“Instructor says BYU-Idaho fired her for a Facebook post”

Last updated on: July 19, 2017 at 3:15 pm by Dan Peterson

“Instructor says BYU-Idaho fired her for a Facebook post” 2017-07-19T15:15:19-06:00 Dan Peterson

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

The Rexburg Idaho Temple stands directly adjacent to Brigham Young University’s Idaho campus.
(Wikimedia Commons)

Several people have written, asking me what I think about this:

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865685087/Instructor-says-BYU-Idaho-fired-her-for-a-Facebook-post.html

One even wanted to know whether, as an employee of BYU-Provo, I dared to speak publicly on the subject.

The answer to his question is that, yes, of course I dare to speak publicly on it. Obviously, though, since the Church and the University and I see eye to eye on these matters, it takes no great daring on my part, and will create no rift with my employer, to do so. (At least one of my readers — a complete stranger to me — will probably suggest that my opinions on the matter are generated by my own mercenary self-interest. As I’ve told him, I regard such casual and baseless claims as beneath contempt. In any case, they’re false.)

First, it needs to be understood that 22-year-old Ruthie Robertson was an adjunct member of the BYU-I faculty. That means that she wasn’t actually a professor. (At her age, it’s a virtual certainty that she doesn’t hold a doctorate, and very likely that she holds no graduate degree at all.) She didn’t have tenure or (in BYU-Provo’s parlance, anyway) “continuing faculty status.” I presume that it means that her employment was by contract for short periods, very likely from semester to semester, and perhaps only for one class at a time. Adjunct faculty (who abound across American academia) are very easily fired. Or, more accurately in most cases, they’re very easily not renewed. There is no obligation on a school’s part, and certainly no reasonable legal expectation on such a part-time employee’s part, that adjunct faculty status will be permanent or even continued from one term to the next.

Permit me, now, to briefly discuss two of the other points at which I might be asked my stance:

— She describes her 5 June 2017 Facebook post as an “official announcement and declaration” of her position on homosexuality. That seems to make it a public statement, not merely a private expression. Which, in turn, makes it something that might legitimately concern her part-time employer.

— Her “official” Facebook “announcement and declaration” publishes her view that homosexuality is natural and not sinful.

She is quite correct with regard to the former proposition. Homosexuality — like heterosexuality and malformed feet, blue and brown eyes, shortness and tallness, blondness and baldness, broad shoulders and congenital heart disease, shyness and gregariousness, cancer and athletic potential, brown skin and “white” skin and albinism, autism and genius — is entirely natural. It will occur, from year to year and from generation to generation, at fairly predictable rates in large enough populations. That fact, alone and in and of itself, possesses no moral significance.

She seems to assume that homosexuality’s “naturalness” entails that it’s not sinful. But that doesn’t follow. As I’ve pointed out, the sheer fact that something occurs naturally possesses no intrinsic moral significance. The natural occurrence of heart disease doesn’t render it morally “good.” Brunette hair is neither good nor evil. Moral values come from elsewhere, from outside the brute fact of what is.

She stakes a different kind of claim when she says that homosexuality isn’t “sinful.”

On one level, what she says is scarcely controversial. No thoughtful person in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has said that homosexuality, in and of itself, is a sin. It’s no more a sin than is heterosexuality. Or male pattern baldness. Or red hair. Or long legs, or colon cancer, or a well-formed chin.

Behavior is where questions of moral good and evil — or, if you will, of “virtue” and “sin” — come into play.

And if, as I expect, she’s really wanting to say that homosexual behavior is no sin, she is placing herself in open opposition to the fundamental moral teaching of the Church to which (as she significantly expressed it in one published statement) she “currently” belongs, which is the Church that sponsors BYU-Idaho as a large and expensive part of its effort to influence the moral and spiritual formation of its youth.

Her open and direct public contradiction of the moral doctrine of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints leaves BYU-I, in my view, little alternative to terminating its connection with her.

Some have said that this is bad PR for the Church and the University. I have no doubt that that is true. Mormon moral teachings on chastity and heterosexual marriage are very much out of fashion, and will likely grow more so. I can’t imagine that anybody in Salt Lake City or Rexburg is delighted with this story. But people and institutions need to act according to their moral principles. Ruthie Robertson claims to have done that, and so, too, has BYU-Idaho.

Posted from Kaanapali, Maui, Hawaii

P.S. — I’ve just been told that this part-time BYU-I instructor has been posting for some time on a virulently apostate ex-Mormon message board as “exmofeminista,” using occasionally quite ripe language to describe her efforts to create a space for herself outside of the Church. That puts this unfortunate little episode in a rather significantly different light, I think.

Uncategorized

Previous Post

July 19, 2017

"Doomsday averted on the Temple Mount, for now"

Next Post

July 19, 2017 Friedrich Engels, of Marx-and-Engels fame, is back in fashion!

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Uncategorized

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 March 2014 August 2013 February 2012

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

What is the first line of the Bible?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Let there be light The Lord is my shepherd. Hear, O Israel. In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.