Hieing to Kolob: BYU Idaho Anti-Porn Employment Letter

Thursday, October 16, 2008

BYU Idaho Anti-Porn Employment Letter

Your comments?

22 comments:

Dr. B said...: Does this mean that non-members can no longer work at BYU-Idaho, even in a student worker position? Or is it like when I was a kid in Las Vegas and the non-members who came to our stake dances had to have an interview with one of the bishops in order to attend?

Oh, well, it eliminates the slime-balls. Better for my daughter who goes to school there.; October 16, 2008 at 7:16 PM
Anonymous said...: Why would Kim Clark go from the intellectual promised land of Harvard to the mental concentration camp that is BYU-I?; October 16, 2008 at 7:40 PM
Anonymous said...: Seems pretty standard, under the circumstances of church employment. I'm not sure what kind of comments you're soliciting.; October 16, 2008 at 8:11 PM
Bored in Vernal said...: Will BYU Idaho now have a special temple recommend interview question regarding porn?; October 16, 2008 at 8:38 PM
Anonymous said...: You don't think questions 8, 13, and/or 14 already cover porn? that disqualifying sins, practices, or abrogations of covenant need to be spelled out in all their variations?; October 16, 2008 at 9:17 PM
Dr. B said...: I think that as an employment practice at BYU-I, in addition to random drug tests, that they should start doing random lie-detector tests to catch all the closet pornographers that must be lurking there.; October 16, 2008 at 9:21 PM
SilverRain said...: It's not much different from the policies of the last two places I worked. Pornography gets you fired. So do drugs, violence and a plethora of other aberrant and disruptive behaviors. Goodness, most places even oversurfing the internet, porn or no, gets you fired.

Chances are, the only reason anyone would find this worth mentioning is because they are looking for bones to pick. My opinion, there are plenty of bones with more marrow, if that is what you do for kicks and giggles.; October 16, 2008 at 9:46 PM
Anonymous said...: If you don't want to work in a place that requires higher standars why bother applying?; October 16, 2008 at 10:42 PM
Anonymous said...: Always a bone to pick on this blog. Why live if you can't bitch about it, constantly, always, right biv?; October 16, 2008 at 10:43 PM
Mormon Heretic said...: I thought this was already policy. I'm surprised both that they needed to send out the memo, and that anyone who works there didn't know that the internet was being monitored by the church.

Porn can get you fired from many places from employment. I suppose this is a shot across the bow that it won't be tolerated, as it apparently has in the past.; October 16, 2008 at 11:07 PM
RoeH said...: Well yay and hooray. I'm sick and tired of the sleezeballs of society getting all their 'rights'. They have none. If they can't abide by college rules, no matter what the college, then don't apply to go there and don't comment anonymously. It doesn't take a rocket scientist.; October 17, 2008 at 8:40 AM
Anonymous said...: Based on my reading of the memo, it seems that it covers situations where employees view pornography away from their place of employment. If it was meant to cover watching pornography at the campus or during the performance of thier job duties, it would be covered by BYU-I sexual harassment policy.

I'm not so sure if I like restrictions on private conduct when you are not working. It seems a bit like overreaching to me.; October 17, 2008 at 11:27 AM
Anonymous said...: Out of context, all this letter really says is 1) stay away from porn, 2) if you've been using porn, get help from priesthood leaders, and 3) if you aren't worthy to go to the temple, you may lose your job with the church.

All of which are pretty much common knowledge within the church.

Maybe if we understood the circumstances that led to the drafting of this letter and the current climate up at BYUI, things would make a little more sense.; October 17, 2008 at 12:38 PM
SilverRain said...: I would first like to say that, despite the unfortunate similarity of phrase, the apparent sentiment in the comment or two after mine is not the same, just for the record.

Secondly, dictating behavior outside of the workplace is very common. As an employee, you are also to some extent a representative of the company. If you do something that misrepresents or casts bad light on a company, they have the right to terminate your employment.; October 17, 2008 at 12:42 PM
Bored in Vernal said...: Thank you, Silver Rain. I like to consider all viewpoints here on my blog. But I am a very sensitive person, and I usually cry when I get mean comments.; October 17, 2008 at 1:16 PM
Sanford said...: Thanks for posting this BIV. I have two nephews who attend BYU Idaho and I am interested in information concerning the school. It probably goes without saying that if you view porn the Church is a strange choice for employment. But people, especially college students, sometimes do things that don’t make sense. But I find it hard to believe that anybody in violation of this policy would go see their Bishop about it. The letter makes it pretty clear that taking that step could/will cost you your job.; October 17, 2008 at 1:22 PM
galen dara said...: ick
a good reason to not ever work for The Church.
and I don't even have a thing for porn!
(but I do take exception equating porn with drug use and violence... watching porn is NOT breaking any laws of the land.); October 17, 2008 at 1:26 PM
Anonymous said...: My comments on the letter--Henry J. Eyring--any relation to President Eyring. And the other VP--Smyth--has the most unfortunate English name. Having such a simple name, he has to spell it out every time.; October 19, 2008 at 9:21 PM
Anonymous said...: Yes he's Henry B. Eyring's son. He looks just like him too. Once he gave a fireside for our stake and he talked about his life growing up as the son as President Eyring. Only half the fireside was worth listening to.; November 3, 2008 at 12:52 AM
Anonymous said...: hmm... BYU-Idaho's pretty famous for some gnarly dogmatic rules (i.e. the no shorts thing), but Porn's pretty clear cut against church standards. Nonetheless, I'm happy I transferred.; November 12, 2008 at 1:27 AM
Anonymous said...: A few comments:

As others has stated, this isn't any different than employment with the church is anywhere else or has been. Additionally, porn is covered under the "living the law of chastity" question of the template recommend. The viewing of pornography is a sin, and it is clear that to be a church employee (at least for most positions that I'm aware of) you have to be temple worthy.

In response to Dr. B and others: although viewing pornography is a sin, categorically calling anyone who views pornography (or has done so) a "slime-ball" or "pervert" is unfortunate. We each are given our own weaknesses and problems. Often, to those who have problems with pornography it isn't about sex at all! It could have just as easily been food or playing video games or shopping or whatever that presented itself as a temptation at a particular time in that persons' life. I believe we all need to be more compassionate with those who have problems that we may not understand. Did not Jesus say to the women caught in adultery merely "go and sin no more". He didn't call her names. He recognized her transgression, called upon her to repent, and showed her love.

That isn't to say that BYU-I isn't fair in putting this policy in place -- just like the honor code, they expect a level of conduct and worthiness. Actions don't come without consequences. But calling those who would lose positions for this "slime-balls" is short-sighted.

Also, in response to Sanford, sometimes, when you need to repent, you realize that no matter the consequences you will do what you need to do.; January 7, 2009 at 12:22 AM
C.a said...: I had a job that had nothing to do with church, it wasnt even in america and they sent us a memo saying that anyone with porn on their computer would be fired (they searched on the intranet your computer and emails) and if someone sent you porn from work and you didnt report him/her both would be fired; March 9, 2009 at 11:31 AM

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)