Student Review Volume 2 Issue 4

TUESDAY, APRIL 9 2013 VOLUME 2, ISSUE NO.

04

STUDENT REVIEW iN THIS ISSUE: How well do you know Cecil?

Honor Code Police Saving the Provo Library Out at BYU

Terrible Questions History of African-Americans within the LDS Church America’s Political Legacy

CELEBRATING

LEGACY THESTUDENTREVIEW.ORG

LETTER FROM THE EDITOR

THESTUDENTREVIEW.ORG

@YSTUDENTREVIEW

APRIL 2013

VOLUME 2, ISSUE 4

STUDENT REVIEW

02

03

STUDENT REVIEW

STAFF EDITOR-IN-CHIEF Conor Hilton OUTREACH DIRECTOR Victoria Birkbeck CREATIVE DIRECTOR Sarah Kay Brimhall PHOTO DIRECTOR/DESIGNER Emma Vidmar WEB DESIGNER Derrick Clements PR TEAM Nathan Paskett Bethan Owen EDITORS Hannah Wheelwright Roseanna Hopper Tana Frechem Elisa Visick

LIVE YOUR LEGACY

CONTRIBUTING ARTISTS Patrick Croskrey Hilary Onyon Emma Vidmar

This issue’s theme is Legacy. A loaded word that may conjure up images of pioneers needlessly following the bends of a river, adding countless hours to their journey, but actually representing a deeper, much more significant idea. Legacy is all that we leave behind, not just the history of what actually happened, but what is remembered. The vibe that exudes when something exits our mouths.

Why legacy? Perhaps it was our own hope that we are leaving a grand legacy that will be remembered passionately, be it for good or ill, but definitely passionately. Perhaps it was due to dissatisfaction with the present and a hope in humanity that diminished with every meme flame war or online comment section we read. Perhaps we had recently reviewed our old Church movie collection. Whatever the source, legacy became our overarching theme.

So what? Beyond simply entertaining or revealing stories that may have been forgotten or never known, these stories can serve as a springboard for our own personal growth. Or the legacy may simply be a warning. A signpost that tells us of certain death and doom waiting down particular paths.

At the least, we may consider what our legacy is. What will people say at your funeral? What will they say at mine?

Who knows what our legacy will be. All we can do is press on, hoping that it’ll be fantastic or horrendous, if that’s what you want. Live your legacy.

Learn from the legacy left behind. Or laugh. I mean it is Legacy…

Sincerely,

LITERARY/A&E SECTION EDITOR Andy Andersen CONTRIBUTORS Andy Andersen J. Andersen Victoria Birkbeck Samy Galvez Matthew Jelalian K, Just Say Amen Already blogger Ariel Letts Nelson Long Aaron Murray Curtis Penfold Jake Seastrand Stephen Smoot Rachel Steinberg Luke Swenson Hannah Wheelwright Corey Landon Wozniak

Dear Reader,

Conor Hilton Editor-in-Chief

...OR LAUGH FOR SIXTY-FOUR YEARS SCENES LIKE THIS WERE TYPICAL OF ANNUAL Y DAY AS STUDENTS FORMED BUCKET BRIGADES TO PASS FULL BUCKETS OF WHITEWASH UP THE MOUNTAIN AND SEND EMPTY BUCKETS DOWN TO BE REFILLED FOR THE REFURBISHING OF THE SCHOOL SYMBOL. PHOTO COURTESY OF THE, L.TOM PERRY SPECIAL COLLECTIONS, HAROLD B. LEE LIBRARY, BYU, PROVO, UT

CAMPUS LIFE

THESTUDENTREVIEW.ORG

@YSTUDENTREVIEW

APRIL 2013

PHOTO PH PHOT H O CR CREDIT: EDIT: THE THE U.S. U.S. N NATIONAL ATIONAL ATIO A ARC ARCHIVES RCHIIVES S

04

Are you scared of the Honor Code police?

WRITTEN BY CURTIS PEN FOLD Sure, some say they’re a myth. BYU Police claim that their job is to not look for honor code violaters but lawbreakers. The Honor Code Office denies any allegations of employing students to go around trying to find honor codE violaters in order to turn them in.

The book The Lord’s University by Bryan Waterman and Brian Kagel claims that in the seventies, eighties, and even nineties BYU security officers (then working under the direction of the University Standards Office) would go to gay hangouts and write down all the license plate numbers of the cars in the parking lot and see if there were any matches in the BYU database. If these accusations are true, that would be a very tedious process indeed.

Instead of being caught by a paid student body, however, students are more likely to be reported by anonymous sources all around them.

“If someone is offended they should face the offender head on,” said one

I felt like I was going to my death” student who was called into the Honor Code Office for having “extreme hair” during the summer while he wasn’t taking classes. “But the Honor Code system has created a tattle-tale safe environment in which one does not have the right to face their accusers, and that in my opinion is far from honorable.”

Most of the students interviewed did

not know who accused them. Anyone can report a BYU student, and a person can remain completely anonymous throughout the reporting process.

Meaning that if a student anonymously accuses another student falsely, they will not face repercussions.

(Really. Try it. On yourself. Joanna Brooks did back in the nineties and wrote a series of articles for the Student Review covering her experiences reporting anonymously and having to defend herself against her own anonymous reports.)

Once an accusation is made, The Honor Code Office starts an investigation. They usually call, write to, and e-mail the student in question saying that they have to make an appointment to be seen by the Honor Code Office.

When in the Honor Code Office, they explain to the student the accusations made against them. At times, these accusations are very vague. A common question that was asked by those interviewed was if the student knew why they were called in.

“It’s like an interrogation,” said Bridey Jensen who was falsely accused of having a homosexual relationship. “They say that they are only interested in helping the student, but I’m skeptical.”

Jensen, like all the students interviewed, found the whole interview with the Honor Code Office to be a nerveracking experience, even though she was falsely accused. Charges were subsequently dropped.

“I felt like I was going to my death,” said Jensen. “The whole time I was just racking

How well do you know your president?

WRITTEN BY AARON MCMURRAY While every BYU student knows the face and probably even the distinct voice of President Cecil O. Samuelson, the man placed at BYU’s helm a full decade ago this year, has managed—and seemingly even tried deliberately—to avoid the limelight. An experienced professional and no-nonsense administrator, Samuelson has avoided the personality cult and high profile that some university presidents thrive on, including some in BYU’s recent history. So the real question is, how well do YOU know your President?

See how you score on a pop quiz about the life and times of the mystery man: 1. Where was President Samuelson born and raised?

2. Where did he serve his mission?

3. What university did he attend?

4. What degrees does he hold?

5. What did he do professionally?

6. What was his position in the LDS Church before coming to BYU? Granted, no student knows every detail about their university president’s life, but still it’s always amazing how little some BYU students know about this man who influences their university experience so directly. President S. is

Future Honor Code police at BYU?

my brain for what I had done wrong.”

Some of the tactics used by the Honor Code Office to get information out of students can be questionable.

“The lady that I met with in the honor code office was totally unreasonable with her questioning,” said one student. “She asked me if I had any close friends that could testify to my personal character. No matter who I named, she would ask me what I would say if she told me that he or she was the person that accused me.”

Another student claimed to have the same line of questioning happen to him in the Honor Code Office.

One student, who says she was falsely accused of sexual misconduct with a man, said that she loved BYU before being called into the Honor Code Office.

But due to the pressure she felt in the Honor Code Office, (enhanced by her own medical anxiety), she said she can’t wait to leave this university.

If the Honor Code Office feels it has enough evidence that a student did a crime, the Dean of Students’ Office can give that student an official warning, which ends up on their transcript, suspend or expel that student, refrain from action, or put that student through counseling or some other creative punishment that they deem appropriate for that student’s crimes. For more information, see “Honor Code Investigation and Administrative Review”, found online with other University Policies.

While a paid student police force seems unlikely, every student may be an informant. Who’s watching you? █

One of the more surprising details to many students is President Samuelson’s lifetime affiliation with our greatest Enemy—not ... the Russians, the devil, or even the Democratic Party, but rather the University of Utah.

