http://fox13now.com/2016/08/17/byu-chang...complaint/
ABA religious discrimination complaint:

Quote:BYU made the following changes to its Honor Code less than three weeks after the ABA acknowledged the discrimination complaint:
“Observ[ing] the standards of the Honor Code” is now considered “sufficiently compelling grounds to warrant an exception to the university’s ecclesiastical endorsement requirement”
Waiving one’s ecclesiastical privilege is no longer required for an exception
“Unusual” or “extenuating circumstances” are no longer required for current students to receive an exception
A March 2015 addition to the Admission Policy that allows ex-LDS applicants for admission to apply for an exception is now referenced in the Honor Code.

I'm looking forward to official word from BYU on these changes.

Title IX investigation:
http://news.byu.edu/news/title-ix-update
They have been collecting feedback from students/former students on their website through the summer, studying how other schools with honor codes handle reporting issues/enforcing compliance, and will take feedback from the DOE's OCR investigation when it is complete to evaluate what changes can be made.

In my view both these situations needed adjusting and are welcome. I'm interested to see what adjustments are made in the title IX case as they receive the feedback from all those sources. I would hope that moving towards resolution of those concerns also tempers any concern by the Big XII voters about these issues.

A day late and a dollar short, but at least a step in the right direction.

Ok, better than nothing but

1) Does it only apply to the law school?
2) It doesn't allow for married LGBT persons to be employed in the athletic department or participate in athletics as students
3) Isn't a blanket ban on retaliation
4) Still does nothing to protect rape victims or LGBT persons from retaliation by their Bishop or BYU

Congrats on the 1 step. Need many more to even get to Baylor's level of compliance with the Big XII 'non-discrimination' strictures.

I'm a bit concerned as BYU-Idaho and BYU-Hawai'i aren't changing their rules. Kind of makes it seem like this is just the result of the accreditation complaint. Are they just inviting us to file complaints against those schools too? Seems as though they are. Kind of dumb on their part.

---

Here's what they need to do. Simply state "while we don't approve of or sanction same sex marriage, we understand that the gentiles have a role to play in the BYU community, as we have always allowed non-Mormons to attend the school and to work there. As a result, we do not, and will not discriminate against LGBT persons who are celibate if single, or are in legally recognized marriages in Utah." They also need to say "Students who report a rape or any other crime shall not be subject to honor code violations that may be discovered as a result of reporting a crime or a potential crime unless that results in a criminal conviction for the student". And honor code violations generated based upon the reports of persons not part of the BYU community will not result in the expulsion of the student, unless that results in a criminal conviction". And "In any event of a withdrawal of ecclesiastical endorsement, the student shall simply be moved to the non-Mormon side of the ledger, unless that student qualifies for an exception".

Does it only apply to the law school?
--According to the story (no official word from BYU yet), the changes are in response to the religious discrimination complaint to the ABA, not the title IX complaint--which is still under investigation (by the DOE). The updates apply to BYU in Provo of which the law school is a part. BYU-Hawaii or BYU-Idaho are separate institutions with their own leadership structures and policies (though the honor code policy is very similar). Might they adopt the changes made in Provo to avoid future issues? Maybe, remains to be seen.

The other items you complain about have not been addressed yet (though your objections are duly noted). The DOE investigation is still in process, and the internal study has only been going on for less than a month--since July--when the complaint was filed. For some strange reason I don't think BYU will copy/paste your proposed language and be done with it.

(08-18-2016 09:42 AM)f1do Wrote:  Does it only apply to the law school?
--According to the story (no official word from BYU yet), the changes are in response to the religious discrimination complaint to the ABA, not the title IX complaint--which is still under investigation (by the DOE). The updates apply to BYU in Provo of which the law school is a part. BYU-Hawaii or BYU-Idaho are separate institutions with their own leadership structures and policies (though the honor code policy is very similar). Might they adopt the changes made in Provo to avoid future issues? Maybe, remains to be seen.

The other items you complain about have not been addressed yet (though your objections are duly noted). The DOE investigation is still in process, and the internal study has only been going on for less than a month--since July--when the complaint was filed. For some strange reason I don't think BYU will copy/paste your proposed language and be done with it.

