I love BYU but it's no secret that the BYU environment at times lends itself to pharisee-like behavior. There's a social phenomenon that occurs when a place is near 100% LDS (like BYU) - the focus tends to shift from things that matter (purifying our own heart) to things that don't matter (whether Sue has more than one earing in her ear or whether Jim shaved this morning). This happens on many levels. Having lived in Orem/Provo for much of my younger life, I can say that I wouldn't be surprised if this story is as simple as it appears. I knew plenty of church members whose leadership styles were more exact obedience-driven than charity-driven.

lawman wrote:

My sense is that once the bishop and the stake president made their decision, there was no way that a general authority could come in to overrule them. It's kind of like where an official makes a bad call that decides the outcome of the game, they don't go back and overturn the result (i.e. Oregon at Oklahoma football a couple of years back).

Are you saying that a GA wouldn't have the nerve to overrule a Stake President if he sensed that a vendetta was being served against an athlete? I would think that a member of the board of trustees (apostle) for the University would have more nerve. Or perhaps the "whole story" justified the removal of the endorsement. I will admit, though, that on the surface this whole situation appears strange. I still know more people who willingly removed themselves from the University than who were kicked out for Honor Code violations. As an aside, the Honor Code office does offer second chances.

This is sad no matter what. Either there is more to the story (sad) or 6/11 gets you kicked out of BYU (sad). I knew plenty of BYU students for whom 6/11 was a valiant effort, and none were athletes. I also knew athletes who would return from road trips in the wee hours Saturday night and come bleary eyed to church early the next morning with lessons read. Any generalizations do more harm than good.

I have an Econ degree from BYU, but never had Kearl. While at school, I heard both positive and negative comments about him. Typical for authority figures.

I googled Wayne Childs because the name rings a bell. He works in the Registrars Office at BYU. On the utefans.net site, they are blasting the "typical hypocrites at BYU" citing that we preach free agency, then impose punitive punishments when agency is used. Um, isn't that what agency is? Choosing the consequences?

CAFB_04-12 wrote:

lawman wrote:

My sense is that once the bishop and the stake president made their decision, there was no way that a general authority could come in to overrule them. It's kind of like where an official makes a bad call that decides the outcome of the game, they don't go back and overturn the result (i.e. Oregon at Oklahoma football a couple of years back).

Are you saying that a GA wouldn't have the nerve to overrule a Stake President if he sensed that a vendetta was being served against an athlete? I would think that a member of the board of trustees (apostle) for the University would have more nerve. Or perhaps the "whole story" justified the removal of the endorsement. I will admit, though, that on the surface this whole situation appears strange. I still know more people who willingly removed themselves from the University than who were kicked out for Honor Code violations. As an aside, the Honor Code office does offer second chances.

The Honor Code Office has nothing to do with this. This was strictly for his mediocre attendance record. From the bishop NOT the Honor Code Office. The entire school is baffled by this.

detmer4prez wrote:

CAFB_04-12 wrote:

lawman wrote:

My sense is that once the bishop and the stake president made their decision, there was no way that a general authority could come in to overrule them. It's kind of like where an official makes a bad call that decides the outcome of the game, they don't go back and overturn the result (i.e. Oregon at Oklahoma football a couple of years back).

Are you saying that a GA wouldn't have the nerve to overrule a Stake President if he sensed that a vendetta was being served against an athlete? I would think that a member of the board of trustees (apostle) for the University would have more nerve. Or perhaps the "whole story" justified the removal of the endorsement. I will admit, though, that on the surface this whole situation appears strange. I still know more people who willingly removed themselves from the University than who were kicked out for Honor Code violations. As an aside, the Honor Code office does offer second chances.

The Honor Code Office has nothing to do with this. This was strictly for his mediocre attendance record. From the bishop NOT the Honor Code Office. The entire school is baffled by this.

Maybe the team will go on strike and not play when the season starts to show their support. I miss a few sundays a year, but attend whenever possible. This is one of the most absurd things I have seen as member of the church and it is simply embarrasing..

If this is all that is really to this story, this is a total crock of holier than thou Bull SH&%. And for the Stake President to back up a bishop who pulls this crap is even worse. Maybe we are not really hearing the whole story, and I really hope this is the case. Someone in the whole BYU chain of command must have more common sense than this.