VOLUME 2, ISSUE 4

STUDENT REVIEW

a Salt Lake City native, who served his mission in Scotland before receiving his Bachelor’s, Master’s, and M.D. from the University of Utah. He did his residency at Duke in North Carolina in rheumatic and genetic diseases, then practiced for 17 years before taking positions as the Senior Vice-President of Intermountain Health Care and as Dean of the U of U’s medical school. He was called to the First Quorom of the Seventy in 1994, and was in the Presidency of the Seventy when assigned to serve as President of BYU in 2003.

Let’s be honest, there probably aren’t many students at BYU who could answer even half of those questions correctly, yet we see the President almost every week at devotional, plus the many other campus events at which he presides.

And those questions just cover the basics. Even fewer students are probably aware that he authored or co-authored at least 48 academic publications, or that he was one of the signatory leaders of the letter and movement in California to garner support among members for Prop 22 (California state amendment prohibiting same-sex marriage). One of the more surprising details to many students is President Samuelson’s lifetime affiliation with our greatest Enemy— not referring to the Russians, the devil, or even the Democratic Party, but rather the University of Utah.

It comes as a shock to many that our beloved President S. is indeed a life-long Ute. With a U of U professor for a father, having completed three degrees there,

and as a former Dean of the medical school, maybe it’s no surprise that his allegiance was red before blue. The real question is, can anything truly turn a Ute fan from red to blue, or even purple?

Is it possible that the voice of our annual welcome-back-to-school devotional is really just the guise of a Crimson Club super-fan biding his time until liberation from Provo?

President Samuelson himself was unavailable for interview, but after scouring the most consistently and infallibly reliable sources, (Ute and Cougar fan blogs and anonymous internet sources, of course) it seems the Samuelson family has always “bled red.” However, in a story by the Deseret News, another longtime bastion of trustworthy and unbiased information, President S. explained what he tells friends who ask him about the perceived conflict of a Ute running the show in Provo. As he puts it, “they say, ‘How is BYU, really? We’re good friends.

I won’t tell anyone.’ I can tell you publicly what I tell them privately—it’s wonderful. Really.” He compares his middleman position in the BYU-Utah rivalry to old friends competing in ward ball: “Some of those rivalries are the most intense, yet everyone is still best friends.” His unique history and ecumenical vision seem to have worked well for him, and probably in the best interest of students at both institutions.

While President Samuelson has tended to avoid the public eye and minimalized his direct interaction with the student body, his impact and influence at BYU are real and permanent. Regardless of one’s personal feelings towards him, President Samuelson’s dedicated work deserves at least the respect and gratitude of all BYU students who are so directly affected by his efforts behind the scenes. Having been released and named an Emeritus Seventy in 2011, there’s no telling how much longer he’ll be asked to serve at BYU, so there’s no better time than the present to get to know and appreciate our very own President Cecil O. Samuelson. █ ILLUSTRATION BY AARON MCMURRAY

05

CAMPUS LIFE

THESTUDENTREVIEW.ORG

@YSTUDENTREVIEW

APRIL 2013

VOLUME 2, ISSUE 4

STUDENT REVIEW

06

07

FAMILY

Out at BYU WRITTEN BY SAMY GALVEZ Thousands have now seen the YouTube video in which Jimmy Hales, a BYU student, came out as a gay man to his friends and family. Though coming out can be an eventful process (with national TV involved, as it was for Jimmy), the actual day-to-day living of those with an alternative sexual orientation at BYU is misunderstood and widely misrepresented.

BYU has constantly been ranked as one of the most LGBT+ unfriendly campuses in the US. The adjective “unfriendly” makes reference to the Honor Code, which prohibits any type of homosexual behavior; including holding hands or dating. Nevertheless, there is much friendliness at BYU for those who are out of the closet.

WHY BE OPEN?

Some might ask, why even come out in such an environment? For James Price, a freshman from North Carolina, it was a no-brainer. He had already come to terms with it himself and saw no reason to hide when he realized that others who hadn’t come to terms with their SSA could use his help.

Blake Trekell, from Colorado, also emphasized how being honest with himself and those around him helped him feel happier. “I didn’t feel like I was lying to everyone all the time,” he comments.

Coming out can be a very positive experience if it is approached with honesty and good intent.

I didn’t feel like I was lying to everyone all the time.”

ROOMMATES AND PEERS

ILLUSTRATION BY HILARY ONYON

Circumstances cause completely different dynamics when coming out to people that you have to relate to every day. Trina Rutz has had roommates that have passed negative judgment on her.

She says “people don’t understand homosexuality; they think that because you are attracted to girls that means you want to have sex with every girl you see.” Those who have had negative reactions to her have been those who didn’t know her well. On the other hand, those who knew her well have been very supportive. She now has roommates who are

understanding of her situation and loving.

“We don’t mind if you ask us about it. We’d love to help you understand.

Issues come up because of lack of understanding,” says Nathan Cunliffe. He also commented on how, while some of the hardest parts of being openly gay include preconceived notions and stereotypes, these can be avoided via healthy conversations and friendships.

Austin* is not completely out, but agrees to the fact that those who know you well will be supportive and loving.

While some might be uncomfortable at first, friends soon realize it’s still you, and will value the trust you solidify by sharing such a private part of who you are. Austin*, like the others, has yet to find someone who knows him well and has a hateful reaction to his sexual orientation.

“I have had no negative reactions.”

CHURCH LEADERSHIP

Relationships in Church can be a little more complicated. Trina insists “your Bishop matters.” While some bishops have been very helpful, others have not been very understanding.

Blake points out that the least helpful Bishops were those who focus only on changing that aspect of who you are. Other negative attitudes Bishops have include: not trusting you when you talk to them or checking too much on you and making you feel like a project.

On the other hand, those who help the most are those who listen and, instead of trying to actively change you, accept who you are and show appreciation.

Another factor that complicates relationships with Bishops is that there isn’t consistency across the board.

James relates how some Bishops are more permissive than others regarding what “homosexual behavior” means. By not having consistency, it is harder to realize what expectations you have to live by as you move from ward to ward during your college career. Despite inconsistency, Nathan says “you won’t have negative reactions from your leaders if you’re doing the right thing.”

Family relationships are definitely the most complicated when coming out. Austin* tells of how his parents are constantly worried for him. Nevertheless, his siblings have shown constant support. “Because your family is so important to you, there will be many complications when you tell them,” he indicates.

James and Nathan did not have very positive experiences with their families either. Nathan told his parents via a letter, which “wasn’t a good idea because it’s something that should be addressed in person.” Honesty and patience are key in order to sustain healthy and loving relationships with your family. Coming out to them might be the hardest part of the process, but it’s the most important because of the fundamental importance of those relationships.

MAKING THE DECISION TO COME OUT

Trina, as well as others, knew that hard consequences would come with their decision to be open about their sexual orientation. It will be hard to find a place in the Church for you, your dating life will be nonexistent, people who don’t know you might have negative reactions or might lie to pretend they’re ok with you; these are some examples of the hardest aspects of being open about your sexual orientation at BYU. Despite all of this, all of them agree that the positive outweighs the negative. The love and understanding shown by other students and friends has been much better than Austin* ever expected. And though there are still steps to be taken, it all seems to be moving in a bright direction. “I didn’t think it would be the right think to do but now I know it’s exactly what I needed to do,” he concludes. █

FEATURE: LEGACY

THESTUDENTREVIEW.ORG

@YSTUDENTREVIEW

APRIL 2013

VOLUME 2, ISSUE 4

STUDENT REVIEW

08

09

A Heavenly Vision, a Bulldozer, and a City: the 25-year fight to save the Provo Library

4

2

3

WRITTEN BY COLIN HATCH AND VICTORIA BIRKBECK

1

T PHOTOS FROM LEFT TO RIGHT 1 THE NEW BELL TOWER IS PLACED ON THE ACADEMY’S ROOF DURING RECONSTRUCTION, COURTESY OF LEE BARTLETT; 2 BRIGHAM YOUNG ACADEMY ON DEDICATION DAY, JANUARY 4, 1892 PHOTO COURTESY OF THE L.TOM PERRY SPECIAL COLLECTIONS, HAROLD B. LEE LIBRARY, BYU; 3 LIBRARY EXTERIOR, PHOTO BY EMMA VIDMAR 4 THE ACADEMY BUILDING SHORTLY BEFORE RECONSTRUCTION BEGAN, COURTESY OF LEE BARTLETT.

he e iimpressive mp prre ess ssiv ive e fa ffaçade aça ça of the Provo library shows Pr ro ov v vo o li libr bra brar br arry sh how ow few signs off the the distress distr isttrress is esss the e tth h building has the has endured ha endu en dure du re ed throughout thrro thro th ou decades. building came de d eca ad de es. s. But Butt the the he iconic ico oni n c bu b ui close demolition many clos cl ose to os o d emol em ollit o itio tio ion n ma m ny y times and would not exist were wo oul uld d no ot ex xist isst to ttoday day we da wer rre e it not for prophetic in p op pr ophe hetiic dreams, heti he drrea d eams m , a grandmother ms gran gran gr nd front of a bulldozer, and the support of an entire community.

