cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board  

Go Back   cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board > SPORTS! > Other College Sports

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-02-2008, 07:56 PM   #11
hyrum
Senior Member
 
hyrum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 860
hyrum is on a distinguished road
Default

I'm sure the U of U is making hundreds of reprints of this story to include in their recruiting packets with the message, come to the U where you can be with fellow LDS members but not subject to Taliban-like monitoring and subjective judgements of your worthiness to attend the school.
hyrum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2008, 09:02 PM   #12
RockyBalboa
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Salt Lake City
Posts: 7,297
RockyBalboa is an unknown quantity at this point
Send a message via MSN to RockyBalboa
Default

The Bishop and SP look pretty bad in this instance just on it's face as reported.

However, I don't think we have both sides of the story at all and I don't think the Father did his son any favors by agreeing to speak with the press and shooting his mouth off. The church doesn't publicly comment on ones worthiness and therefore isn't going to express their side of it and the Father knows that.....For all he knows his son could be lying his butt off to him regarding the real reasons....ala Ryan Kessman lying to his father.

In any event, it's pretty sad all around.
__________________
Masquerading as Cougarguards very own genius dumbass since 05'.
RockyBalboa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2008, 09:25 PM   #13
SteelBlue
Senior Member
 
SteelBlue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Norcal
Posts: 5,821
SteelBlue is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RockyBalboa View Post
The Bishop and SP look pretty bad in this instance just on it's face as reported.

However, I don't think we have both sides of the story at all and I don't think the Father did his son any favors by agreeing to speak with the press and shooting his mouth off. The church doesn't publicly comment on ones worthiness and therefore isn't going to express their side of it and the Father knows that.....For all he knows his son could be lying his butt off to him regarding the real reasons....ala Ryan Kessman lying to his father.

In any event, it's pretty sad all around.
I think the HC office would be involved though if anything but this EE were a part of the equation. I keep thinking there's gotta be more to this story but I honestly won't be surprised if there isn't.

I just re-read the article and this quote jumped out at me:
Quote:
Documents viewed by The Tribune show the issue has pitted university officials and the athletic department - who back Walton, by almost every account - against the very church that runs it.
I wonder if they'll keep up the fight.

Last edited by SteelBlue; 02-02-2008 at 09:31 PM.
SteelBlue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2008, 10:44 PM   #14
PaloAltoCougar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 580
PaloAltoCougar is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

On its face, the story makes the bishop sound stupid, but I try never to accept such stories at face value. The action has apparently been reviewed by the bishop, stake president (who I believe to be a very bright and savvy guy), President Samuelson and an apostle. The likelihood of administrative stupidity decreases (but admittedly doesn’t disappear) with so many involved.

I was also amused by the sentence: “An anonymous e-mail alerted The Tribune to the situation, not the Walton family.” I assume the Trib author meant “An anonymous e-mail, not from the Walton family, alerted The Tribune to the situation.” Isn’t the statement inherently self-contradicting? If the e-mail author were truly anonymous how could we know it wasn’t from the Waltons?

The biggest problem I have with the story is that we’re unlikely ever to know the truth. The only persons who are quoted with respect to the facts of the case are the Waltons who can’t be expected to be objective. And the apparent bad guys in the story cannot comment. If they’re withholding information that would vindicate them, I honor their fidelity to their obligations of confidentiality. At the moment, we just don’t know if they’re heroes or jerks.
PaloAltoCougar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2008, 10:46 PM   #15
MikeWaters
Demiurge
 
MikeWaters's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 36,363
MikeWaters is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

He must have done something much worse than Tavernari.
MikeWaters is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2008, 10:57 PM   #16
hyrum
Senior Member
 
hyrum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 860
hyrum is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PaloAltoCougar View Post
I was also amused by the sentence: “An anonymous e-mail alerted The Tribune to the situation, not the Walton family.” I assume the Trib author meant “An anonymous e-mail, not from the Walton family, alerted The Tribune to the situation.” Isn’t the statement inherently self-contradicting? If the e-mail author were truly anonymous how could we know it wasn’t from the Waltons?
They could have asked the Waltons if they had sent it. In fact, a reporter would be dumb not to ask. The situation could then be rephrased to, "The Walton's deny sending the tip.", but that has a perjorative tone. Maybe the reporter knows but promised not to reveal the identity of the tipster. My WAG: it was a friend or teammate who is upset about the situation.
hyrum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-03-2008, 12:54 AM   #17
BYU71
Senior Member
 
