Even Stanford allowed Duncan to visit

BYU cancelled a scheduled speech from a different Judge Duncan (not the one whose treatment at Stanford backfired spectacularly). Why was it cancelled? Because students objected to his rejection of trans pronouns in another speech.

As Whelan writes: “When such apparent cowardice exists even at a private religious law school sponsored by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, is it any wonder that law-school deans elsewhere kowtow to the grievance-mongers?”

Really interesting is one of the article addenda: apparently, part of the cancellation is because a university “DEI” administrator felt “disrespected” by him. The new president of BYU was a “DEI” administrator, wasn’t he?

ETA: it seems like the “disrespect” was simply refusing to use the “DEI adminstrator’s” "chosen pronouns’ (e.g., a woman who wants to be referred to as “he/him”).

So, on the heels of the talk by President Nelson, how should we react to this? Maybe the alumni rich people should renounce their funds to all of BYU’s programs. I certainly think students and alumni need to speak out on this. What if trans students want to now address Father in Heaven as “she/her?” The sad thing is our leaders are playing into the hands of the socialist/communist political leaders by bringing these social issues to distract us from the big money and power grab of our political leaders. Mostly Democrats as well.

Who else is fearful of sticking up for right and won’t defend the Gospel?

I don’t think the “contention” is coming from conservatives who are willing to hear the “other side” (heck, they are forced to constantly be bombarded by the “other side”). It’s coming solely from the cancel culture people who can’t abide any marketplace of ideas.

Here are additional details from the BYU law student who coordinated the now-cancelled event. Source: not officially a BYU or Church publication

I am regularly embarrassed by BYU now, but increasingly not surprised. :frowning:

We are nearing the end of times before the Millennium for sure. The wheat is being separated from the tares for sure. Satan is cunning and confusing the very elect as we have been warned.

I am different than most, I always thought some BYU students and staff’s attitude has always been a bit “High and Mighty” with other people.

I find it interesting that we are upset with BYU cancelled some liberal speaker and yet, seeing some people lack of understanding of issues like LBGTQ and the whole Liberal and Progressives thoughts makes me understand why President Nelson made his talk.

I find focusing on my own standing before the Lord is more important than trying to understand why BYU decided to cancel a speaker.

Which talk are you responding to? Duncan refuses to call a boy “her/she” as a conservative not a liberal. That was at BYU. That is sad that he was cancelled.

BYU law school cancelled a conservative speaker. The liberal BYU law professor was to have been the “balance,” but the law school deemed him “too controversial” (he wasn’t) because liberal students said they would be triggered by him speaking. A DEI (diversity, equity, inclusion) administrator was offended that the speaker from Nebraska wouldn’t use his pronouns, or something, and the students were using that as a reason to protest.

It’s not liberal points of view that need a showing at BYU any more. Students are exposed to that in spades. It is the conservative point of view (in this case, the ostensible Church stance on abortion) that is now constantly cancelled and suppressed. Even at BYU, which is an embarrassment.

Regardless of the university, only allowing one side and shielding students from having to hear and grapple with other viewpoints is not a rigorous graduate school or law school education. Stanford actually reacted strongly when they recently stepped on a rake with this.

I guess my point is this McKay,
For decades, BYU has dismissed “liberal” professors because they were not “conservative” enough for the standards of the administration. AND NO ONE cared about that!

I actually know someone who was fired from BYU for this reason.

Now that the shoe is on the other foot, that a “conservative” speaker is cancelled at BYU, all of a sudden it’s a problem. WHY is that?

Seems to me that is a double standard.

One of the main tenants of “Moral Agency” is the ability to choose what we believe from whatever source we choose. We suffer the consequences for those choices.

Since I am someone who have been told many many times that I am not “conservative” enough (some by posters on this site, as well as some LDS neighbors).

I find it amusing that people are all uptight about the current “cancel culture” when the truth is that within our very own church, cancel culture hass been going on for decades! People have been ostracized for not meeting what some members believe is the proper “standards” that someone should adhere too.

When my too boys did not go on missions, I cannot tell you the number of times that good members made comments about my wife and I and how we failed to be “good parents”. Or the fact, that my daughter married a non-believer. of course, they had the best of intentions, right?

So please don’t tell me about “cancel culture”, I have been living through it since I joined the church in 1974.

Floyd, I feel bad you’ve interacted with some crappy members who I guess can’t help themselves (not an excuse) in sharing their thoughts about you and your family. Unfortunately, there will always be some turds in the Church membership punch bowl. I can share that even tho I’ve had some kids who haven’t met “the standards” I have only found support and love from other members. Mostly because most of us have our own similar story I think. Been fortunate in that regard.
Regarding BYU, interesting take. I think for me it’s ok for byu to have some left-of-center speakers and professors etc. (but not extreme left - espousing say abortion, communism/socialism, false doctrine, Joseph Smith was a fraud etc) But I do think on the whole, the overall slant needs to be more right of center. It does not need to be “50/50”. That is not the role of this University. Part of the role IMHO is to support the students in/growing testimonies and keeping covenants they have made. Exposure to some differing views can help. End of the day, BYU is not just another university. I hope it stays true to its mission.