Many are aware that Brigham Young Academy was the precursor to Brigham Young University, started by Karl G. Maeser at the behest of Brigham Young in 1876. The original Academy building burned to the ground in 1884, forcing Maeser and his students to hold school inside a warehouse for several years.

Karl Maeser had a dream shortly after the fire in which the recently deceased

Brigham Young led him into a building with assembly halls and classrooms.

When he awoke, he sketched out the plan of the building. When Brigham Young Academy was built, it was designed according to Maeser’s sketch.

In 1892, Maeser and his students dedicated the new Academy, and Maeser retired the same day.

John Edge Booth was one of two teachers at the Academy who taught alongside Maeser and succeeded his work at the school, teaching there as a volunteer for 30 years. Booth’s granddaughter, Shirley Brockbank Paxman, was educated in the Academy building when it housed Brigham Young High School. Her family lived just half a block away.

However, Brigham Young High School closed in 1968, and BYU put the build-

ings up for sale in the 1970’s. Driven by her family’s connection to the building, Shirley Paxman wrote what would be the first of many letters on behalf of the Academy building to the mayor, asking the city to purchase the land rather than allow it to be sold for commercial development. Her request was denied.

Commercial developers bought the property, but did nothing with it. Years passed and the Academy building fell into disuse. Students threw rocks through the windows. A chain link fence was put up around the building while the grass and weeds grew taller and taller. When Shirley and her husband Monroe noticed that the trees and lawn of the building were dying, they used their own money to install a sprinkler system and keep them alive.

In 1984, the newspapers reported that the city was ready to demolish the building. It was in light of this threat that the Brigham Young Academy Foundation was founded. Over the next 15 years the group, of which Shirley and Monroe were founding members, would support and defend approximately 13 different restoration attempts for the building.

Suggestions included turning the building into apartments, office space, or a home for BYU’s dinosaur collection.

“It was an every week, every month, every year campaign to keep it alive,” the Paxmans said during a recent interview with their grandson, Colin Hatch.

In 1994, the situation seemed hopeless. The city of Provo bought the lot with the intention of razing the buildings, and the fire chief stated, “If there is

a fire in that building, I have instructed my department to just let it burn down.”

The mayor set a deadline by which sufficient funds had to be raised or the building would be torn down. The night before the deadline, Shirley and Monroe, then in their 70’s, walked past the building and noticed a bulldozer lined up at the edge of the property. Shirley recalls: “I asked him what he was doing there, and he said they were commissioned to tear the building down. And I just stood in front of the bulldozer and didn’t leave. I said, ‘If that machine goes, you’re gonna have to move me’.”

Later that very night, the group received a $1 million dollar donation from a wealthy donor in Seattle. “The mayor was satisfied and the bulldozer was backed away,” Monroe said.

It was an every week, every month, every year campaign to keep [the library] alive.”

In 1997, the matter came to a vote by the citizens of Provo whether or not the city should allocate $16 million in funds to restore the old Academy building and build the addition to house the city library. In the weeks leading up to the vote, the Foundation ran full-page ads encouraging citizens to vote, featuring local celebrities such as Lavell Edwards.

The letters to the editor section of The Daily Herald was filled with passionate opinions from locals, some saying that the building was simply a money pit, others arguing that the money could be better spent helping the poor, and others pleading the case for the preservation of the landmark.

On the day of the vote, 58% of the Provo population supported the proposal. However, the money came with one last stipulation- the Brigham Young Academy Foundation had until June 30 to raise the additional $6.5 million required to complete the project.

The next few months were a frenzy of fundraising. The group hosted a 5k race, donations came from the Church of

Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints Foundation approved by Gordon B. Hinckley, and actor Robert Redford donated all the proceeds of a banquet dinner at Sundance Resort to the cause. The collection came down to the wire, but at last the money was raised.

“We were joyous when we finally raised the last money to buy it, that last million dollars.” Shirley said.

Today, the Provo Library at Academy Square is a cheerful, bustling center of the community. The restored halls are decorated with portraits of Karl G. Maeser and plaques commemorating the contributions of the Paxmans, the Brigham Young Academy Foundation, and the many others that worked hard to preserve Provo’s heritage. The building that was once crumbling in on itself is now the centerpiece of a thriving community. █ You can hear Colin Hatch’s interview with his grandparents, Shirley and Monroe Paxman on our website at thestudentreview.org

ARTS & ENTERTAINMENT

THESTUDENTREVIEW.ORG

@YSTUDENTREVIEW

APRIL 2013

VOLUME 2, ISSUE 4

STUDENT REVIEW

10

11

Clybourne Park WRITTEN BY AARON MCMURRAY

PHOTO COURTESY OF PIONEER THEATRE COMPANY

One of the eternal values of the arts is their ability to say what needs desperately to be said when nobody is saying it.

In his Pulitzer Prize-winning play, Clybourne Park, Bruce Norris is able to talk about several issues that most people can appreciate, but few can competently discuss: race, grief, changing values, and even a little bit of real estate.

Pioneer Theatre Company in Salt Lake City performed Clybourne Park

from February 15 through March 2, to great acclaim and as a convincing testimonial of Norris’ precise style and talent as a playwright. Lest you dismiss the play because you’ve “never heard of it” (you’re right, it isn’t Shakespeare or “Wicked”), or as just “a play about race,” consider that since its publication in 2010, Clybourne Park has garnered attention both in the U.S. and abroad, being produced several times in London, including once starring Martin Freeman. It’s also received a Tony Award for Best Play, Laurence Olivier Award for Best New Play, and a Pulitzer Prize for Drama.

The play itself consists of two acts occurring fifty years apart in Chicago.

The first act is set in 1959 and portrays a married couple preparing to leave their home in a comfortable, white, middle-class neighborhood. The couple is still grieving over the suicide of their only son, a young Korean War veteran shunned for his psychological instability.

Their grief has only been compounded by the silence and estrangement they experience in their community, and has even strained their marriage as they struggle individually with the grief haunting them both. As they prepare to move on and start again in a new home, neighbors and concerned community members come to confront the movers, having heard that the family who will replace them is black. The distraught locals are convinced that their reputable community will disintegrate and depreciate in value if blacks begin to populate the neighborhood. Memorable characters, like the intrusive local priest trying to get the husband to open up about his feelings, combined with witty dialogue, and subtle but believable subthemes of grief, alienation, and community are all sewn together brilliantly by Norris’ smart, razor-edged style.

The second act opens 50 years later in the same house, as a young married couple wrestles with zoning ordinances against their planned renovations, coupled with reservations from neighbors who hope to conserve Clybourne’s heritage as a black community. The young white couple and their stuffy lawyer tear the laughter out of an audience never quite sure what might be said next by the three outsiders in their self-righteous ignorance, or by the local black couple meeting with them to discuss the future of the house and ultimately their neighborhood. Tarah Flanagan, who starred in the Salt Lake production, said, “If you didn’t have the humor to take tension out of the air, it would all be really hard to take…I’m glad it’s there. It invites people into the play.”

The humor is born from both the irony of what happened in the house a generation ago and comedic relief from the bumbling white couple as they illustrate the torpid inability of so many Americans to have a conversation about these issues in real life.

