Posted on 03/02/2011 1:02:29 PM PST by T Minus Four
Ethan Miller/Getty Images It was reported yesterday that BYU starting center Brandon Davies was let go from the team for the remainder of the season for violating Brigham Young's honor code.
Today, 1280 The Zone in Salt Lake City is reporting that Davies' girlfriend is pregnant with his child. The honor code does not allow sexual relationships unless you are married, among a hefty list of other rules.
Davies is averaging 11.1 points per game and a team-high 6.2 rebounds, and not having him available for the NCAA tournament will be a major issue for Mr. Fredette and the Cougars.
If and when they meet up with a big-six conference powerhouse, they will need everything they have down low to bang against the other teams' centers.
BYU's backup centers have not played many meaningful minutes this season and expecting them to do so this late into the season is asking a little too much.
Their sophomore forward, Stephen Rogers, is averaging 4.4 points and 2.3 rebounds in an average of 10 minutes per game. The Cougars' freshman 6'10'' forward/center James Anderson is averaging one point and one-and-a-half rebounds per game in seven minutes of action.
A plan to go with a smaller lineup and to speed their game up more than usual is what BYU is planning on doing with the Davies absence, according to unnamed sources.
Getting away with not having your starting center might fly against the lower seeds, but this all but guarantees they are not going to be able to make a run as deep as many experts have been predicting.
This will also affect their potential seeding in the big dance. As of now they are a projected No. 1 seed, but without one of their key players, the Cougars may fall as low as a No. 3 seed, making the road to the Final Four that much more difficult
RE: Condoms could have prevented this.
Is that the Mormon solution to a matter of integrity?
“The honor code does not allow sexual relationships unless you are married”
Or are you naive enough to believe wearing condoms means you are not having sexual relations???
Correct. I’m not sure about the timing, but I think they joined the group following the Hillsdale lead. My kids were fortunate to have a Grove City College graduate as a high school teacher. She is still a good family friend.
I hear he is going to transfer and up to seven SEC schools said they would welcome him with open arms. LOL!
No, but I’m not naive enough to think that this kid is the only one having sex on the BYU campus.
Mormons and polygamy — here are the facts:
(http://www.mormonsandpolygamy.org/)
There are 13 million Mormons in the United States and around the world, and not one of them is a polygamist.
“Mormon” is the most common and widely accepted name for a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, headquartered in Salt Lake City. “Mormons” have nothing whatsoever to do with the Texas sect known as “FLDS,” or with any other polygamous group.
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints doesn’t allow anyone practicing polygamy to be a member.
Polygamy was part of our past, for about 50 years in the 19th century. But it is not part of our present. Polygamy was officially discontinued in 1890 — 118 years ago.
When practiced by Mormons in the 19th century, polygamy was quite unlike the depictions of polygamous groups now seen on TV. For instance, a woman had freedom of choice as to whom she would marry. She made her own decisions about life, education and personal pursuits and did not isolate herself from the world.
Today’s Mormons live in every state of the U.S. and in 162 countries. Mormon men and women can be found in all professional fields — doctors, teachers, police officers, scientists and soldiers. The Mormon Tabernacle Choir has sung at presidential inaugurations and at the 2002 Winter Olympic Games in Salt Lake City.
The FLDS group adopted the name “Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints” in the early 1990s (watch video). It is an isolated group numbering a few thousand members. There should be no confusion between Mormons and polygamists.
“Mormon” Polygamy:
Misconceptions
Polygamy, also known as plural marriage or plurality of wives, is not practiced by any, active contemporary member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. In 1890, the Church (commonly known as the Mormon Church) officially disavowed polygamy as a practice and currently excommunicates any Latter-day Saint who embraces it.
