BYU Honor Code

Recently, BYU basketball came into the national spotlight; and not because of how their team was performing. Brandon Davies, one of the Cougars’ best players this season was dismissed from the team for violating the school Honor Code by having premarital sex with his girlfriend. While the season ended already, and probably too early for many BYU fans, I still feel like this issue applies to our class.

The Honor Code requires students to “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 and 
encourage others in their commitment to comply with the Honor Code.” The Honor Code applies both on and off campus and students are required to renew this contract every year. If they violate it, punishments range from an academic hold on their account to total separation from the school.

This brings up many questions. If accepted to BYU would you sign the Honor Code in order to attend? Why? Why not? Is it healthy that the school essentially shelters their students from the world? In many dystopian tales, the totalitarian government was created to protect the people from the “evils” of the world (Ex. Brave New World and “V for Vendetta”). Is this in any way similar to BYU’s Honor Code? Also, if students knowingly and willingly accept the terms of the Honor Code, is it ok for them to question the authority of it? I’ve posted a link to BYU’s webpage with the Honor Code on it. I can’t wait to hear everyone’s thoughts on this!

http://saas.byu.edu/catalog/2010-2011ucat/GeneralInfo/HonorCode.php

Drugs, Drugs, Drugs

I recently learned the classification system for drugs and the criteria for their placements. Drugs are broken down into 5 schedules, (I) being the worst to (V) being the least harmful. There is a hyperlink at the bottom of this post if you want to read more into each schedule and the drugs that each contains.

I was extremely shocked to find out that Marijuana was placed in Schedule I. The requirements for a Schedule I drug is to have a “high tendency for abuse, have no accepted medical use, and are not available with a prescription by a physician”. The other drugs alongside Marijuana in Schedule I are Heroin, MDMA (Ecstasy), LSD, and GHB.

First off, Marijuana does not cause a physical addiction, if anything it is a mental addiction. There have been no reported cases of THC overdose. Secondly, there have been experiments that have successfully shown that Marijuana can have a beneficial medical use with cancer patients; it gives the patients an appetite and helps with the pain. Lastly, it is available to cancer patients with a prescription by a physician in 17 states, including Washington, D.C.

Activists have tried to change the schedule of Marijuana based on these previously stated arguments to help the legalization process. Since people do not believe that it meets the requirements of a Schedule I drug, the government either has to allow for medical use or remove it from federal control altogether. However, the government maintains its stance on Marijuana being a Schedule I drug.

So my question is why is the government refusing to remove Marijuana from Schedule I? Are they trying to dissuade the legalization of the drug by maintaining its “dangerous” status? Does their authority affect your view of the drug? Or do you agree with the government that Marijuana should be a Schedule 1 drug? Generally, how do the positions that the government or authorities take affect your views and opinions?

You can expand off of this topic in any way that you wish. I was just so intrigued when I learned this that I wanted to hear other people’s views on the topic. Also, I’d just like to say that I’m not a druggie or anything; I’m just very interested in drugs in general (haha).

I can’t wait to see what you all have to say :)

http://www.addictions.org/schedules.html

Its a Big Business World

Just a little background information before I ask questions, I am a business major with a concentration in finance. I currently own a few shares in Pacsun and Citi Group Insurance. These businesses, along with all publicly traded companies, make A LOT of money. Jeans at Pacsun go for about $40 a pair. If a little research was done, they are produced for something around $5 dollars in places like Taiwan. It almost makes me angry to support a company that is making between 400 and 600% in profits. So some questions that I have are, should companies be allowed to make as much money as they like, if no, where should a limit be drawn since we live in a capitalist society. Should we stop buying or is paying that much alright? Can we fight the system for a change in price or is it a helpless situation?

Wikileaks: Good or Bad?

I’m sure most of you are familiar with Wikileaks and how it is changing the structure of journalism. If not, check out the links at the bottom of this prompt. I’m curious to see how you guys see Wikileak’s actions. Speaking specifically about the Afghan War Diaries, do the potential security risks of these secret documents outweigh the benefit of having information available to the masses? How does the availability of information about major corporations and governments affect an everyday citizen’s ability to question authority? Does Julian Assange, the founder of Wikileaks, deserve judicial action? What affect does Wikileaks have on the future?

I know there are a lot of questions here, so feel free to choose whichever you’d like to answer. I’m looking forward to your answers.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-10757263

http://www.voanews.com/english/news/What-Is-Wikileaks--99239414.html

What happens next?

The recent events in the Middle East continue to interest me, especially as they relate to this class. Egypt has recently overthrown its president of 30 years and the army has assumed temporary control of the country. My question is, after the excitement of activism and revolution, what happens next? How important is it, in the process of questioning authority, to have a plan in action after you have successfully questioned authority? How much responsibility, if any, does the questioning party have in reestablishing order after breaking down the previous authority? How does a society prevent another corrupt authority figure from taking over? What about anarchism?

Also,what can we learn from how past revolutions turned out (like the aftermath of the Russian Revolution vs. the aftermath of the American revolution for example). I look forward to seeing all of your responses.

Rebellion At It's Finest (Sort Of)

My senior year of high school, my school got a new principal who was a lot more strict than our old principal had been. She had security patrolling the halls to herd students into classes before the bell even rang, started cracking down on the slightest dress code infraction, and talked to students as if they were elementary school children. Most of the time, seniors put up with the new rules because we only had to deal with it for one year, but when she announced that she would have chaperones patrolling the dance floor at prom and that she would personally choose the playlist, we decided it was time to take action (Seriously, who wants to dance to the Chicken Dance at prom?). So a group of seniors started planning an Anti-Prom by setting up a location, DJ, and security for a dance to be hosted on the same night as our school-sponsored prom. Eventually, concerned parents heard about the Anti-Prom and called the school telling the principal that she could not allow this to happen. In response, she met up with us and agreed that we could choose our own playlist as long as the sponsor teacher of the senior class approved it; which was fine by us since we got along well with our sponsor.

Looking back on the situation, I think we made a bigger deal of it than we needed to, and we could probably have handled it in a way that caused less chaos. After all, it was only a high school prom. However, we did get our point across and came up with a compromise that worked for both sides.

So, since I love stories, my question is: What have YOU done in the past to question authority? How did you justify your actions at the time? Do you still believe they were justified, or was there a better way to handle the situation?

I can't wait to hear what you guys have to say!

The Power of Uniforms

I apologize in advance for taking too long to post this..

Anyways, my girlfriend was watching Dr. Phil and told me about a segment called "Are we really that vulnerable to uniforms?," which caught my interest for this class. They had a man in a military uniform stand in the streets and tell people to do certain things like walk around a tile or stop and walk with their left foot in front. Suprisingly people would make a face but do as they were told. When this same man was dressed in civillian clothes and requested that they do the same thing, people would look at him questioningly but walk right through the tile or not stop at all. It is not only clear here, but in everday life that the power of a uniform is significant. People personifying a doctor or police can face incredible criminal charges. Is the power of a uniform really that significant that it even has to be regulated? Why do we so easily follow what someone in uniform tells us to do? Why is it so hard for us to question the authority of someone in uniform?