At its core, Clybourne Park is about so much more than just race. It wrestles with the rhetoric and stereotypes that have buried America in half-defined

sensitivities, and it paints realistic pictures of honest people trying to move forward in the swamp created by our own inability to talk about those sensitivities. (It’s worth noting that the play is loosely based on real events, as chronicled by “Lorraine Hansberry’s Raisin In The Sun.) These issues still plague Americans, and are certainly relevant to Mormons who, as a community at least, should have no trouble relating to the well-meaning characters who stumble on their own endearing incompetence in any dialogue about race. With the recent change to the heading of Official Declaration No. 2, arguably the biggest textual change in LDS canon since 1981, there’s no better time than now to remedy that awkwardness and proactively identify as part of a diverse community desperately in need of a healthier, more functional dialogue. Practice makes perfect, right?

With a creative narrative, hilarious dialogue, and intelligently genuine voice, Clybourne Park is more than a play, or even a play about race. It’s a dramatically satisfying piece about real life in America, which will undoubtedly be around for years to come. █ Save the dates: Pioneer Theatre will be performing Les Miserables through May 3-June 1.

At its core, Clybourne Park is about so much more than just race. It wrestles with the rhetoric and stereotypes that have buried America in half-defined sensitivities, and it paints realistic pictures of honest people trying to move forward.”

Little Happy Secrets

A story of the Modern Mormon WRITTEN BY ANDY ANDERSEN Within the LDS community there seems to be an ever-present conflict between what is secret and what is sacred.

This is the primary thematic premise of Little Happy Secrets, LDS playwright and screenwriter Melissa Leilani Larson’s award winning play which ran at Provo’s Echo Theatre this year from Feb. 7—23. The story of a young Mormon lesbian coming to terms with her sexuality while maintaining her faith, Little Happy Secrets gives the Mormon world a fresh glimpse at the naked truth of our propensity to marginalize each other, and our struggles to reconcile ourselves with a world where secrecy is often valued over individuality.

In the first act of Little Happy Secrets the Provo landscape is established as protagonist and narrator Claire, and her best friend/roommate Brennan—with whom Claire has fallen in love—live their lives as happy-go-lucky BYU students. Punch lines are found in the familiar tropes of BYU culture— cheap dates in the Wilkinson center and a fetish for Jane Austen film adaptations, etc.—but in the context of Claire’s story of confusion, self-doubt, and crippling personal pain, these monuments of

Mormon culture as parodied in The Singles Ward and The R.M., are crumbling in the wake of a democracy of Mormon frustrations.

And from the rubble of a bygone era, Little Happy Secrets emerges with intimate moments of honesty rarely seen in narrative depictions of Mormon life. The opening scene, for example, depicts two female BYU students speculating about sex and orgasms—one of many scenes that might have been shocking to a less-willing audience, but end up turning the two-hour duration of the play into a place of openness and spiritual relief.

Even in the proudest moments of honesty in the play, however, there remains a difficulty in expressing feelings that don’t fit the Mormon mold. “I believe everything I’ve always believed in,” Claire says to her Sister near the end of the play. “I just feel differently.”

In the DNA of this line lies the brilliance of what Larson has written: no Mormon asks for the individuality that marginalizes them from the body of their faith community, but the fallacy lies in the belief that there is no place for individuality in their faith. Little Happy Secrets acknowledges the beauties and saving graces of the LDS church while embracing the individuality of its members—letting all of us know that, no matter how big the holes in our souls can get, there’s a divine source telling its children who will listen to keep going. █

ARTS & ENTERTAINMENT

THESTUDENTREVIEW.ORG

@YSTUDENTREVIEW

APRIL 2013

VOLUME 2, ISSUE 4

STUDENT REVIEW

12

13

The Terrible Questions

A Review of The God Who Weeps: How Mormonism Makes Sense of Life WRITTEN BY STEPHEN SMOOT Hugh Nibley, one of Mormonism’s most towering intellectual figures of the last century, often spoken about what he called the “terrible questions” of existence: Where do I come from? Why am I here? What is my role in the universe?

What happens after death? Is this material existence all that there is? Do I have free will? Is there a God? How can I know? How will all this end?

These questions take center place in Mormon metaphysics. The Plan of Salvation, as it is now called in modern Mormon discourse, is a unique Mormon metaphysical cosmology that attempts to answer these questions. Drawing from both scripture and the teachings of their modern leaders, Mormons try to situate themselves in the universe with this eternal, cosmic worldview.

But how does Mormon cosmology compare and contrast to the cosmologies of other religious and philosophical worldviews? For example, what does Mormonism offer to the discussion of the relationship between free will and

determinism? How do Mormons account for an all-loving God allowing evil and suffering to exist in this world? How does the Mormon teaching of a premortal existence answer contradictions non-Christians have observed in traditional Christian theology? How does the Mormon teaching of posthumous salvation at once cut a significant soteriological Gordian knot that has long plagued the greatest Christian thinkers?

Enter Terryl and Fiona Givens with their new book The God Who Weeps: How Mormonism Makes Sense of Life.

Terryl Givens has written extensively on Mormonism, ranging from books on the Book of Mormon, Mormon culture, and the concept of a pre-mortality in Western thought. His wife Fiona joins him in writing The God Who Weeps, which reads with marked erudition and intelligence and is yet neither stuffy in its tone nor overwhelming with its content.

Terryl and Fiona Givens posit five central propositions relating to Mormon cosmology, which they argue are

“compelling, inspiring, and reasonable.”

These propositions are: 1. “God is a personal entity, having a heart that beats in sympathy with human hearts, feeling our joy and sorrowing over our pain.”

2. “We lived as spirit beings in the presence of God before we were born into this mortal life.”

3. “Mortality is an ascent, not a fall, and we carry infinite potential into a world of sin and sorrow.”

4. “God has the desire and the power to unite and elevate the entire human family in a kingdom of heaven, and, except for the most stubbornly unwilling, that will be our destiny.”

5. “Heaven will consist of those relationships that matter most to us.”

In exploring and elucidating these propositions, the Givenses don’t just restrict themselves to Mormon scripture or the teachings of General Authorities.

Rather, they actively engage in dialogue with different western theologies and philosophies. Philosophers from Aristotle to Bertrand Russell, theologians from St. Augustine to Dietrich Bonheoffer, poets from Dante to Robert Frost, and even scientists like Charles Darwin all receive attention from the Givenses, and are either synthesized or contrasted with Mormon thought. Ultimately, the Givenses argue that Mormonism has significant contributions to offer in the great discussion raging around the terrible questions.

PHOTO COURTESY OF BYUBOOKSTORE.COM

How does Mormon cosmology compare and contrast to the cosmologies of other religious and philosophical worldviews?

For instance, the Givenses compare Mormon soteriology (or the theology of salvation) with that of traditional Christianity, and argue that Joseph Smith’s teaching of the opportunity for posthumous salvation and eternal progression for those who never had an opportunity to accept the gospel in this life answers a really tough question for creedal Christianity: how do we reconcile the fact that Jesus is the only way to salvation, and yet untold legions have come and gone from this world without even so much as knowing Jesus existed, let alone having had a chance to accept his gospel?

Likewise, the Givenses argue that Mormonism’s answer to the so-called “problem of evil” is more logically, emotionally and spiritually satisfying and compelling than the answers given hitherto by the great religious thinkers of the west. The question of theodicy, or how to justify belief in God in the face of evil and suffering, is perhaps the greatest challenge to belief in God that faces traditional theism. The Givenses argue that Joseph Smith’s revelation about the weeping God (Moses 7:28–30) and our relationship to him sheds much needed light on this all-important question.

The God Who Weeps, then, is an invitation for us to discuss these and other terrible questions which face humanity.

Though the questions may be terrible, they are also answerable, if only somewhat. Quoting Paul, the Givenses stress in their book that during this mortal sojourn we “see through a glass darkly” (1 Corinthians 13:12), or, in the words of Keats, who is also quoted by the Givenses, we “strain at particles of light in the midst of great darkness.” As such, the Givenses do not presume to have all the answers to the terrible questions.

Rather, they discuss how the Mormon understanding of the Plan of Salvation in many ways draws us closer to answers to the terrible questions than competing theistic and atheistic metaphysics.