BYU71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,084
BYU71 is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PaloAltoCougar View Post
On its face, the story makes the bishop sound stupid, but I try never to accept such stories at face value. The action has apparently been reviewed by the bishop, stake president (who I believe to be a very bright and savvy guy), President Samuelson and an apostle. The likelihood of administrative stupidity decreases (but admittedly doesn’t disappear) with so many involved.

I was also amused by the sentence: “An anonymous e-mail alerted The Tribune to the situation, not the Walton family.” I assume the Trib author meant “An anonymous e-mail, not from the Walton family, alerted The Tribune to the situation.” Isn’t the statement inherently self-contradicting? If the e-mail author were truly anonymous how could we know it wasn’t from the Waltons?

The biggest problem I have with the story is that we’re unlikely ever to know the truth. The only persons who are quoted with respect to the facts of the case are the Waltons who can’t be expected to be objective. And the apparent bad guys in the story cannot comment. If they’re withholding information that would vindicate them, I honor their fidelity to their obligations of confidentiality. At the moment, we just don’t know if they’re heroes or jerks.
MY comments and opinon here should be taken based on suppositions I am making. I am freely admitting I don't know the whole story.

I can see though how even if Samuelson or an Apostle disagreed, there is nothing they could do. The churches very discipline and lack of chaos is based on strict adherance to it's structure. The Bishop determines worthiness. Can you imagine if in this case he was overruled.

They are many within BYU and outside of BYU that think atletics gets too much emphasis and attention. Many would just as soon do away with the programs.

Can you imagine if it got around a Bishop was overruled in an athletes case. Now, there we would have a story. It is possible something unfair can occur and let go for the sake of the greater goal of maintaining structure and discipline.

Since my divorce my attendance at church hasn't been exemplary. I haven't attended Sunday School in 15 years. I have had Bishops sign my Temple Recommend no problem. I had one who refused to 3 years ago unless my attendance including SS got in line with his thinking. I haven't attended the Temple since.

I am not blaming him and believe he had every right as the Bishop to require that. Perhaps I have hurt myself and that is why I am more rebellious than I used to be.

The Lord and I will have to sort it out. For those of you who are concerned about my soul and wish to lecture me, don't.
BYU71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-03-2008, 01:00 AM   #18
MikeWaters
Demiurge
 
MikeWaters's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 36,363
MikeWaters is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

BYU71, do you attend priesthood, or just sacrament mtg? Because if your order is sacrament meeting, then skip sunday school, then attend priesthood, that describes about half the men in the church.
MikeWaters is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-03-2008, 01:01 AM   #19
livecoug
Senior Member
 
livecoug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,176
livecoug is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SteelBlue View Post
The reason I find it very believable is because there are hundreds of wards. It's not at all hard to imagine a few over the top bishops. I had one the first year back from my mission who was very similar to the one in this story.
Do you honestly believe that every student in this players ward were attending more than 60% of the time? If not, we would have heard of others getting the boot from that ward. There has to be more to the story.
livecoug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-03-2008, 01:06 AM   #20
BYU71
Senior Member
 
BYU71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,084
BYU71 is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeWaters View Post
BYU71, do you attend priesthood, or just sacrament mtg? Because if your order is sacrament meeting, then skip sunday school, then attend priesthood, that describes about half the men in the church.
LOL. I used my own personal example to point out Bishops have different criteria. I probably shouldn't have exposed myself.

I used to attend Priesthood Meeting and Sacrament at least 3 out of 4. It wasn't just SS, he didn't think the 3 out of 4 without being sick wasn't good. I found I started skipping Priesthood too and now I am down to Sacrament meeting.

For me it is habit. I don't mind being blasted on this one, but I haven't found I have missed much by not being at Priesthood. Most of the lessons and rightly so are about family. I am single.

My lack of attendance has cost me in participating in going to the Temple. That is the real loss, because of the great peace and comfort I felt when I attended.
BYU71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:30 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.