Does the Big XII want a school that only changes when sued and is also faced with bad press?

(08-18-2016 10:15 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(08-18-2016 09:42 AM)f1do Wrote:  Does it only apply to the law school?
--According to the story (no official word from BYU yet), the changes are in response to the religious discrimination complaint to the ABA, not the title IX complaint--which is still under investigation (by the DOE). The updates apply to BYU in Provo of which the law school is a part. BYU-Hawaii or BYU-Idaho are separate institutions with their own leadership structures and policies (though the honor code policy is very similar). Might they adopt the changes made in Provo to avoid future issues? Maybe, remains to be seen.

The other items you complain about have not been addressed yet (though your objections are duly noted). The DOE investigation is still in process, and the internal study has only been going on for less than a month--since July--when the complaint was filed. For some strange reason I don't think BYU will copy/paste your proposed language and be done with it.

Does the Big XII want a school that only changes when sued and is also faced with bad press?

Are you asking me or them?

I find it very sad that a religion based school is conforming to liberal agenda's. Call me what you will, I'm a black guy in Alabama who has my fair share of discrimination on a weekly basis. I went to a high school where kids were always doing things like throwing paper in my afro, calling me the N word, and making jokes about drinking the same water. And I graduated high school in 2008 not the 50's.....And even with a graduate level education I still experience nonsense like this.

But I find it very sad that that things such as who you choose to engage in coitus with is being compared to real discrimination.

(08-18-2016 10:23 AM)f1do Wrote:  

(08-18-2016 10:15 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(08-18-2016 09:42 AM)f1do Wrote:  Does it only apply to the law school?
--According to the story (no official word from BYU yet), the changes are in response to the religious discrimination complaint to the ABA, not the title IX complaint--which is still under investigation (by the DOE). The updates apply to BYU in Provo of which the law school is a part. BYU-Hawaii or BYU-Idaho are separate institutions with their own leadership structures and policies (though the honor code policy is very similar). Might they adopt the changes made in Provo to avoid future issues? Maybe, remains to be seen.

The other items you complain about have not been addressed yet (though your objections are duly noted). The DOE investigation is still in process, and the internal study has only been going on for less than a month--since July--when the complaint was filed. For some strange reason I don't think BYU will copy/paste your proposed language and be done with it.

Does the Big XII want a school that only changes when sued and is also faced with bad press?

Are you asking me or them?

Everyone. Its a valid point. For the BYU supporters, is that how you'd like your school to be viewed? For the Big XII folks and others, do you think they'll actually be a partner that will help the conference out if their actions get the conference in a jam?

Look, making people create massive PR problems for the school before studies even start isn't a good way to build a cohesive conference or to build a conference brand. Its a recipe for constant strife, recriminations, etc. Just look at this board. You can't even hold a thread on this forum without it getting jammed over to the Spin Room. Why? Because BYU has such huge political baggage as a result of its discriminatory and retaliatory policies that any discussion of the school has to take those issues into account. Its a huge distraction from athletics. And it will remain a huge distraction for any conference adding BYU. I don't think the Big XII really wants an institution that doesn't change unless they've taken huge reputational hits first.

Just my $0.02.

(08-18-2016 10:28 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(08-18-2016 10:23 AM)f1do Wrote:  

(08-18-2016 10:15 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(08-18-2016 09:42 AM)f1do Wrote:  Does it only apply to the law school?
--According to the story (no official word from BYU yet), the changes are in response to the religious discrimination complaint to the ABA, not the title IX complaint--which is still under investigation (by the DOE). The updates apply to BYU in Provo of which the law school is a part. BYU-Hawaii or BYU-Idaho are separate institutions with their own leadership structures and policies (though the honor code policy is very similar). Might they adopt the changes made in Provo to avoid future issues? Maybe, remains to be seen.

The other items you complain about have not been addressed yet (though your objections are duly noted). The DOE investigation is still in process, and the internal study has only been going on for less than a month--since July--when the complaint was filed. For some strange reason I don't think BYU will copy/paste your proposed language and be done with it.