Latter-day Saints who take their faith seriously should read this book. If ever there was a book from which we could learn “by study and also by faith” (D&C 88:118), this is it. █

PHOTOS COURTESY OF MARCUSGILBERTOFFICIAL.COM; MRNORMALL.NET; MAGWEB.COM

The Legacy of Legacy WRITTEN BY ARIEL LETTS If you are a connoisseur of Mormon film, have visited the Joseph Smith Memorial building between the years 1993 and 2000, or watched a church movie with your family every Sunday while growing up, you are probably familiar with the film Legacy: A Mormon Journey (1990). In this 53 minute mini-epic, written and directed by Kieth Merrill, we are exposed to almost 20 years of church history, including the persecution in Missouri, the building of the Nauvoo temple, Joseph Smith’s martyrdom, the call for the Mormon Battalion, and, of course, the trek west to Utah.

It is surprisingly hard to find a complete list of cast members who appeared in the film. Who are they and what are they up to now? The world wants to know, or at least a small part of the Mormon community does. Extensive research, completed by accessing IMDB, Wikipedia, and the official websites of

the actors involved, reveals a few things: KATHLEEN BELLER (ELIZA WILLIAMS/ WALKER) Born in 1956 and started her

acting career when she was 15. She was on the daytime soap opera Search for Tomorrow from 1971-74. Her film debut was The Godfather Part II (1974) where she had a small role. She was nominated for a Golden Globe as Best Supporting Actress in 1979. The last thing listed on her IMDB page is some voice work for the video game Cyberia in 1994.

She seems to have disappeared from the public eye, preferring, I assume, to spend time with her husband and three children.

MARCUS GILBERT (DAVID WALKER)

Not to be confused with the football offensive lineman for the Pittsburgh Steelers, Gilbert was born in 1958 in the U.K. It is unclear whether his roles in Rambo III (1988), Doctor Who (1989), or his work in numerous other TV series and movies prepared him for the role of David in Legacy. Gilbert has since appeared in Army of Darkness (1992), an episode of Murder, She Wrote (1994), and other TV series episodes. He also created his own production company,

Touch the Sky Productions, and makes travel and adventure documentaries. He is married and has two children.

BENTON JENNINGS (GOVERNOR BOGGS) While Jennings did not have a

major role in the film Legacy he seems to be doing all right in the acting world.

After Legacy he went on to work on The Last of the Mohicans (1992), Power Rangers Lightspeed Rescue (2000), Mr. and Mrs. Smith (2005), Dexter (2006), Scrubs (2007), How I Met Your Mother (2010), and General Hospital (2013), among other projects. It is clear that he is the go-to choice for Jimmy Kimmel when he needs help with one of his skits; Jennings has played Hitler, Alex Tribeck’s body, a cab driver, and “guy shot with arrow by Ted Nugent.” Jennings also has a Twitter account, @bentonjennings, that is fairly active. If you’re feeling so inclined, I am sure he would welcome a shout-out.

Although everyone else from Legacy has kept a pretty low profile, they will always have a place in our hearts as the beloved characters they portrayed in the film. █

LITERARY SECTION

THESTUDENTREVIEW.ORG

@YSTUDENTREVIEW

APRIL 2013

VOLUME 2, ISSUE 4

STUDENT REVIEW

14

15

LITERARY

The Crane WRITTEN BY NELSON LONG There’s a crane outside my window and he’s calling my name He’s hovering up in the sky He tells me to join him “The weathers just fine and the view is wonderfully divine!”

I politely refuse and he looks confused and replies with a sad “Well…Why?” I look up to him and point to my arms and tell him “I just can’t fly.”

“Can’t fly?” he yelled from up in the sky “Have you ever just once even tried?”

“Yeah I did back when I was a kid, but its been a really long time.”

“Now is the time to try again I just know you’ll be able to fly.”

“OK I will give it a shot, I guess there’s no reason to be shy.”

I step to the edge of the window pane and my breathing flows in with gasps I close my eyes and reach out my hands and leap out as far as I can It doesn’t take long to know this is wrong cause gravity is pulling me down I hit the ground with such great force that I can’t even let out a sound My femur is broken into 3 pieces and I’m not sure the shape of my spine As air flows back into my sad lungs I scream as I look to the sky “I guess this proves that I can’t fly!”

I lay my face down in the grass “At least you did your best and tried, now lets get you off of your leg.”

SECTION IF YOU HAVE A CREATIVE WRITING SUBMISSION (ESSAY, POETRY OR SHORT STORY) PLEASE SEND IT TO THESTUDENTREVIEW2@GMAIL.COM

A few pieces on the nature of Dystopia, by which, through close study, we may become aware of the shortcomings of our own postmodern society.

PHOTO CREDIT: PATRICK CROSKREY

WRITTEN BY LUKE SWENSON I These days are the days of the greatness of the grand Empire! We all walk on cloud-shoes. Our daughters become optometrists, and our sons become daughters.

I stand on a golden steeple and eat breakfast cereal. The empress’s prophet tells me that we will swim in a lake, the empress’s prophet tells me that our genitals will form gills one day.

Glory to fish!

II Fritos for a horse! Fritos for a horse! The day has come, my brothers, for us to sit between the cushions of the couches of our oppressors! For us to eat the grains of abandoned bread, for us to lick the cold lost pennies, and for the box springs to launch us toward freedom!

PHOTO CREDIT: EMMA VIDMAR

Break of Day and the Crack of Dawn WRITTEN BY NELSON LONG The early bird gets the worm as well as an earful of silence in the beginning hours of the day. Early risers love the solitude of the morning. The early morning for them is a time to wake up leisurely, mentally and physically prepare for the upcoming day, and bask in the solitude of the silence as others still sleep. In addition, early risers refer to a set mental schedule as they go throughout their morning activities. This agenda is best completed in the quiet morning hours when only minimal interruptions can arise. Also, early risers do not appreciate social interaction in the wee hours of

the morning. The morning for them is a time meant for the company of oneself; a party made for one.

Late sleepers prefer the rush of the morning; they need not solitude. They use their morning time to exercise: jump out bed, run to get ready, crunch on their breakfast cereal, and sprint out the door. Late sleepers relish in the drama of the morning, wondering if they will be ready in enough time to start their busy day. On the contrary to early risers, late sleepers have no schedule to begin their day with. Persons who rise from sleep late in the morning only care about getting the necessities out of the way and shaking hands with the clock as they make their way out the door. Besides no set morning routine, late risers love the company of others in the morning; alone time is not needed in the morning because sleep already granted that. A party of two is better than one.

RELIGION

THESTUDENTREVIEW.ORG

@YSTUDENTREVIEW

APRIL 2013

16

History of AfricanAmericans within the LDS Church WRITTEN BY MATTHEW JELALAIN

PHOTO CREDIT: PATRICK CROSKREY

This I Believe WRITTEN BY K

K is a 20-something woman living in NYC where she attends graduate school and works with children.

She did not attend BYU. Her blog, Just Say Amen Already, can be found at: www.amenalready.tumblr.com

I believe in joy.

I believe in the healing power of laughter. I believe that kindness is the most powerful thing in the world. I believe in the importance of smiling. I believe I am a daughter of a loving G-d1. I believe all of this because I believe in joy.

It wasn’t terribly long ago that I lay in bed, wondering if I would ever feel joy again. Depression had taken hold of me, suffocating me as I struggled to break free from its grasp, desperate to breathe again. I feared that joy had been sucked from my life, and I would never be allowed to get it back.

I told no one how much I was struggling, as I was certain that doing so would be admitting some terrible weakness or lack of faith on my part. I tried to hold it all together and be what everyone needed me to be: confident, reliable, and strong enough for everyone else to lean on. Inside, I was barely hanging on.

As I lay in bed one night, unable to sleep but too exhausted to get up, I 1 I am Jewish convert to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. It is a Jewish custom not to write out G-d that I have not been able to break.

wondered, “Why am I still doing this?

Why am I still fighting?” There had to be something for me to hold on to, something still worth fighting for. I took out a notebook, and by the light of a flashlight I had propped up on a pillow, I began to write a letter to myself, begging myself not to give up. I wrote out things I was proud of, memories that made me smile, things I was looking forward to; the return of Peeps to grocery store aisles as spring neared, the slobbery kisses from the toddler I babysat, the upcoming new season of my favorite show, butterscotch oatmeal cookies, a new book I could curl up with and read for hours at a time, the smiles of the kids I had worked with as I helped them reach a new goal, the laughter around my family’s dinner table. These were simple, small things, but they were important.

