucky
Posts: 2796
Joined: Thu 22 Sep, 2005 09:50 am
Location: Twin Cities, MN
Contact:

Postby WiseNLucky » Tue 24 Mar, 2009 04:02 pm

Lowdoggy Dogg wrote:It looks like Notre Dame will not be outdone by BYU.


I'm not a BYU alum. Did BYU reject Obama or someone with similar views as commencement speaker? Is it even possible to find someone who shares all BYU ideals to serve as speaker other than prominent members of the church? Not that doing so would be bad, but I would hate to think that commencement speakers would be considered only if their views completely aligned with the church's positions.
WiseNLucky



Horizontally gifted since . . . .

User avatar
Lowdoggy Dogg
Posts: 1770
Joined: Thu 21 Aug, 2003 08:08 am
Location: Gatortown, FL
Contact:

Postby Lowdoggy Dogg » Tue 24 Mar, 2009 06:58 pm

There was some controversy over Dick Cheney's appearance at Convocation last year.

User avatar
WiseNLucky
Posts: 2796
Joined: Thu 22 Sep, 2005 09:50 am
Location: Twin Cities, MN
Contact:

Postby WiseNLucky » Wed 25 Mar, 2009 01:03 pm

Lowdoggy Dogg wrote:There was some controversy over Dick Cheney's appearance at Convocation last year.


And I would have known that had I gone back and read the WHOLE thread. I looked above and saw all the stuff about beards; now I see why you made this comment in this thread.
WiseNLucky



Horizontally gifted since . . . .


Return to “Religion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests