Lose Your Faith, Get Expelled at BYU

[Janelle2002 3,865]

Mormons who stop practicing their religion while at BYU are expelled or forced to live in secrecy for years. Others are temporarily blackballed for living in sin.

Kathy and her husband, Zach, take care to hide their coffee machine when friends come over. The Brigham Young University students have a vacuum cleaner that squirts Febreze to hide the scent, because if anyone outside of a select few finds out the couple has lost faith in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, their bishop might withdraw his ecclesiastical endorsement. Without it, they would be expelled. The university would initiate proceedings to terminate their campus jobs. If they were still single and lived in campus-affiliated housing, they would be swiftly evicted.

At Brigham Young University, the Provo, Utah-based Mormon superschool that boasts a network of satellite campuses, impressive national rankings, and educates many LDS members, students are free to enroll as members of any faith, or even of none. Mormons pay a discounted tuition, but all others attend at an annual tuition cost of just $10,000—not bad for a private school ranked 62nd among national universities by U.S. News and World Report. But students who were members of the Mormon Church at any point in their lives are not eligible to attend the university if they leave the faith.

If they stop believing in church doctrine while at school, they can be automatically expelled with a simple phone call from their bishop.

In a November 2014 statement, university spokeswoman Carri Jenkins acknowledged such a disparity. “Non-members have not made promises and commitments that a member of the church has,” she said. “A former Mormon who decides to leave the church distances themselves from those promises and commitments. The result is that they are not eligible to attend BYU.”

In a highly religious environment, such faith changes are taxing. Formerly Mormon-identified students largely say they love BYU, but all say their experience is tainted by a pervasive undercurrent of fear. Many have sought counseling, with their confidentiality-bound therapist being one of the few people they can confide in. Now, a new alumni-run campaign is calling BYU’s accreditation into question over concerns of intellectual freedom. Ex-LDS students, however, must watch the campaign largely from the sidelines, as any outspoken involvement may get them kicked out.

Reasons for leaving the church vary, but most of the students interviewed by The Daily Beast cited a clash of church teachings with deeply held personal understandings of the world.

“I remember in interviews crying because I felt so bad. At one point I ended up having to lie about not being on pornography anymore because I wanted so badly to get out of there.”

For Kathy, the journey to what the church calls a “faith crisis” began when she met her now-husband, initially just a close friend who eventually confided that he had lost faith in the church. (Her name, like all names of current students in this story, has been changed to protect her academic standing at the university.)

“It wasn’t anything about how people are treated in the church, but that he couldn’t believe in a god that would allow such terrible things to happen,” she says. Breaking with BYU custom, he had even decided not to go on a mission after his freshman year—something expected of male attendees.

Kathy found it liberating to have a friend who was so open to doubt, but she remained—as she had always been—a so-called “Molly Mormon.” Those in the faith give that nickname to the ultra-pious, who are never a step out of beat. She even submitted paperwork to go on a mission herself, even though it is less common for women to do so. Kathy was just waiting to get the call. And then she started dating her now-husband.

“In the end I decided to do a very traditional BYU-woman thing to do and I decided not to go on my mission so I could continue dating him,” Kathy says. Soon, they began talking about marriage. Her husband, Zach, said that he could see himself “doing the church thing,” and they decided to have a religious wedding.

Because neither one of them had served a mission they went through the temple for an endowment ceremony for the first time. That was “the first thing that really broke a lot of things for us,” she now recalls.

Zach had watched one on Youtube before, so he knew what to expect. Kathy says he didn’t feel any particularly spiritual calling, but took it in stride as confirmation of his previous doubts. She, on the other hand, describes her experience as “weird,” but “also kind of wonderful because here I am, as a woman in the church, and they keep handing me

continued http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/03/31/lose-your-faith-get-expelled-at-byu.html

[Darnell 8,478]

it's a private school. the regents can do whatever they want, within the limits of state and federal law.

I don't have any issue with this.

and no, I'm not a Mormon, and I don't play one on TV either.

[VOL 425]

I understand the tuition is very very cheap if you are LDS member, In state and out of state pay same rate...

[Not a Tailor 1,370]

The main issue seems to be the lack of consensus among the bishops on what constitutes an offense that gets a student told 'no BYU for you.' I can see that as a definite problem, especially in a case where a school is a religious school but also has larger-scale accreditation. Accreditation standards must be met.

[Janelle2002 3,865]

The main issue seems to be the lack of consensus among the bishops on what constitutes an offense that gets a student told 'no BYU for you.' I can see that as a definite problem, especially in a case where a school is a religious school but also has larger-scale accreditation. Accreditation standards must be met.