These were things that brought me joy.

They were things that were special to me, and they made me know that G-d wanted me to have joy.

G-d had sent me to this world, to live this life. Things were hard, but as I prayed and paused to listen for a reply, I understood that they were exactly as they were supposed to be. When I thought about my life, G-d’s hand was clear. He wanted me right where I was, trials and all, but He wanted me to have joy. I had to decide if I wanted that for me, too.

Things in my life were still very difficult, and the depression did not magically lift. It was not easy. I had to force myself to look for moments of joy,

and hold tightly to them. An especially funny television show did not make up for the terrible moments. Singing my favorite hymn did not wipe away all of my tears. But thinking of these moments, and remembering the peace they had brought me, made it a little easier to get out of bed. They gave me the strength to take small steps towards getting through this. They gave me hope that I would be okay again. I remembered what it felt like to be happy. I knew that I was not forgotten. I knew that I was loved.

I believe we are all meant to have joy.

We may have to fight to see it amidst all of the darkness, but it is there. Joy did not make everything better, but it made me strong.

I came through my fight with depression stronger than ever, and resolved to share my joy with others. This is where my blog comes in. I hope to bring a smile to someone’s face, and give someone a moment of joy. I also want to share my faith, because that has been the greatest source of joy in my life.

My faith helps me understand that sometimes, terrible things happen, and some parts of life simply have to suck.

But I know that my Heavenly Father and my Savior love me, and they will make sure that somehow, everything will be okay. When things seem dark, I look around, and see a firefly, or feel a warm breeze that I’m sure was sent just for me, or just pause and feel G-d’s presence, and I smile, because I know that joy is real. █

There has been a long and complicated legacy between those of African descent and the Church. There are many opinions on the topic one, but few talk about this history in a factual manner.

“We can put reasons to commandments. When we do, we’re on our own.

Some people put reasons to [the ban] and they turned out to be spectacularly wrong” said Elder Dallin H Oaks.

As a disclaimer, the term “black people” will be used to refer to anyone of African heritage. If anyone finds the term offensive for some reason I wish to say now that was not my intent.

For the first couple years of church history there were no policies regarding blacks in any way. Missionaries went out to preach the Gospel to anyone willing to listen. Several black people were baptized into the church.

One of these black converts who will be of great historical significance is Elijah Abel.

By 1831, accusations of stirring rebellions amongst slaves were leveled against the church’s missionaries. The Church leadership vowed to investigate if missionaries were breaking the laws of the land. Only one man was ever accused specifically. However this man moved back to the east side of the United States and thus an investigation was all but impossible.

In 1835, the practice was put into place that missionaries should not teach slaves unless permission was granted by the slave owner. A year later the church changed practices again and would not preach to slaves at all unless the slave master converted.

In 1836, Joseph Smith published an anti-abolitionist article in the “Messenger and Advocate” publication. In it he gave various objections to the abolitionist movement.

One such statement was that abolitionism would cause “a community of people who might peradventure, overrun our country and violate the most

sacred principles of human society,-chastity and virtue.”

Joseph pointed to Biblical examples of slavery to show how it has been a justifiable practice in the past.

Oliver Cowdery would later build on, and in some ways differ with, what Joseph said. However, his reasoning focused much more heavily on the issue of race. Oliver cited sources such as the divine origins of the Constitution (which legalized slavery at the time) and the curse of Ham (son of Noah believed to be the progenitor of the African people).

Oliver’s beliefs were by no means unique. In fact, these were commonly held beliefs by most people.

It is important to note that both men clearly stated that these were personal views that they held. Despite these discussions there still was no ban on black people having the Priesthood. In fact, this same year Elijah Abel was ordained to the Office of Elder, as well as, the Office of Seventy.

In 1842, Joseph wrote a clearly antislavery article in the publication “March Times and Seasons” in response to letters written between the Mayor of Nauvoo John C Bennet and abolitionist Charles V Dyer congratulating them for their brave and philanthropic hearts. No explanation was given for the change in Joseph’s opinion.

Until his death, Joseph maintained these beliefs, however, he did not believe that all laws and restrictions should be lifted.

Brigham Young believed not only in the curse of Ham theory but also believed that Ham’s wife was a descendent of Cain making their offspring doubly cursed. He stated that blacks would be slaves until God granted their freedom and there was nothing man could do to change the situation of black people.

History would prove this final opinion to be incorrect, however, as the Civil War successfully removed the institution of slavery. There is no evidence that

VOLUME 2, ISSUE 4

STUDENT REVIEW

Brigham acknowledged his mistake but rather focused more on other arguments.

Orson Hyde built on Brigham’s beliefs saying that the spirits placed into black bodies were neutral in the war in heaven and hence they were punished by being placed into black bodies. Brigham rejected this idea stating that everyone picked a side.

Orson Hyde also put forth the idea that blacks were naturally inferior to whites. Once again, these beliefs were commonly held during this period.

For unknown reasons both a priesthood ban and a temple ban were instituted amongst blacks.

John Taylor, Wilford Woodruff, Lorenzo Snow and Joseph F Smith would continue these practices during their presidencies.

Practices were made more specific under Joseph F. Smith’s presidency, as he established the practice of banning any man with any known “blood of Cain” from having the Priesthood.

He did allow black people the opportunity to preform baptisms for the dead for the first time since Joseph Smith. In 1912, the First Presidency publically acknowledged that the idea of the spirits of black people being less valiant in the war in heaven was not given by revelation.

President Smith’s reasoning for the ban was based on the Curse of Cain argument.

Both Heber J Grant and George Albert Smith continued the ban citing the Curse of Cain argument.

Under George Albert Smith, the priesthood ban was implemented dif-

ferently for different parts of the world, removing the stipulation about everyone with known “blood of Cain”. For example, in the United States, blackness was simply determined by how “black” someone looked. If an individual had a black grandparent yet looked white, the ban would not be implemented.

By 1969, under President David O McKay, the church quit supporting segregationist policies and began to heavily push for equal rights.

Under Joseph Fielding Smith and Ezra Taft Benson, these practices were continued.

In 1978, Spencer W Kimball received revelation known as “Official Declaration 2,” which removes the ban completely and allows black men to hold the Priesthood.

This year the church added new headings to the Official Declarations.

Part of the Second Declaration’s headline states that “Church records offer no clear insights into the origins of this practice [Priesthood Ban.] Church leaders believed that a revelation from God was needed to alter this practice and prayerfully sought guidance… The revelation removed all restrictions with regard to race that once applied to the priesthood.”

Despite all of the justifications offered by the various prophets it is now clear that none of them were given by revelation.

Whether the ban was of God or of man, yet permitted by God, will continue to be a mystery. █

PHOTO COURTESY OF LDS CHURCH ARCHIVES

We can put reasons to commandments. When we do, we’re on our own. Some people put reasons to [the ban] and they turned out to be spectacularly wrong.”

DALLIN H OAKS

17

RELIGION

THESTUDENTREVIEW.ORG

@YSTUDENTREVIEW

APRIL 2013

VOLUME 2, ISSUE 4

STUDENT REVIEW

18

19

The Interesting (and Paradoxical) Effects of the Internet on Mormon Consciousness WRITTEN BY COREY LANDON WOZNIAK HISTORY AND IDENTITY

When I was on my Mormon mission, my dad told me that he had never loved my mom and cheated on her before he and my mom divorced. I had never known this, and this newly revealed detail rocked me. Although his infidelity had always been the reality, it didn’t affect me until I felt I had to assimilate it into the narrative I told myself about my life—that I had been born to a loveless marriage. I learned through this incident that personal identity can be stolen and remade by other people when they reveal to us details of our history that we didn’t know before.

I find a parallel between these two episodes and challenges that modern

PHOTO CREDIT: PATRICK CROSKREY

Mormonism is facing due to the advent of the Internet. Before the torrential downpour of information made more accessible by the Internet, the mythological (I mean this word in its technical sense, not in its pejorative sense) origins and history of Mormonism could be well-guarded by the Church.

