Randy Bott and the Priesthood Ban

[DU Ute]

From the Slate article:

And, at church meetings, some black Mormons still hear racial slurs. As African-American convert to the church Tamu Smith said in the documentary Nobody Knows: The Untold Story of Black Mormons, “the first time I was called a nigger was in the Salt Lake Temple.”

Reading that made me physically ill.

[Blueintheface]

To me it does not matter if they fire him, retire him, pay him off to leave quietly, put him on indefinite administrative leave, whatever. BYU needs him out of the classroom and no longer affiliated with the University. I am sure there is a way to accomplish this in an expedient fashion.

Do we have a mafia emoticon? :rubbedout: On second thought...

[Jeff Lebowski]

I've drafted the letter to Cecil.

As an alumnus of BYU (two degrees) I'm offended by the recent remarks by Professor Bott as reported in the Washington Post. This was not an isolated incident by him as evidenced by similar remarks that remained on his internet blog for years and similar teachings that several students have confirmed to have been taught in his classes for over a decade.

While I believe Professor Bott has a right to state his opinion, I also believe that BYU has a responsibility to its faculty, students, and alumni to maintain its integrity. Therefore, I'm more offended by the inaction of the BYU administration in rectifying this situation. As every day passes without action against Professor Bott, my alma mater continues to get dragged through press as a racist and intolerant university. While I know the church and BYU verbally hold that "all are alike unto God" (2 Ne 26:33), the inaction against Professor Bott does not square with this position.

Regardless of the number of press releases that are issued, it's only through suspension or termination of Professor Bott that the media, the masses and ultimately the members of the church will understand that the church truly is against all forms of racism.

Moliere

I made sure to put my degrees below my name so he knows I'm not an English major

I'll hold off for another day before sending it, or maybe I'll send it on Sunday night so he gets it Monday morning.

With all due respect, firing Bott would not achieve what you have described because it does nothing to address the underlying issue. Without a definitive declaration from the church that the ban was not divine, firing someone for speculating on the reasons would be hypocritical. You should be demanding that the church comes clean.

[Moliere]

I think you're underestimating how hard it is to fire a tenured university professor over something he/she says. I don't know if BYU professors have tenure the same way professors at other universities do, however.

We Can Do Hard Things!!!

Surely if a group of YW can walk 20 miles over suburban SLC then BYU can find a way to reprimand Bott.

[SteelBlue]

For those of you in the "fire him" camp, how do you get around the fact that the University has tolerated and been aware of such ideas throughout its history? How do you get around the fact that they've essentially created this environment? I don't think you can. Firing Bott is like throwing a bucket of water on a burning home, it accomplishes almost nothing. It also leaves people with the false impression that he did something that is far outside of what has been normal at BYU, and that now all is well.

[Moliere]

With all due respect, firing Bott would not achieve what you have described because it does nothing to address the underlying issue. Without a definitive declaration from the church that the ban was not divine, firing someone for speculating on the reasons would be hypocritical. You should be demanding that the church comes clean.

While I fully agree, no letter to church HQ will have any impact. It will just be returned to local leaders, and likely die there as they have no say in this matter. BYU is at least headed by a seventy, and while I didn't feel right in asking the head of BYU to address the doctrinal/PR issue for the church, the letter was more centered around what BYU could do.

While firing Bott doesn't rectify the situation, it at least shows that BYU won't tolerate these teachings regardless of what the church believes. Maybe this is a time for BYU to inch out from under the thumb of church HQ (somewhat TIC)

[All-American]

I think you're underestimating how hard it is to fire a tenured university professor over something he/she says. I don't know if BYU professors have tenure the same way professors at other universities do, however.

On BYU's tenure:

http://www.aaup.org/NR/rdonlyres/27E.../0/Brigham.pdf

[Jeff Lebowski]

While I fully agree, no letter to church HQ will have any impact. It will just be returned to local leaders, and likely die there as they have no say in this matter. BYU is at least headed by a seventy, and while I didn't feel right in asking the head of BYU to address the doctrinal/PR issue for the church, the letter was more centered around what BYU could do.

On the contrary, the fact that the BYU pres is a GA is a positive in this case. Any heat he feels gets passed up the chain.

While firing Bott doesn't rectify the situation, it at least shows that BYU won't tolerate these teachings regardless of what the church believes. Maybe this is a time for BYU to inch out from under the thumb of church HQ (somewhat TIC)

If you think BYU is going to do something out of synch with Church HQ on this thing, you are nuts.

[Blueintheface]

For those of you in the "fire him" camp, how do you get around the fact that the University has tolerated and been aware of such ideas throughout its history? How do you get around the fact that they've essentially created this environment? I don't think you can. Firing Bott is like throwing a bucket of water on a burning home, it accomplishes almost nothing. It also leaves people with the false impression that he did something that is far outside of what has been normal at BYU, and that now all is well.

I think the obvious answer is you can't. BYU has done this to themselves and it is an institutional problem that will not soon be corrected. An Honor code system completely out of control, continued revisionist history publishings even more flawed than the church as a whole, professors with great influence pandering to this culture and infecting young minds, many of whom are not exactly encouraged to think freely...the list goes on.

I enjoyed my time at BYU but only because I thought the business school was top notch and it challenged me. Religion classes were necessary for graduation and the most they did for me was help me to continue to study the scriptures.

