Cite? I see a 2005 accusation and acquittal.
You know of all those, only the last one is a story I could conceivably stretch to schools looking the other way, if not actively trying to sweep the story under the rug. Is there wrongdoing? Yes, in all these cases. But I see no support for the teams looking the other way or trying to cover up the wrongdoing. In fact, what I usually hear is that schools cooperate with the NCAA investigation, get dinged, and then appeal the punishment. Or I hear whining about a player only getting suspended for one game or whining about a player getting suspended for too many games. I can’t remember the last time I heard about a team/school getting in trouble for trying to cover something up. This is the age of Twitter and internet journalism. Covering things up is a seriously uphill battle.
More to the point addressing your specific statement: There are 346 Division I basketball teams. If you want to do this school by school, point me to a “vast majority” looking the other way or covering up wrongdoing. Hell, I’ll accept 60%… that’s what: about 207? Gonna need to see some legwork from you here.
You made a sweeping generalization based on your perception. I tried to call you on it in a tactful way, just asking for some support. You could have backed away from your statement gracefully. Now, I’d like to see a citation, not just anecdotal evidence (that doesn’t really support your proposition) that “the vast majority of NCAA teams … when a player breaks the rules, just look the other way, that is if they’re not actively trying to sweep the entire mess under the rug.” (ellipses mine)
On preview: Look, my above is a little snarkier than I wanted it to come out. I’m just making a point. When it comes to college sports, occasionally people make hyperbolic statements based on personal perception that are unsupported by facts and evidence. I don’t think your statement that many teams look the other way (or try to cover up wrongdoing) is true.
http://www.cc.utah.edu/~jay/Brigham_Young/Brigham_Young.html
Strange how the school founded by a guy with 27 wives is suddenly a moral institution.
He married them before he had sex with them though. Polygamy was a stringently hardnosed system where premarital sex was concerned.
Now if it was Joseph Smith University… then it’d be more of an issue. You wouldn’t want your daughter or your wife to be a cheerleader there.
An interesting point I hadn’t thought of. I almost wonder, if Davies could point to an “official” (such as his coach, or a player or student officially working for the university as a recruiter or guide) that said such a thing, if he couldn’t sue.
I also wonder if this situation will drastically affect BYU’s recruiting for the next few years.
I have a question for those who are ripping on BYU over this. The LDS church is only one of many that, at least in theory, prohibits premarital sex. Do you think it is better for a school to say it follows a particular religion, but not take any action toward promoting the values of that religion? I guess have more respect for religious folks that walk the walk over those who claim to hold the values of a religion but disregard the portions they find objectionable or inconvenient.
I guess maybe I am influenced by my own experiences. I grew up Catholic and a lot of my friends and family still call themselves Catholic, but most of them ignore the more ridiculous directives of the religion. That is their choice, but I think that by doing this they are giving the church more prestige and power than they should have and a better alternative would be to switch to a different religion that more closely reflected their true values.
In the same manner, Mormons, or non-Mormons, that do not wish to embrace the values that BYU espouses, should go to school somewhere else. Then if BYU’s values are truly out of step with modern society they will either have to adapt or the school will decline due to lack of enrollment.
Yes. I always have more respect for a person or institution who allows other people to follow their own consciences instead of forcing a religion on them. Not that I expect BYU to dissociate itself from Mormonism any time soon.
By the way, here is the entire honor code for Notre Dame, which is not exactly Secular U.:
How do you know that that he id not have sex with them first? Some were kids.l
Marley, all you did there was scratch the surface. I present to you duLac: A Guide to Student Life (Notre Dame’s student handbook and basic list of rules).
Link (There’s a .pdf you can go to from there, but it’s wieldy and my Firefox tabs hung up on it.) I recommend the “Standards of Conduct” section.
When I went to lunch this morning, the TV had been rigged so it was ABC World News Now, or some infomercial with Montel Williams (I would have vastly preferred to watch Mr. Ed on This, as I find it less vapid than either Montel Williams or television news, but the option was not available to me).
So I watched World News Now, and THIS fucking slice of tawdry voyeurism was the LEAD STORY!
WTF IS THAT ALL ABOUT??!!?? :mad:
That all looks very typical for me, but I do see that a student who has sex outside of marriage “may be subject to University sanction.” I am positive every school has a list of rules like that, so maybe it’s not just the honor codes we need to talk about here.
Yeah - I have a feeling BYU’s list of rules is just being written as “honor code” for shorthand. It’s how ND students will typically describe duLac. (Check a few paragraphs down where they discuss the delightful practice known as “parietals”.)
I would agree with that. I could never buy into that restrictive (and religious) an honor code, especially since I am not a Mormon.
Of course not. Though, as has been noted by others, Davies is in fact a Mormon, and BYU is explicitly a private Mormon university, affiliated with the Church of Mormon, and yet even so, certain parts of the code (like attending weekly church services) have allowances for non-Mormon students (but apparently, not atheist ones).
Wrong, because that’s the whole point of “honor”! If you don’t think it matters that he agreed to it beforehand, then what does ANY “honor code” agreement mean to you? Are all your words just words, and a statement from you that “I swear to…” or “I agree to…” means no more than “yeah yeah, blah blah blah, and try not to sweat it if I sort of kinda forget at some point and somebody points it out to you”?
An honor code is about honor, i.e., the strength of character to abide by prescriptive or proscriptive rules of behavior where YOU yourself are the primary person responsible for upholding them. And the institutional penalty for failing to live up to that commitment at BYU is clear. Nobody forced him to agree to this honor code - he did so, of his own free will, in going to BYU.
As the team’s coach said: “A lot of people try to judge if this is right or wrong, but it’s a commitment they make. It’s not about right or wrong. It’s about commitment.”
I don’t agree with BYU’s morality but I can still applaud their integrity.
That is exactly what is being lauded about BYU - that they don’t have this exception. Saying they explicitly (but verbally and off-the-record) tell recruits that “this won’t really apply to you” is a pretty serious charge, and not even Davies himself has made it, so who are you to do so?
There are thousands of universities in the United States alone. He chose a private one with an honor code that he would have to abide by. And you choose to blame the school?
Heck, my school’s was harsher than BYU’s by a mile. I didn’t like it, but I agreed to go there, so I kept by it … well, actually, I didn’t. But I sucked it up and took my lumps when I broke the rules.
Their school, their rules.
Yes, that would be against the honor code…
Joe
I’m highlighting what every sports pundit and news story is ignoring: that the BYU honor code is a thinly disguised intrusion into 30,000 students’ sex lives and personal beliefs. Sure, they all knew what they were getting into (as much as any 18-year-old with tons of parental pressure can), but it doesn’t make the honor code or BYU good or noble.
I, for one, would like to applaud this billion-dollar institution with the unquestioned support of millions of Mormons. It takes a lot of courage to brand a 20 year old with a scarlet A.
At least one BYU grad is calling hypocrisy
No proof obviously, but it’s likely. None gave birth less than 9 months after the wedding (he had children with 16 women) and why fool around when you’ve got two dozen at home?
I actually have a hard time taking that seriously —they list sexual offences earlier, and that includes solely sexual assault, prostitution, soliciting a prostitute, voyeurism, and non-consensual stuff. Were adultery a serious offence, there would be no need to list any of those other than sexual assault separately. I would be surprised to hear that the entry is much more than symbolic.