For example, Linda Newell, coauthor of the controversial biography of Emma Smith called, Mormon Enigma: Emma Hale Smith described to me how she—although she had grown up in the Mormon Church—had never known that Joseph Smith had practiced polygamy until her early adulthood. Because they hadn’t focused on that part of Mormon history in Sunday School, she wasn’t aware that it was a part of her Mormon heritage.

In the age of the Internet, stories like Linda’s are almost inconceivable, as Mormons are exposed to a polyphony of narrative-histories about their own religion without any conscious effort on their part to seek the information out. Certainly, histories of Mormonism by non-Mormons and critics have been in print since the dawn of Mormonism; on the Internet, however, alternative histories (meaning the ones not told in Sunday School) besiege every Mormon, not just those with the initiative to go to the library and square off with the Dewey Decimal System.

When this happens, some Mormons experience an identity crisis, and flee the Mormon community. “[There is] a discrepancy between a church history that has been selectively rendered through the Church Education System and Sunday school manuals, and a less-flattering version universally accessible on the Internet ... The problem is not so much the discovery of particular details that are deal breakers for the faithful; the problem is a loss of faith and trust in an institution that was less than forthcoming to begin with,” said Terryl Givens in a 2012 interview with the Salt Lake Tribune. Givens is a faithful Mormon and professor of literature and religion at the University of Richmond.

Richard Bushman has advised that the best tactic to preserve faith in the Internet age is to inoculate youth by telling them “the whole story from the beginning. If the disruptive facts are worked into history Latter-day Saints learn as they grow up, they won’t be turned upside down when they come across something negative.”

In other words, Latter-day youth who learn about polygamy or peep stones early on will be able to assimilate those details into their faith narrative in much

the same way that they assimilated the similarly jarring details of angelic visitations and the golden plates.

The Mormon Church has responded to the challenges of the internet-age with growing efforts towards transparency. The release of The Joseph Smith Papers, the launch of a new, official Church history website and comments from Church Historian Marlin K. Jensen last year foreshadow that the Church will in coming years be more open about difficult historical issues: “There’s no sense kidding ourselves.

We need to be very upfront with [this generation], tell them what we know, and give answers to what we have, and let them fall on their faith for things that we don’t completely understand.”

INTERNET AND EDUCATION: THE END OF ORGANIZED RELIGION?

It has been argued that the Internet marks the end of organized religion.

“Traditional religion, one built on ‘right belief’ requires a closed information system,” writes Valerie Tarico in an Alternet article called “Does the Internet Spell Doom for Organized Religion?” According to Tarico, the Internet is “the biggest threat organized religion has ever faced,” because, she says, information and education cannot coexist with religious devotion.

But is this true? Studies have shown that Mormons with the highest educations (i.e. high exposure to diverse ideas and access to open information) demonstrate the highest patterns of religious devotion. Those with graduate degrees are the most likely of any Mormons to attend weekly meetings, pay a full tithe, pray, study scripture, and consider their beliefs very important in their lives.

In this sense, information accessed through the Internet had a paradoxical effect on Mormonism: while some Mormons found disconcerting information on the Internet and lost faith, others (surely) used the Internet as an academic resource to pursue higher degrees and grow in devotion.

“ANTI-MORMON” LITERATURE A NECESSARY EVIL

The Internet has performed an essential role in the maintenance of Mormon self-identity and community.

Since the early beginnings of the Mormon Church, Mormons have always felt persecuted. “Persecution for righteousness’ sake” has been a crucial part of how Mormons have told their own history and how they have perceived themselves. “[The Saints’] appeals to government [for protection from Missouri mobs] had an unexpected effect on the Church’s

“Mormons with the highest educations… demonstrate the highest patterns of religious devotion. Those with graduate degrees are the most likely of any Mormons to attend weekly meetings, pay a full tithe, pray, study scripture, and consider their beliefs very important in their lives.” self-image. The need to gather support for their petitions led the Saints to tell their story not as a narrative of revelations, but one of persecutions,” writes Richard Bushman in Rough Stone Rolling. “When Joseph received visitors, he was as likely to describe the mobbings as he was to explain his revelations.”

Brigham Young once taught, “This people must be kept where the finger of scorn can be pointed at them.”

Culturally, Mormons find validation in persecution because they feel it connects them to New Testament saints and their Pioneer forebears. Jesus taught “they shall hate you.” This “us-against-the-world” mentality is essential to Mormon consciousness.

For this reason, “anti-Mormon” literature might actually be a necessary

evil by performing the function that violent physical persecution performed for early Latter-day Saints. Although modern Mormons are not physically abused in a civilized world, they can console themselves in knowing that they are still persecuted in a cyber one.

Could it be argued that anti-Mormon literature drives as many Mormons away as would be driven away if antiMormon literature did not exist? Would some Mormons leave Mormonism if General Conference ceased to be picketed and protested? Would Mormons feel conspicuously un-persecuted and therefore detached from the faith of their martyred forebears?

It matters not if “anti-Mormon” literature constitutes real persecution (or even if the content of the literature is

accurate), only that Mormons feel that they are being persecuted. If that is the case, then “anti-Mormon” literature performs its proper sociological function by connecting modern Mormons to their ancestors.

CONCLUSION

The effects of the Internet on religion are hard to determine. Some have prophesied that the Internet would herald the extinction of organized religion.

While it is true that Mormonism has suffered some casualties at the hands of the Internet, it also seems possible that the Internet has created certain conditions more conducive to faith and the maintenance of faith communities. █

VIEWPOINT

THESTUDENTREVIEW.ORG

@YSTUDENTREVIEW

APRIL 2013

VOLUME 2, ISSUE 4

STUDENT REVIEW

20

21

Let’s Party: America’s Political Legacy WRITTEN BY JAKE SEASTRAND

Near the end of his second term as President, George Washington gave advice to the people of this nation as a ‘parting friend’ in a letter. As the valedictory to his 20 years of service, his words were printed in newspapers and then distributed as a pamphlet, and they included his advice on topics such as education, religion, foreign relations, and national debt. Washington never intended his words to make a great impact on American governance, but he hoped people would remember his words. He specifically warned against anything or anyone that would convince people to secede or separate from the union. He advised that the strength of the union comes from individuals placing their identity as Americans above their identities as members of a city, state or region.

Washington advanced the dangers of sectionalism further by warning against political parties. Washington was non-partisan, as were the first several sessions of Congress. The dawn of the political party was at a crucial time in American history when the French Revolution instigated war between Great Britain and France and young

America was considering taking sides.

This contentious issue was hallmarked by the creation of the DemocraticRepublican Party by Thomas Jefferson that supported France, and the opposing Federalist Party created by Andrew Hamilton that supported Great Britain.

Wearied, President Washington included the following counsel concerning the organized parties in that letter: “...The alternate domination of one party over another and coinciding efforts to exact revenge upon their opponents have led to horrible atrocities, and is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism...[which] gradually incline[s] the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual.” Washington saw political parties as dangerous because of the tendency for such groups to create unfounded jealousy against opposition and distract the government from more important duties.

Fast-forward several years to the Civil War. The United States was ravaged by secession, and hatred was rampant.

Anti-slavery activists formed a political party known today as the Republican

In our day, we do not fight monarchal dictators for a voice. In our day, ignorance can be that existential power.”

ILLUSTRATION BY HILARY ONYON Party. In Lincoln’s day, the Republican Party quickly became the principal opponent to the dominant Southern Democratic Party. The main cause was opposition to the Kansas-Nebraska Act, which repealed the Missouri Compromise that had made Kansas slave-free.

The Republicans, who dominated all the northern states, saw the expansion of slavery as a great evil. The party came into power with the election of President Abraham Lincoln in 1860 and oversaw the saving of the union, the end of slavery, and the provision of equal rights to all.