Federal and state money should not be used to help students get an education at private universities that are non-tolerant of other religions and sexual orientations.

[Rattlehead 69]

Federal and state money should not be used to help students get an education at private universities that are non-tolerant of other religions and sexual orientations.

Yep, only the ones that follow certain PC ideologies should get gubmint funding.

IIRC, Grove City rejected federal funding over a very similar issue; they decided it simply wasn't worth having the Gov holding it over them like an Acme anvil every time they decided to dictate the policies of a private institution.

[Not a Tailor 1,370]

Federal and state money should not be used to help students get an education at private universities that are non-tolerant of other religions and sexual orientations.

Well, BYU seems to have got around that, according to the article, by accepting everyone except ex-mormons. I'm sort of on the fence about what I think about that. On the one hand, they're following the letter of the law, effectively. On the other hand, I think they're enormous douchecanoes and deserve to have their federal funding pulled. As far as state funding goes, it's my understanding the Utah is majority-mormon so I'm not sure where I stand on state funding from a religious state going to a religious school.

[LibCampFireClub 635]

Federal and state money should not be used to help students get an education at private universities that are non-tolerant of other religions and sexual orientations.

Non-tolerant religion is a misnomer. It's a religion as in separation of Church and State. Would you like to see the government in total control over what is taught, what is not taught, how it's taught, who is learning, who objects, who dissents, and then force the objectors out so that the area is lib-clean?

BYU is a Mormon school, named after its founder: Brigham Young. Now, to those of you who choose to attack me for religious affiliation, go right on ahead. Let me just say that my ancestors are deeply Mormon rooted. I am not Mormon, but my ancestors are. In fact, they are so deeply rooted they accompanied Brigham Young to Utah in the 1800s to escape religious persecution. What persecution you may ask? Many Christians objected to them, with violence. They looked for a place to live where they didn't infringe upon the sensibilities of others.

It's a school with theological standards with graduates held in the highest regard. But there has always been a stigma for those who graduate from religious institutions, especially BYU.

Do we really want a country that imposes a standard that rewards one, and punishes another? It won't happen in today's America without a revolution, that is for sure.

Edited April 2, 2015 by xxClosedxx

[Not a Tailor 1,370]

Non-tolerant religion is a misnomer. It's a religion as in separation of Church and State. Would you like to see the government in total control over what is taught, what is not taught, how it's taught, who is learning, who objects, who dissents, and then force the objectors out so that the area is lib-clean?

BYU is a Mormon school, named after its founder: Brigham Young. Now, to those of you who choose to attack me for religious affiliation, go right on ahead. Let me just say that my ancestors are deeply Mormon rooted. I am not Mormon, but my ancestors are. In fact, they are so deeply rooted they accompanied Brigham Young to Utah in the 1800s to escape religious persecution. What persecution you may ask? Many Christians objected to them, with violence. They looked for a place to live where they didn't infringe upon the sensibilities of others.

It's a school with theological standards with graduates held in the highest regard. But there has always been a stigma for those who graduate from religious institutions, especially BYU.

Do we really want a country that imposes a standard that rewards one, and punishes another? It won't happen in today's America without a revolution, that is for sure.

Janelle never said non-tolerant religion. She said that the university was non-tolerant of specific things. The university already accepts students of varying faiths, probably to keep their federal funding. She is critiquing a specific discrimination of the university that should preclude it from receiving federal funds. She never made any judgement against mormons or mormonism.

[LibCampFireClub 635]

Janelle never said non-tolerant religion. She said that the university was non-tolerant of specific things. The university already accepts students of varying faiths, probably to keep their federal funding. She is critiquing a specific discrimination of the university that should preclude it from receiving federal funds. She never made any judgement against mormons or mormonism.

Is there a difference? Is it like all religions should somehow unify to make one religion that agrees and has a common god and theological root? What's up with that? Would you join the third Christian church, or would you focus on only the first Christian church? Keep in mind that the third may have a prophet with a new message that trumps the first church. Or, perhaps the first church warned of the third to it's members to avoid.

Who sorts that all out? Actually, it was already sorted out by Tommy, the father of the Declaration of Independence.

[Not a Tailor 1,370]

Is there a difference? Is it like all religions should somehow unify to make one religion that agrees and has a common god and theological root? What's up with that? Would you join the third Christian church, or would you focus on only the first Christian church? Keep in mind that the third may have a prophet with a new message that trumps the first church. Or, perhaps the first church warned of the third to it's members to avoid.