Does the Big XII want a school that only changes when sued and is also faced with bad press?

Are you asking me or them?

Everyone. Its a valid point. For the BYU supporters, is that how you'd like your school to be viewed? For the Big XII folks and others, do you think they'll actually be a partner that will help the conference out if their actions get the conference in a jam?

Look, making people create massive PR problems for the school before studies even start isn't a good way to build a cohesive conference or to build a conference brand.

Just my $0.02.

Personally, I feel as though if BYU has to change itself for a conference they should not even want to be in it. I know they want to be a part of the club but this doesn't seem like a good fit for either side.

(08-18-2016 10:15 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(08-18-2016 09:42 AM)f1do Wrote:  Does it only apply to the law school?
--According to the story (no official word from BYU yet), the changes are in response to the religious discrimination complaint to the ABA, not the title IX complaint--which is still under investigation (by the DOE). The updates apply to BYU in Provo of which the law school is a part. BYU-Hawaii or BYU-Idaho are separate institutions with their own leadership structures and policies (though the honor code policy is very similar). Might they adopt the changes made in Provo to avoid future issues? Maybe, remains to be seen.

The other items you complain about have not been addressed yet (though your objections are duly noted). The DOE investigation is still in process, and the internal study has only been going on for less than a month--since July--when the complaint was filed. For some strange reason I don't think BYU will copy/paste your proposed language and be done with it.

Does the Big XII want a school that only changes when sued and is also faced with bad press?

Like Notre Dame, Penn State and Florida State?

BYU's official statement on the ABA complaint is a little different spin than the "FreeBYU" group who filed the complaint said.
http://www.law2.byu.edu/news2/aba-rejects-complaint

Quote:We recently received notice that the ABA has rejected the complaint and has closed the matter. The complainant had previously made a similar complaint to Brigham Young University’s regional accreditor—the Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities—which was likewise rejected.

http://www.sltrib.com/news/4249238-155/g...estigation
University spokeswoman Carri Jenkins wrote in an email that while "some minor adjustments were made to the already existing process by which students can petition for an exception to the ecclesiastical endorsement requirement," the changes came before the school heard from the ABA. The university will continue to evaluate each student's case individually, she added."

(08-18-2016 10:30 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-18-2016 10:15 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(08-18-2016 09:42 AM)f1do Wrote:  Does it only apply to the law school?
--According to the story (no official word from BYU yet), the changes are in response to the religious discrimination complaint to the ABA, not the title IX complaint--which is still under investigation (by the DOE). The updates apply to BYU in Provo of which the law school is a part. BYU-Hawaii or BYU-Idaho are separate institutions with their own leadership structures and policies (though the honor code policy is very similar). Might they adopt the changes made in Provo to avoid future issues? Maybe, remains to be seen.

The other items you complain about have not been addressed yet (though your objections are duly noted). The DOE investigation is still in process, and the internal study has only been going on for less than a month--since July--when the complaint was filed. For some strange reason I don't think BYU will copy/paste your proposed language and be done with it.

Does the Big XII want a school that only changes when sued and is also faced with bad press?

Like Notre Dame, Penn State and Florida State?

Exactly like Penn State. Anyone think that Penn State's foot dragging was good for the B1G? Or the kids?

And Penn State only dragged their feet on athletic concerns. Not much better. But BYU drags their feet on everything.

(08-18-2016 10:28 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Everyone. Its a valid point. For the BYU supporters, is that how you'd like your school to be viewed? For the Big XII folks and others, do you think they'll actually be a partner that will help the conference out if their actions get the conference in a jam?

Look, making people create massive PR problems for the school before studies even start isn't a good way to build a cohesive conference or to build a conference brand. Its a recipe for constant strife, recriminations, etc. Just look at this board. You can't even hold a thread on this forum without it getting jammed over to the Spin Room. Why? Because BYU has such huge political baggage as a result of its discriminatory and retaliatory policies that any discussion of the school has to take those issues into account. Its a huge distraction from athletics. And it will remain a huge distraction for any conference adding BYU. I don't think the Big XII really wants an institution that doesn't change unless they've taken huge reputational hits first.

