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).

I totally disagree with this. Do you really think that some General Authority, or a member of the Twelve is going to feel pressure not to over turn this type of ruling. Pressure from who? Some student ward Bishop and a student stake President. Those guys are a dime-a-dozen. If anything, the high-ranking Church leaders would feel pressure not to overturn the decision.

Stake Presidents having their policies/decisions slapped down all the time. It is just part of being a Stake President.

One thing nobody has talked about yet is if this guy is going to file an appeal -- rather, appeal directly to a GA or a member of the Twelve. I know that Kearl and the Bishop already got the sign-off from a member of the Twelve, but it doesn't preclude the student from appealing the decision himself.

I don't see why anyone should have to actually obey the rules of the school or church. I mean, sure, rules and standards are important, but not really. What's really important is that I'm more Christian and forgiving than the hard-nosed Pharisaical bishop and stake president that kicked Kent out.

From an eternal perspective, leaving the Church to keep his ecclesiastical endorsement would have been the best thing for him. And I don't see why they wouldn't still give him an endorsement even if he left the Church just for that reason.

And what's the deal with the Jews, Baptists, Muslims, Buddhists and Hindus and people from other religions at BYU not having to go to church with me every Sunday? They don't pay the Church a penny of tithing either! Talk about your double standard.

The problem with having so many people acting "holier than thou" is that they give a bad name to those of us who really are.

Yndian wrote:

I don't see why anyone should have to actually obey the rules of the school or church. I mean, sure, rules and standards are important, but not really. What's really important is that I'm more Christian and forgiving than the hard-nosed Pharisaical bishop and stake president that kicked Kent out.

From an eternal perspective, leaving the Church to keep his ecclesiastical endorsement would have been the best thing for him. And I don't see why they wouldn't still give him an endorsement even if he left the Church just for that reason.

And what's the deal with the Jews, Baptists, Muslims, Buddhists and Hindus and people from other religions at BYU not having to go to church with me every Sunday? They don't pay the Church a penny of tithing either! Talk about your double standard.

The problem with having so many people acting "holier than thou" is that they give a bad name to those of us who really are. ;)

Thank you. I needed a good laugh this morning.

mraven wrote:

I don't think any one of us can judge whether the bishop's refusal to give the p_layer_ an ecclesiastical endorsement was right or wrong, and we won't ever know for sure what the reasons behind that decision were. Unfortunately, we will only ever hear one side of this story. The bishop and other religious leaders involved can't speak about it. So, we have the p_layer_ saying the reason he got expelled was because his bishop thought he didn't go to church. How do we know the kid isn't lying through his teeth. We just won't ever know, so let's just accept what happened and hope it doesn't negatively impact recruiting. To me, judging the bishop and stake president and calling them names is just ignorant unless you were a part of the discussions that led to the p_layer_s expulsion.

Ding, ding ding!!! We have a winner!!!

For what its worth, I took Econ 110 from James Kearl back in '97. I visited him several times during office hours and always thought that he was an extremely thoughtful and reasonable person. In fact, my impression was always that he was a bit on the "liberal" side as far as most BYU professors go. Its difficult for me to believe that he didn't do what he thought was appropriate and fair given the situation. I also think that its unlikely that we'll get the bishop and Kearl's side of the story, because that's not typically the way church disciplinary matters are supposed to be handled, is it??? I mean, should the bishop come out and say "Well, he wasn't coming to church AND he told me he'd gone to "third base" with his FHE sister while doing Jello-shots on a Vegas weekend getaway".

I dunno, maybe its just me, but I'm going to ignore this and trust that justice will be done one way or another.

BoiseBlue wrote:

For what its worth, I took Econ 110 from James Kearl back in '97. I visited him several times during office hours and always thought that he was an extremely thoughtful and reasonable person. In fact, my impression was always that he was a bit on the "liberal" side as far as most BYU professors go. Its difficult for me to believe that he didn't do what he thought was appropriate and fair given the situation. I also think that its unlikely that we'll get the bishop and Kearl's side of the story, because that's not typically the way church disciplinary matters are supposed to be handled, is it??? I mean, should the bishop come out and say "Well, he wasn't coming to church AND he told me he'd gone to "third base" with his FHE sister while doing Jello-shots on a Vegas weekend getaway".

I dunno, maybe its just me, but I'm going to ignore this and trust that justice will be done one way or another.

Very nice. And I agree with your course of action.