Polygamists have no rightful association with the Mormon Church and many, if not most, have never been members of the Mormon Church. Some groups who have split off from the Church practice polygamy, but their practice has nothing to do with the activity of members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
President Gordon B. Hinckley, late Prophet and President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, stated the following about polygamy in the Church’s General Conference of October 1998:
“I wish to state categorically that this Church has nothing whatever to do with those practicing polygamy. They are not members of this Church. Most of them have never been members. They are in violation of the civil law. They know they are in violation of the law. They are subject to its penalties. The Church, of course, has no jurisdiction whatever in this matter.
“If any of our members are found to be practicing plural marriage, they are excommunicated, the most serious penalty the Church can impose. Not only are those so involved in direct violation of the civil law, they are in violation of the law of this Church. An article of our faith is binding upon us. It states, ‘We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law’ (Articles of Faith 1:12). One cannot obey the law and disobey the law at the same time.
Not true. Presbyterians and/or Lutherans may not always "appreciate" that some things -- say a liberal Presbyterian or Lutheran denomination does to promote abortion or homosexuality .. or vise versa...some of those more liberal denominations may not appreciate conservative stances on the Bible...but overall, label-wise, they're stuck with each other.
They can't do what Gordon Hinckley tried doing on the Larry King Show and claim there wasn't such a thing as a fundamentalist Mormon. (Sorry, Rennes, Hinckley didn't have that kind of authority -- to just wipe away every fundamentalist Mormon off the face of the earth...or America).
And neither do you. Fundamentalist Mormons are Mormon; and, in fact, per D&C 132, they're more mainstream Mormon than the so-called mainstream Mormons!
Mormon FREEPERS like Edward Watson has staked out this ground. Now there's a lot I disagree with Edward...in fact, most of his conclusions -- including some of those below I'm about to quote you -- but I will quote what he told me back on April 17, 2008:
"Of course the FLDS is a Christian faith. Their denominational taxonomy, following the Religion-Branch-Family-Denomination matrix, is “Christian-Mormon-Fundamentalist Mormon-Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. They do not belong to the Catholic, Eastern Christian, Protestant, or Anglican/Independent Catholic (Via Media) branches; they belong to the Mormon branch of Christianity, but in a completely different Family (Fundamentalist Mormon). Others in the same Family are the Apostolic United Brethren, Latter Day Church of Christ (Kingston Clan), and The True and Living Church of Jesus Christ of Saints of the Last Days). Get your facts straight. There are four families in the Mormon branch of Christianity [CJCLDS, Fundamentalist Mormon, Liberal Mormon, Prairie Saints] just as there are 20 denominational families in the Protestant branch of Christianity."
Source: FLDS opponents say wrong man named in warrant
What do I believe is the most important part of that quote?
Well, to project what Edward says, he essentially is saying that just as Presbyterians and Lutherans are extended FAMILIES in the Protestant BRANCH of Christianity, that fundamentalist MORMONS are extended FAMILIES in the "MORMON BRANCH"...THAT'S MORMON BRANCH SINGULAR!
Now, certainly, I disagree with Edward that the Mormonism branch is to be classified as "Christian." (But hey, I'm sure plenty of Edward's fellow Mormons will likewise disagree with him on something I've just uttered...so they can't say I'm doing something they aren't doing)
Golly; that's too bad; because the LDS religious Orghanization's own SCRIPTURE says that one MUST enter into polygamy in D&C 132 to be EXalted.
http://lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/132?lang=eng
Section 132
Revelation given through Joseph Smith the Prophet, at Nauvoo, Illinois, recorded 12 July 1843, relating to the new and everlasting covenant, including the eternity of the marriage covenant, and also the plurality of wives (see History of the Church, 5:501–7). Although the revelation was recorded in 1843, it is evident from the historical records that the doctrines and principles involved in this revelation had been known by the Prophet since 1831.
You're simply either mistaken, or you're parroting somebody else's lies.
(a) The first 57 or so years...even Lds historians recognize that Joseph Smith "married" Fanny Alger in early 1833...and FAIR apologist Gregory L. Smith says the "revelation" to engage in polygamy came to Smith as early as 1831.