Who sorts that all out? Actually, it was already sorted out by Tommy, the father of the Declaration of Independence.

What are you even responding to? It's like you quote something and go 'I'll just say whatever I want'. Your posts lack context and I can't figure out whether you're even participating in conversation and a really bad writer or if you're just trying for a total derail.

[LibCampFireClub 635]

I'm inserting comments regarding what is said in writing, and what is implied between the lines. You can be sure that millions of people on earth today have thoughts, feelings, suggestions, and ideas about discrimination, religion, racism, and the temperature of their hot water. Tommy was a smart guy and anticipated what is happening today:

Thomas Jefferson's portable writing desk

The Declaration of Independence was composed on a mahogany lap desk, designed by Jefferson and built by Philadelphia cabinet maker Benjamin Randolph. Jefferson gave it to Joseph Coolidge, Jr. (1798-1879) when he married Ellen Randolph, Jefferson's granddaughter. In giving it, Jefferson wrote on November 18, 1825: "Politics, as well as Religion, has it's superstitions. These, gaining strength with time, may, one day give imaginary value to this relic, for it's association with the birth of the Great Charter of our Independence." Coolidge replied, on February 27, 1826, that he would consider the desk "no longer inanimate, and mute, but as something to be interrogated and caressed."

[LibCampFireClub 635]

The Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom is a statement about both freedom of conscience and the principle of separation of church and state. Written by Thomas Jefferson and passed by the Virginia General Assembly on January 16, 1786, it is the forerunner of the first amendment protections for religious freedom. Divided into three paragraphs, the statute is rooted in Jefferson's philosophy. It could be passed in Virginia because Dissenting sects there (particularly Baptists, Presbyterians, and Methodists) had petitioned strongly during the preceding decade for religious liberty, including the separation of church and state.

Jefferson had argued in the Declaration of Independence that "the laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle [man]…." The first paragraph of the religious statute proclaims one of those entitlements, freedom of thought. To Jefferson, "Nature's God," who is undeniably visible in the workings of the universe, gives man the freedom to choose his religious beliefs. This is the divinity whom deists of the time accepted—a God who created the world and is the final judge of man, but who does not intervene in the affairs of man. This God who gives man the freedom to believe or not to believe is also the God of the Christian sects.

I. Whereas Almighty God hath created the mind free; that all attempts to influence it by temporal punishment or burthens, or by civil incapacitations, tend only to beget habits of hypocrisy and meanness, and are a departure from the plan of the Holy author of our religion, who being Lord both of body and mind, yet chose not to propagate it by coercions on either, as was his Almighty power to do . . .

The second paragraph is the act itself, which states that no person can be compelled to attend any church or support it with his taxes. It says that an individual is free to worship as he pleases with no discrimination.

II. Be it enacted by the General Assembly, that no man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief; but that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinion in matters of religion, and that the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge, or affect their civil capacities.

The third paragraph reflects Jefferson's belief in the people's right, through their elected assemblies, to change any law. Here, Jefferson states that this statute is not irrevocable because no law is (not even the Constitution). Future assemblies that choose to repeal or circumscribe the act do so at their own peril, because this is "an infringement of natural right." Thus, Jefferson articulates his philosophy of both natural right and the sovereignty of the people.

III. And though we well know that this assembly elected by the people for the ordinary purposes of legislation only, have no power to restrain the act of succeeding assemblies, constituted with powers equal to our own, and that therefore to declare this act to be irrevocable would be of no effect in law; yet we are free to declare, and do declare, that the rights hereby asserted are of the natural rights of mankind, and that if any act shall be hereafter passed to repeal the present, or to narrow its operation, such as would be an infringement of natural right.

http://www.vahistorical.org/collections-and-resources/virginia-history-explorer/thomas-jefferson

Edited April 2, 2015 by xxClosedxx

[Janelle2002 3,865]

Janelle never said non-tolerant religion. She said that the university was non-tolerant of specific things. The university already accepts students of varying faiths, probably to keep their federal funding. She is critiquing a specific discrimination of the university that should preclude it from receiving federal funds. She never made any judgement against mormons or mormonism.

Glad to see someone's glasses are working tonight.

[Janelle2002 3,865]

I'm inserting comments regarding what is said in writing, and what is implied between the lines. You can be sure that millions of people on earth today have thoughts, feelings, suggestions, and ideas about discrimination, religion, racism, and the temperature of their hot water. Tommy was a smart guy and anticipated what is happening today:

What the heck does this comment have to do with anything?