I recently noticed a popular search engine was displaying, "BYU Honor Code" as a trending topic. Realizing millions of people likely didn't wake up and coincidentally ask themselves, "I wonder what rules students of BYU must follow in order to remain in good standing," I conducted a little investigation.
Turns out a rather adroit BYU basketball player was suspended from the team for breaking the code. An Honor Code board is to decide if the young man will be allowed to remain a student at the esteemed university.
The BYU Honor Code states that students must...
Be honest
Live a chaste and virtuous life
Obey the law and all campus policies
Use clean language
Respect others
Abstain from alcoholic beverages, tobacco, tea, coffee and substance abuse
Participate regularly in church services
Observe the Dress and Grooming Standards
Encourage others in their commitment to comply with the Honor Code
First of all, I have no problem with the honor code or the students who agree to live their life in accordance. People should be free to start or join any group they want with whatever rules they want as long as they don't hurt anybody. In America, both group-starting and group-joining are thankfully voluntary.
However, in researching the story, I discovered that a great many sports journalists claimed to respect BYU administrators for strictly enforcing the code. "They sacrificed basketball wins for morality. For braving certain backlash from our sports obsessed society, I say kudos," the sports writers pompously said.
Really?
A few of the Honor Code demands I can understand, but why would any rational person have respect for individuals who punish college students for the crime of breaking random rules? And how can abiding by these random rules be admired by anyone except people involved in the group?
If a club declared petting puppies was grounds for immediate expulsion, would sports writers applaud every member who managed to keep their petting-hand away from all collies, spaniels, pinschers and pointers?
Would they say, "I can't understand why anyone would join a club in which puppy-petting is forbidden, but I can and do admire members for walking by every 'Fido' they encounter and suppressing their inherent desire to extend a friendly hand and say, 'Come here, boy! Who's a good boy!? Are you a good boy!?' That takes real courage."?
Why exactly is it noble to refrain from non-sinful actions?
I suppose religiously inspired rules that don't serve practical purposes are considered noble because that's what the majority of our elders have always taught us. After all, not until 1973 did the American Psychiatric Association stop listing homosexuality as a mental disorder. That means, in 1972, instead of just being ashamed, parents could justifiably respond to the revelation that their child was gay by pinning him or her down and then forcibly dressing them in a straight jacket. While the BYU Honor Code doesn't specifically reference homosexual behavior, I have a strong feeling school administrators would strenuously frown upon a pair of basketball players whose pre-game ritual included twenty-minutes of sucking each others face. In fact, BYU administrators would likely kick the student-athletes off the team for not acting in a virtuous manner.
And if a desperately thirsty BYU player gets kicked off the basketball team for consuming a Diet Snapple Peach Green Tea, which are fabulous by the way, because his faucet was producing a sludgy brown substance, would these same sports writers rise and applaud. "Way to stand up for your anti-tea beliefs! I don't understand them, but I admire you for making sure, if another player finds himself in a similar situation, he'll either drink the sludge or become dangerously dehydrated, because that's what god would want."
No comments:
Post a Comment