Just my $0.02.

I'm not going to worry about how others might perceive my school. Those perceptions are clouded by so many things out of my or my school's control. I don't mind talking about what is going on--but people will think what they want to think.

Shame on them for dropping their morals over a conference affiliation. If they go through with this then I will lose a lot of respect for them.

(08-18-2016 10:27 AM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  I find it very sad that a religion based school is conforming to liberal agenda's. Call me what you will, I'm a black guy in Alabama who has my fair share of discrimination on a weekly basis. I went to a high school where kids were always doing things like throwing paper in my afro, calling me the N word, and making jokes about drinking the same water. And I graduated high school in 2008 not the 50's.....And even with a graduate level education I still experience nonsense like this.

But I find it very sad that that things such as who you choose to engage in coitus with is being compared to real discrimination.

I find it sad, but not surprising, that you would feel like that. As a Gay man who grew up in Alabama in the 1980's, I'm pretty sure I know what discrimination is. Your experience was probably different than mine, but at least you had family and social institutions to rely on when abused. LGBT youth frequently don't. Discrimination and demeaning of LGBT persons knows no color. What's truly sad as I don't think you actually think that discrimination against LGBT persons is even bad. You obviously don't think it is 'real'. Noted.

I'll throw out my example...to keep this on sports.

Was it okay for Alabama to bar Blacks from jobs and opportunities in its athletic programs in the mid 1960s? They could argue that other schools in the SEC didn't discriminate (Kentucky). They could argue that the Blacks could go to Tuskegee or Alabama State. But as you know, to take one of a limited number of opportunities and to ban Blacks from that opportunity is to lessen the total number of opportunities for Black players and coaches. And that Tuskegee, with its lower funding, was never able to provide the exposure and salaries that Alabama could.

Why is it any different if BYU bars married LGBT persons from jobs and opportunities in 2016. They can argue that others schools in the Big XII don't discriminate. They could argue that LGBT persons can just play and coach at New Mexico State. But there are a limited number of places in the P5. To effectively bar LGBT persons from some of the very limited number of spots is to reduce the opportunity for LGBT players and coaches. And no, NMSU doesn't have the budget or the exposure of a Big XII team.

I see the two examples as extremely similar. Only difference I see is that one puts an "Amen" at the end of their policies and that the targeted minority is different. Exact same impact on the targeted minority.

I suspect you don't think that discrimination against LGBT persons is wrong (or even advocate it). But what I'm not going to allow you to do, without challenge, is to argue that the discrimination isn't real. I don't think that even BYU's people would argue that the policy isn't discriminatory. They know it is. They might attempt to excuse it with an "Amen", but they know its discriminatory.

The question for the Big XII is this. Are they going to affirm discrimination by admitting BYU.

(08-18-2016 10:54 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(08-18-2016 10:27 AM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  I find it very sad that a religion based school is conforming to liberal agenda's. Call me what you will, I'm a black guy in Alabama who has my fair share of discrimination on a weekly basis. I went to a high school where kids were always doing things like throwing paper in my afro, calling me the N word, and making jokes about drinking the same water. And I graduated high school in 2008 not the 50's.....And even with a graduate level education I still experience nonsense like this.

But I find it very sad that that things such as who you choose to engage in coitus with is being compared to real discrimination.

I find it sad, but not surprising, that you would feel like that. As a Gay man who grew up in Alabama in the 1980's, I'm pretty sure I know what discrimination is. Your experience was probably different than mine, but at least you had family and social institutions to rely on when abused. LGBT youth frequently don't. Discrimination and demeaning of LGBT persons knows no color. What's truly sad as I don't think you actually think that discrimination against LGBT persons is even bad. You obviously don't think it is 'real'. Noted.

I'll throw out my example...to keep this on sports.

Was it okay for Alabama to bar Blacks from jobs and opportunities in its athletic programs in the mid 1960s? They could argue that other schools in the SEC didn't discriminate (Kentucky). They could argue that the Blacks could go to Tuskegee? But as you know, to take one of a limited number of opportunities and to ban Blacks from that opportunity is to lessen the total number of opportunities for Black players and coaches. And that Tuskegee, with its lower funding, was never able to provide the exposure and salaries that Alabama could.