Your opening statement was unnecessary after you needed it with the right statements. See if you can be less abusive and contentious. With that said, you are correct. BYU is not just another university. The standards of the Church must be kept. Apparently they aren’t completely.

It’s not logical at BYU to conclude if A then B so if B then A. The doctrine and morals should not be that way at BYU. We can be patient and help struggling people but not this. Transgenderism is not compatible with doctrine.

That is why I had to learn to separate the Gospel of Jesus Christ from the Church as an organization.

As Elder Uchtdorf said in a conference talk “The gospel of Christ is perfect, the church is made up of imperfect human beings, who make mistakes”.

I don’t go to Church for the members or it being some type of social status, I go because I know that is where the Lord wants me to be.

at the age of 17, I decided to join the church, no missionaries was involved, just good friends. You would think that the ward that I lived in would welcome a kid who lived in a “rough” house and wanted to change and live the gospel way would be welcomed and included.

That was not the case for me, I guess because I smelled of cigarette smoke and the members knew my dad was a bartender that they told their kids not to get involved with me. I would sit on the back row of the chapel alone, no one would sit next to me. The bishop once told me that my dad was going to hell because he was a bartender.

An example of the members behavior, I had a good friend in the ward whose son had to come home off his mission because of a health issue (he was allergic to some type of flower that grew in the country). Members whispered among themselves, that if the young man was more “spiritual”, he would not have had to come home early.
The young man got healthy, the Church reassigned him to a US mission and he completed a faithful mission.
BTW, one of those whispers that was saying that, had their own son come home because he could not handle the stresses of being on a mission and is no longer active in the church.

All I can say Scott is that the definition of a double standard:
“a set of principles that applies differently and usually more rigorously to one group of people or circumstances than to another.”

BYU administration has been known for decades to “cancel” people who do not teach the “right way”.

What is the right way?

I’d say it’s teaching true doctrine and principles of the true Gospel. And upholding and building up the kingdom of God on the earth.

God created man in his own image. He created male and female to multiply and replenish the earth. He established the Commandment to have sexual relations with a member of the opposite sex and only in the bond of marriage with the opposite sex male to female.

Would you disagree with any of this?

I think we’re talking about different things. You’re correct that it’s hard when there’s a culture shift and the dominant culture (conservative) is being replaced with what was formerly the “underdog” (liberal). But, hiring, firing, and setting an orientation for faculty is a completely separate issue from invited speakers on campus. Even in the very conservative days of BYU, there were liberal speakers and liberal professors. Under the current regime (and at almost all other universities), conservative speakers are being prevented from speaking because they are “too controversial” (and it’s absurd for BYU to say this of Judge Duncan from Nebraska). But that sword doesn’t cut the other way (liberal speakers being prevented because they are too controversial). Conservative students and faculty don’t throw hissy fits when someone from a different philosophy speaks — this is exclusively a behavior exhibited by liberals. And school administrations simply cave because it’s easier to give the squeaky wheel grease.

Increasingly, BYU and the Church don’t take stands on things because they don’t want to upset liberals in government and society, and liberals within the Church. There might be a massive unintended consequence, though, in going too far in upsetting conservative members (who have always been the least inclined to protest or melt down over things — which is a big reason why they have always had to “take one for the team” to placate the loud, shrill liberal protestors).

It’s interesting that while a national outlet (National Review) reported on this, KSL, Deseret News, and the Daily Universe were completely silent on what was a major news story. As they were with things like the Black Menaces harassing Brad Wilcox in his classroom (and their now strident and militant campaigns at BYU on race and gay issues). These are news stories and newsworthy, but BYU and the Brethren want to keep acting like nothing untoward is going on. Elder Holland’s “musketfire” talk (which is behind the protests to prevent him speaking at SUU) talked about how all of this needs to stop at BYU, which was a welcome addressing of it, but in isolation doesn’t mean anything if things continue to go down that path.

1 Like

The DEI administrator has been identified. She had no issues with Duncan before (is even pictured shaking his hand), but has been beating the drum to keep him from coming (or, students are laying this at her feet).

You are spot on. The Liberals and Democrats seem to have been hijacked by communists and fascists. This is an attempt of a one party rule. There must be plenty of Democrats who are not in favor of these fascist actions. But, I don’t hear anything from them. Are they out there? The silent majority or minority?

Here is a very interesting talk by Elder Oaks many years ago at BYU.

From what I gather, “Knowledge” is the key between sinning and simply making mistakes in judgment. The question I have, why does it seem that so many people lack the knowledge of the evils of abortion and homosexual acts? It seems that the Prophets and Apostles in the latter-days have been clear. How more clear does it have to be than the Family Proclamation to the World?