(b) Polygamy was in no way "discontinued in 1890." First of all, MOST of the already existing polygamous families were not broken up in 1890. So polygamy "continued" to be practiced by them. (Utah even voted in B.H. Roberts as Congressman in 1898, even though he took his third simultaneous wife around 1893).
Secondly, B. Carmon Hardy records about 260 additional Lds "plural unions" solemnized by Mormon officials (by two "apostles" & others) between 1890-1910. They didn't believe what Woodruff said represented God...and since Joseph F. Smith, the Lds "prophet" at the time, already had five ways, who was he to tell anybody to get rid of some of theirs?
Just read Hardy's appendix of his Univ. of IL book, A Solemn Covenant. Hardy himself is a descendent of a polygamist family.
Also then...since some of those plural unions from the early 1900s lasted 60 years, polygamy among MAINSTREAM Mormons continued into the early 1960s. Now NEW plural unions may have been quite rare after 1910, but if you have polygamous families, they are still "continuing it."
Therefore,MAINSTREAM Mormon polygamy was alive on planet earth from 1833 to about 1963...130 years of its 180-year existence. That's 72% of its history!
Furthermore, throughout the 20th and 21st centuries, Mormons claim eternal polygamists are alive and practicing polygamy on another colony named Kolob.
So. Are you calling these leaders a liar or mistaken? That polygamy is not going on right now in the Mormon celestial kingdom?
(Are you telling us that the Lds church is/has ex-communicating/ed Joseph Smith? Brigham Young? John Taylor? Wilford Woodruff? Joseph F. Smith? Heber C. Kimball? And all the rest?)
Or, are you telling us they rejected all their wives except one in the Mormon afterlife?
Tell, us Rennes, why is polygamy "A-OK" in the celestial kingdom/Kolob...but not here?
Risen above? ... What a joke!
check the definition of integrity
I am not a Mormon. I do not ascribe to their beliefs. However I have known several Mormon families, about twenty, in our community for many years. They are upstanding families, contributing to our community on many levels.
You are grasping for straws. and appearing foolish, to try brand Mormonism as a perverted polygamist cult.
I too have known a number of Mormon families and they have been way above average in terms of responsibility and contributions to the community.
For some reason there is a group of posters who attack like rabid dogs anyone who makes a positive post about Mormons. They claim to be Christian but say the most un-Christian things about Mormons. I don’t understand it.
You’ll see when you read their inevitable responses to this post.
I too have known a number of Mormon families and they have been way above average in terms of responsibility and contributions to the community.
For some reason there is a group of posters who attack like rabid dogs anyone who makes a positive post about Mormons. They claim to be Christian but say the most un-Christian things about Mormons. I don’t understand it.
You’ll see when you read their inevitable responses to this post.
The innocent players on the team lose the tournament exposure.
From a career point of view, if I'm a good player and I know what the school policy be if one of my teammates screw up, I'll avoid the risk.
It has nothing to do with anyone's ethical opinion.
The end result is innocent players have lost a chance for increased national exposure. You can blame the end result on the guilty player or you can blame the end result on the way the administration applied violation to it's policy. That's an ethical argument. Either way, the end result for an athlete whose goal is national exposure is not one they would be willing to risk, IMHO.
They can be models of propriety themselves, but it won't matter if their ladder to success is taken down by the stupid decision of a teammate.
Momron should read ‘Mormon’, and toady should read ‘today’ ... too big a hurry to post and run.
Thank you for some reasoned comments here!
I am impressed that BYU is sticking by their guns! (oops, violent imagery. sorry)
Compare BYU with Notre Dame that allows members of the football team to continue playing even though they have been accused of rape and sexual assault. Of course I expect no better from ND. They gave Obama an honorary degree.
How's this for starters. This was posted today here on FR. IMO it is very un-Christian.
"I will mock, insult, ridicule, and point out every flaw in that institution built upon lies, and the idiots or hypocrites that follow it. I will never feel one bit of shame for hating, yes hating mormons and their blasphemous insistence on referring to their cult built on gold plated horse$#!+ as being “christian”. "
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.