Skip navigation.

BYU: maybe not that different after all?

Today I stumbled across a website for the UCSD Guardian, the student newspaper for the University of California at San Diego, where a number of my high school friends attended college. I often wonder how BYU measures up to schools that are more diverse and liberal, so I was curious to see what issues are debated at UCSD. Here are links to some of the articles I found:

Student government elections plagued by grievances and last-minute disqualifications. Sound familiar?

Arguments about free speech on campus.

I was intrigued, so I skimmed over the student newspaper sites for a few other universities. Here's what they've been reporting on:

At Berkeley, an editorial wondering just what student government organizations actually do for the student body.

At Harvard, a sarcastic article implying that students should walk more, and a self-righteous letter to the editor defending student walking habits and criticizing the author of the original article.

In some cases, I was satisfied to find that BYU conversations are more or less the same as those at these other universities. In some cases, I was disappointed that students at these other schools, which are reputed to be so much more liberal and diverse and academically free, still complain about some trivial issues, just like BYU students.

It was also interesting to observe the differences between BYU and these other schools. The following are some articles that you probably wouldn't expect to find in the Daily Universe:

At Princeton, they'll be hearing from President Clinton soon. Part of me suspects that were he to come to Utah, he wouldn't receive such a warm welcome.

Like BYU, Princeton recently had some protests lately. What for? Their protesters were anti-abortion. I thought it was funny that the pro-lifers were the protesting minority.

The Daily Californian, Berkeley's student newspaper, there's a weekly column called Sex On Tuesday. I'm guessing this column wouldn't go over too well here.

I don't know what I'm getting at, in terms of discussion. As different as BYU is from other universities, we're surprisingly similar on some levels (which can be a good thing and a bad thing).

re: abortion

Someone help me understand: is the liberal take on abortion that it is an acceptable method of birth control? Or just that it isn't the government's business? Or what?

yeah yeah yeah

"At Princeton, they'll be hearing from President Clinton soon. Part of me suspects that were he to come to Utah, he wouldn't receive such a warm welcome."

you make it sound as if this were a bad thing
in fact it is a good thing...because the man's an immoral lying bastard

furthermore; if vp cheney were to go to Princeton, he wouldn't receive such a warm welcome.

don't act like Princeton's so far ahead in terms of acceptance and "open mindedness," they're only as "open minded" and "accepting" as those of us in provo--they only are "open minded" to and "accept" others who think just like them (ironic isn't it?)--and thus everything is fitting and proper.

most liberal's i know would

most liberal's i know would side with roe vs. wade (and largely with the LDS Church's position) for that matter. They would say that there are many incidences where abortion is morally (and/or religiously) wrong, but that it should be left up to the individual and not to the government.

Most liberals I know feel that abortion as a contraceptive is morally disgusting.

project mayhem

Thanks. I think I would

Thanks.

I think I would agree-- there ARE instances where an abortion is best for everyone... and using it as birth control is reprehensible. And I would really like to hear from someone who disagrees with that sentiment... which makes me wonder exactly how the reds and blues differ on this point.

I suspect it's more of a talking point than anything.

It's funny cuz the LDS

It's funny cuz the LDS Church's position on abortion is much more like the Democratic parties position. The LDS position is very much for Roe vs. Wade, which most Demo's want to uphold. Whereas, many republicans tend to want to overturn Roe vs. Wade.

project mayhem

Roe v. Wade eliminated the

Roe v. Wade eliminated the states' rights to regulate abortion. I don't understand how you could say that the LDS position is very much for Roe v. Wade.

Roe vs. Wade began as an

Roe vs. Wade began as an attack on Texas' abortion law that prohibited all abortions except when the mothers life was in risk. Norma McCorvey, the then anonymous plaintiff, was fighting for her right to abort a pregnancy which she claimed was conceived during a rape (she later admitted to lying about the rape, but the principle still stood).

Before Roe vs. Wade, a state such as Texas (and as S. Dakota recently did) could ban abortions for pregnancies resulting from rape and incest.

Roe vs. wade decided that the state could not prohibit abortions at all in the first trimester. In the second trimester, the state retains the right to regulate abortions, in leu of the mother's health. In the third trimester (or following the state's claim of viability), the state has all rights to regulate abortion to protect the mother's health as well as the life of the unborn fetus.

I say that the LDS Church's position is in line with Roe vs. Wade, because the Church's position is that abortions should be allowed with instances of rape and incest (as well as the mother's health - which includes mental health). Furthermore, because the LDS Church's position is basically that which is between the mother, the father, and God, it is one of choice.

project mayhem

Roe vs. wade decided that

Roe vs. wade decided that the state could not prohibit abortions at all in the first trimester.

For that reason right there I am not surprised that most LDS would prefer to see Roe v. Wade go the way of Plessy v. Ferguson.

do you think the LDS Church

do you think the LDS Church would prefer a woman have no choice to have an abortion because of rape or incest?

When a woman wants to have an abortion because of rape or incest, she is placing her own emotional well-being over the potential-life of the fetus. It's a choice that the Church advocates and a choice not protected w/o Roe vs. Wade.

project mayhem

I know. But that is quite

I know. But that is quite different from saying no restrictions whatsoever on abortions in the first trimester.

Of the estimated 60M abortions that have occurred since then, something like 1% of them fall into the categories of rape, incest, or endangering the life of the mother.

row vs. wade upholds the

row vs. wade upholds the right that the church espouses. without it, those rights could be taken away, as is being attempted by s. dakota.

project mayhem