[The Rambam]

The logic is that Ham married a woman named Egyptus who was a descendant of Cain and therefore black. Then after the flood, she and Ham went off to settle Egypt. Their kids intermarried and preserved the black skin, although all her kids would be half black/half white. Maybe God magically changed her descendants to be full black, so he could preserve the curse.

Ephraim and Manassah were half black. So Lehi and Nephi should have been banned from Priesthood under the one drop of blood logic. And the fact that the Church maintained a no-Negro blood blood-bank at LDS Hospital until 1978 shows how seriously they took the drop of blood logic. It is all a muddle and a mess and doesn't' make sense. As has been said, Elijah Able alone shows the impossibility of showing some commandment from God and/or some doctrinally based ban.

I think you're underestimating how hard it is to fire a tenured university professor over something he/she says. I don't know if BYU professors have tenure the same way professors at other universities do, however.

BYU doesn't have tenure. It doesn't matter if you are Richard Feynman or Henery Louis Gates, Jr. or Madeleine Albright, if you drink a latte for breakfast YOU ARE FIRED. They can fire a professor for saying they don't mind gay marriage in Iowa. They can fire a professor for writing a fictional story about a rape. The can fire a professor for anything. That is why there is no academic freedom at BYU.

[Solon]

I think the obvious answer is you can't. BYU has done this to themselves and it is an institutional problem

I agree that firing Bott would be a huge mistake.

He's a religion prof. who was speaking about religion. I realize that the byu has some circomlocuted version of "tenure" (I think it's called 'continuing status' but I couldn't get to AA's link to confirm). The true problem is that Bott's opinions are well sourced in teachings from LDS authorities.

I also agree that this is a black eye for the byu. It's been a tough few months for my cougar amigos.

I think this whole situation begs for illumination from the highest echelons of LDS leadership, not byu's administration. I need some time to digest the most recent press release before I opine further.

[The Rambam]

While I fully agree, no letter to church HQ will have any impact. It will just be returned to local leaders, and likely die there as they have no say in this matter. BYU is at least headed by a seventy, and while I didn't feel right in asking the head of BYU to address the doctrinal/PR issue for the church, the letter was more centered around what BYU could do.

While firing Bott doesn't rectify the situation, it at least shows that BYU won't tolerate these teachings regardless of what the church believes. Maybe this is a time for BYU to inch out from under the thumb of church HQ (somewhat TIC)

I used to believe this and we are certainly taught this, but is isn't true. I can't give specifics but I do know that some letters sent directly have been effective in reaching and being heard by those at the top. The policy is really a hold-over of the days when the Apostles lived in SLC in local wards and were accessible and people went over the head of their local leaders if they were denied the use of a cultural hall for a wedding reception because the date conflicted with a ward party--that sort of thing.

This type of letter can and should be sent directly to HQ.

[pellegrino]

I used to believe this and we are certainly taught this, but is isn't true. I can't give specifics but I do know that some letters sent directly have been effective in reaching and being heard by those at the top. The policy is really a hold-over of the days when the Apostles lived in SLC in local wards and were accessible and people went over the head of their local leaders if they were denied the use of a cultural hall for a wedding reception because the date conflicted with a ward party--that sort of thing.

This type of letter can and should be sent directly to HQ.

I sent mine today. First time writer!

[Flystripper]

For those of you in the "fire him" camp, how do you get around the fact that the University has tolerated and been aware of such ideas throughout its history? How do you get around the fact that they've essentially created this environment? I don't think you can. Firing Bott is like throwing a bucket of water on a burning home, it accomplishes almost nothing. It also leaves people with the false impression that he did something that is far outside of what has been normal at BYU, and that now all is well.

Firing Bott is the mere tip of the iceberg of what BYU and the Church need to do. They also need to do as Lebowski and others have been suggesting for many, many years by recongnizing publicly that they were wrong about the priesthood ban and that they are forever sorry about the pain that LDS institutional racism has caused members and nonmembers for more than a century.

I should clarify that if BYU believes that dismissing Bott will be sufficient to quell the outrage, they are indeed mistaken. As you say, a termination of Bott does leave the false impression that he said something outside of what has been normal at BYU and within the church for decades. However, a university cannot continue to support through employment an individual that said the things that Bott said to WaPo, even if what Bott said was unofficially supported for decades within BYU and the Church as a whole.

Bott has to fired coupled with an official apology from the church so that BYU can honestly say that they are purging themselves of both current and historical institutional racism. Is Bott a sacrificial lamb? Yes, and unfortunately for him, his sacrifice is a part of what is necessary for the church and BYU to move forward.

[pellegrino]

I agree that firing Bott would be a huge mistake.

He's a religion prof. who was speaking about religion. I realize that the byu has some circomlocuted version of "tenure" (I think it's called 'continuing status' but I couldn't get to AA's link to confirm). The true problem is that Bott's opinions are well sourced in teachings from LDS authorities.

I also agree that this is a black eye for the byu. It's been a tough few months for my cougar amigos.

I think this whole situation begs for illumination from the highest echelons of LDS leadership, not byu's administration. I need some time to digest the most recent press release before I opine further.

this is correct, though I'm not precisely sure what the difference between tenure and continuing status is. I understand that it means you can be let go if you fail to uphold university standards (temple recommend, etc. )