Why is it any different if BYU bars married LGBT persons from jobs and opportunities in 2016. They can argue that others schools in the Big XII don't discriminate. They could argue that LGBT persons can just play and coach at New Mexico State. But there are a limited number of places in the P5. To effectively bar LGBT persons from some of the very limited number of spots is to reduce the opportunity for LGBT players and coaches. And no, NMSU doesn't have the budget or the exposure of a Big XII team.

I see the two examples as extremely similar. Only difference I see is that one puts an "Amen" at the end of their policies and that the targeted minority is different. Exact same impact on the targeted minority.

I suspect you don't think that discrimination against LGBT persons is wrong (or even advocate it). But what I'm not going to allow you to do, without challenge, is to argue that the discrimination isn't real.

Tom,

Let me say this, I can sympathize that the LGBT's do go through very unfortunate treatment that is in fact discrimination. And I see the point you are trying to make with the Tuskegee reference.

But here is the difference to me in that and I will go ahead and say I'm a Christian. There are many things that I can choose in life despite how I want to feel about them. I don't want to give 10% of my income to the church every month. When you give 10% of a six figure salary it's a lot of money that could go into savings, your mortgage, fun, or whatever. I don't want to not be able to go to bars and do fun things I loved to do in college. I don't always want to put the needs of others before my own. But I do all of these things because Christ calls me to. But where I'm going is all of this is a choice that I have to constantly battle.

I can't choose not to be black just like I can't be composed of mostly water. However, I can make a choice on all of those things I listed above and how I conduct myself sexually. And let me tell you a secret, as a Christian I'm often discriminated against in addition to being black. I can feel the eyes starring at me if I pray before eating. But if someone ever told me that I could not do something because I made a choice to be Christian I would not fight them on the grounds of discrimination because it's a choice that I alone made.

And again Tom, despite any negative or sarcastic comments I make just know I love you man. It's very sad to hear that you had to go through those things too.

(08-18-2016 11:10 AM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  

(08-18-2016 10:54 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(08-18-2016 10:27 AM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  I find it very sad that a religion based school is conforming to liberal agenda's. Call me what you will, I'm a black guy in Alabama who has my fair share of discrimination on a weekly basis. I went to a high school where kids were always doing things like throwing paper in my afro, calling me the N word, and making jokes about drinking the same water. And I graduated high school in 2008 not the 50's.....And even with a graduate level education I still experience nonsense like this.

But I find it very sad that that things such as who you choose to engage in coitus with is being compared to real discrimination.

I find it sad, but not surprising, that you would feel like that. As a Gay man who grew up in Alabama in the 1980's, I'm pretty sure I know what discrimination is. Your experience was probably different than mine, but at least you had family and social institutions to rely on when abused. LGBT youth frequently don't. Discrimination and demeaning of LGBT persons knows no color. What's truly sad as I don't think you actually think that discrimination against LGBT persons is even bad. You obviously don't think it is 'real'. Noted.

I'll throw out my example...to keep this on sports.

Was it okay for Alabama to bar Blacks from jobs and opportunities in its athletic programs in the mid 1960s? They could argue that other schools in the SEC didn't discriminate (Kentucky). They could argue that the Blacks could go to Tuskegee? But as you know, to take one of a limited number of opportunities and to ban Blacks from that opportunity is to lessen the total number of opportunities for Black players and coaches. And that Tuskegee, with its lower funding, was never able to provide the exposure and salaries that Alabama could.

Why is it any different if BYU bars married LGBT persons from jobs and opportunities in 2016. They can argue that others schools in the Big XII don't discriminate. They could argue that LGBT persons can just play and coach at New Mexico State. But there are a limited number of places in the P5. To effectively bar LGBT persons from some of the very limited number of spots is to reduce the opportunity for LGBT players and coaches. And no, NMSU doesn't have the budget or the exposure of a Big XII team.

I see the two examples as extremely similar. Only difference I see is that one puts an "Amen" at the end of their policies and that the targeted minority is different. Exact same impact on the targeted minority.

I suspect you don't think that discrimination against LGBT persons is wrong (or even advocate it). But what I'm not going to allow you to do, without challenge, is to argue that the discrimination isn't real.

Tom,

Let me say this, I can sympathize that the LGBT's do go through very unfortunate treatment that is in fact discrimination. And I see the point you are trying to make with the Tuskegee reference.

But here is the difference to me in that and I will go ahead and say I'm a Christian. There are many things that I can choose in life despite how I want to feel about them. I don't want to give 10% of my income to the church every month. When you give 10% of a six figure salary it's a lot of money that could go into savings, your mortgage, fun, or whatever. I don't want to not be able to go to bars and do fun things I loved to do in college. I don't always want to put the needs of others before my own. But I do all of these things because Christ calls me to. But where I'm going is all of this is a choice that I have to constantly battle.

I can't choose not to be black just like I can't be composed of mostly water. However, I can make a choice on all of those things I listed above and how I conduct myself sexually. And let me tell you a secret, as a Christian I'm often discriminated against in addition to being black. I can feel the eyes starring at me if I pray before eating. But if someone ever told me that I could not do something because I made a choice to be Christian I would not fight them on the grounds of discrimination because it's a choice that I alone made.

And again Tom, despite any negative or sarcastic comments I make just know I love you man. It's very sad to hear that you had to go through those things too.

Thank you.

But if you excuse BYU taking those slots from LGBT persons, you are effectively making decisions for others that might not share your faith. P5 membership is a zero sum game. One school gets in at the expense of another.

There is a long running argument as to whether being LGBT is a choice or not. I don't think it is. I've never been anything but that and life would have certainly been easier otherwise. Even if it isn't a choice, it isn't the choice of anyone else or the Big XII. For the Big XII to effectively penalize being LGBT is wrong IMHO. I'd also argue that it really isn't a choice. Just one that can be hidden, although at a great cost to the hider.

Just a style note on the public praying before eating. Culturally, and this isn't a LGBT thing, overt displays of faith in secular environments can provide others with the impression that you're 'wearing your faith on your shirtsleeves'. Some, even many "Christians" might think that you're putting on a show. Unfair? Probably. But that's just the way it is. I get that you may come from a culture where that is expected. But just know that in some other Christian traditions, its considered out of place. I'm worldly enough to know that I don't know what the person's motivation is for doing so (and that in certain cultures - that it is expected), and so I'm just going to let them do what they feel they have to do without judgement about them or their motivations. Others might be less so understanding. Sadly, I think part of the pushback might be subconcious racism - as African Americans tend to do so much more often than others. Either way, you won't get kicked out of any NCAA institution for doing so. By the way, I'm being consistent. If I don't want others to discriminate against me as a Gay man for doing something like holding hands in public (again a cultural thing), then I can't discriminate against others for publicly doing something that their culture dictates. General rule...if it ain't being targeted at me, and its volunatary, and there's no compulsion, then it ain't my business.

Mormons care highly what the rest of the country thinks of them. They're painfully aware of being the butt of jokes -- even a Broadway play.

They send their youth on bicycles door-to-door, actively selling. It takes intestinal fortitude to don that white short-sleeve button-up and black tie and walk up to thousands of strangers doors, day after day.


Point is, if they have any kind of goal of growing their ranks then they're going to need to convert people. Can't do that if those people think Mormons a bunch of polygamist, gay-bashing, dismiss campus rape under-the-rug types.

It's a business decision. Like so many things are.

(08-18-2016 10:15 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Does the Big XII want a school that only changes when sued and is also faced with bad press?

Sounds like a good fit.

(08-18-2016 12:44 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(08-18-2016 10:15 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Does the Big XII want a school that only changes when sued and is also faced with bad press?

Sounds like a good fit.

While you are throwing smack, you bring up a good point. Adding BYU will draw more attention to Baylor's problems.

Trust me, the schools not taken will complain, and loudly. The LGBT (and supportive) communities will complain, and loudly.

Does the Big XII really want that, especially if there's going to be no recruiting advantage for any of the teams from adding BYU?