The Democratic Party, originally known as the Democratic-Republican Party, is considered one of the first in the country. It formed from the Antifederalists who opposed Alexander Hamiliton. Due to widespread unpopularity of the Federalists, the Federalist Party disbanded. The Democratic-Republican Party split after contention over a successor in the 1820s and the party was renamed the Democratic Party. Since the 1930’s, the Democratic Party has promoted social liberalism and a progressive platform. The party has the lengthiest record of continuous

operation in American history and was originally concentrated in the southern states of America. Despite the main voting bloc being concentrated in states where slavery was supported, African Americans began drifting to the Democratic Party, as Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal programs gave economic relief to all minorities. From this point on, the Democratic Party continued to attract minorities in America such as Hispanics, African Americans, LGBT individuals, women, Native Americans, youth, and labor unions. With time, the Democratic Party has outnumbered the others in registered voters nationwide. From that crucial moment during Washington’s time when the first parties were formed to our modern day, there are hundreds of other active, though less popular, parties in the United States.

A 21st century snapshot of today’s political affiliation reveals heavy contention between both sides of the major political parties: two separate ideologies, unable to agree. In our own world here at BYU, the recent BYU Student Association elections give us a picture of what a political contest might have looked like back before political parties

existed; political hopefuls run on a set of proposed initiatives, and the people choose. Party lines today are being drawn across moral values that cannot be contained within one party or the other. If we work together, the law can be served for both sides.

Our political pedigree reveals that the most successful times of American history were when individuals could forget party lines and work together. Lincoln pleaded and worked for equality that healed the nation. Senate Republicans supported the Great Society legislation

by Democratic President Johnson in the early 1960s, allowing for the first time a person who was not elderly or disabled to receive need-based aid from the U.S. government- helping those who couldn’t help themselves. And Democrats worked with Republican President Reagan in the early 1980s with the Economic Recovery Tax Act, which lowered the top and the bottom marginal tax brackets, spurring GDP growth.

The student population at Brigham Young University is a snapshot of a larger picture of the discussion across the country. Each student falls somewhere on the political spectrum from far

right to far left and all the happy folks in between. From a recent anonymous survey I conducted of 20 BYU students, a surprising 60% chose “unaffiliated” as their party selection. Though unscientific, this data surprised me. Perhaps this trend towards independence from any political affiliation is evidence that any party’s dialogue is becoming irrelevant. According to a poll conducted by the New York Times in December 2011, more than 2.5 million American voters shed their party affiliations. Any move to become “independent” should be superseded by that person’s desire to work across party lines for the good of the country instead of a personal apathy for politics altogether. The root of our frustration with the government is not in one party’s popular majority over another, but from a “sequestered” leadership that puts party over the people.

This is what George Washington feared in his final address.

One example of the hemorrhaging of political parties is the current identity crisis facing the Republican Party.

The majority of Americans (53%) along with 28% of Republicans, believe that Republicans are out of touch and out-

…the strength of the union comes from individuals placing their identity as Americans above their identities as members of a city, state or region.” dated in their view for America’s future.

A recent speech given by Republican Jon Huntsman was featured in the American Conservative, a right of center online paper. In the article, Mr. Huntsman mentions many issues facing the conservative cause, including marriage equality. Huntsman declares that marriage equality is a conservative cause, and if conservatism is to be relevant in American discussion, it needs more than just a cosmetic makeover. He said, “The party of Theodore Roosevelt and Ronald Reagan has now lost the popular vote in five of the last six presidential elections.

The marketplace of ideas will render us irrelevant, and soon, if we are not honest about our time and place in history.”

Unless Republicans can agree to be a part of the discussion for equality, they

VIEWPOINT

22

THESTUDENTREVIEW.ORG

@YSTUDENTREVIEW

APRIL 2013

VOLUME 2, ISSUE 4

STUDENT STUDEN REVIEW

23

CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS PAGE

can certainly anticipate being left out of the discussion. Democrats have just as much to lose. In the same study done by the New York Times, there has been a 9.5 percent decrease in the number of registered Democrats since 2008 in Iowa, 6.6 percent in Pennsylvania, 5.8 percent in Arizona, 5.7 percent in Nevada, 3.8 percent in North Carolina and 3.7 percent in Florida. This surge of registered independents reflects that voters are unsatisfied with party rhetoric.

Geoffrey Cohen, a professor of psychology at Yale University, did a multi-stage experiment of the dominating impact of group influence on political beliefs. His team randomly selected groups of conservative and liberal college students to participate.

Each of the subjects was presented with one of two versions of a welfare policy.

One version provided generous benefits, whereas the other version provided stringent benefits. The manipulation of policy content was crossed with a manipulation of reference group information. Half the participants were told that Democrats supported the policy; the remaining participants were told that Republicans supported it. For both liberal and conservative participants, the effect of reference group information overrode that of policy content.

If their party endorsed it, liberals supported even a harsh welfare program, and conservatives supported even a lavish one. The results are consistent with the contention that people base their attitudes on social meaning.

The Founding Fathers feared existential powers that dictated our choices.

They feared them so much they fought and many died for the power to govern themselves. In our day, we do not fight monarchal dictators for a voice. In our day, ignorance can be that existential power.

Ask yourself the following questions about your own party affiliation: Are you voting a particular party because your parents did, out of tradition?

When you go to the polls, do you vote the person and not the party? Have you studied all angles of the issue? What makes this nation great is that everyone is invited to the table. I submit that we forfeit our freedom and do our country a disservice when we come to the table uneducated in the issues presented and expect to see real progress. Knowledge fosters understanding, allowing us to see things from other perspectives. In this way we can truly put the people before the party. █

As long as feminism is considered “the f-word” among Mormons, it is unlikely that we will ever feel comfortable talking about the Equal Rights Amendment.”

Why the Ensign n Edi Editors were Wrong about the e ERA WRITTEN BY HANNAH WHEELWRIGHT

The ERA has no bearing on the separation of powers as outlined in the Constitution.”

As long as feminism is considered “the f-word” among Mormons, it is unlikely that we will ever feel comfortable talking about the Equal Rights Amendment.

But to objectively analyze legislation relating to gender, we need to move past this overly simplistic attitude towards an ideology that merely advocates for women’s political, social, and economic equality.

The Equal Rights Amendment, or ERA, was passed by Congress on March 22, 1977, but was not ratified by enough states before the deadline and did not become part of the Constitution. The entire text of the Amendment states: “Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.

The Congress shall have the power to

enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article. This Amendment shall take effect two years after the date of ratification.”

The LDS Church took an unusual public stance and called the ERA “a moral issue.” In an article in the March 1980 Ensign, church magazine personnel laid out an argument against the ERA by quoting politicians, Church leadeers, and other experts from different yfields. Local leaders encouraged women to participate in anti-ERA parades, and church buildings became hubs for organizing efforts against the amendment. t In this article, I will very briefly look at some of the statements made in the Enrsign and demonstrate that the authors cof this article were wrong, and that Mormons should not reflexively oppose rthe ERA, but should instead study this hissue and support efforts to ratify it. h The Ensign article claims that “It thas been felt that only a constitutional eamendment could provide the massive impact needed to change laws that dislcriminate on the basis of sex.” But this dsentiment is highly misleading in suggesting that the only reason activists would want the ERA ratified as a consti-

tutional al amendment wou would be to cause a “massive ive impact;” the real reason it is needed in constitutional n the form of a cons amendmentt is because it is the only way to address inequalities equalities in state laws, as well as to provide de a legal basis for sex to become a protected tected classification worthy of strict scrutiny, iny, just as race is guaranteed in our legal system. stem.

The article also claims that sex discrimination is already prohibited in the 14th Amendment. Section 1 of the 14th Amendment states: “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

But if we were to base our concept of protections under the law entirely on the 14th Amendment, there would have been no need for the Civil Rights Act or any legislation that has been enacted to protect various groups. Clearly the legal consensus is that the 14th Amendment is insufficient in guaranteeing all persons their rights under the law, and women are no exception to that rule.

The Ensign also states that “The ERA does not automatically guarantee equal rights. Existing discriminatory laws would still have to be repealed d or amended—the same process off change now being followed. In addition, the ERA would not affect many inequities that result from attitudes and customs.

It would prohibit only governmental discrimination.” But is the fact that discriminatory laws would still need to be repealed led a reason not tto pass the ERA? It was written and fought for to prohibit and destroy vestiges of governmental discrimination by forcing the revision of and preventing the passing of unequal laws. The ERA was never intended to specifically eradicate cultural inequalities, as nice as that would be.

Finally, the authors come out and call the ERA a moral issue. They declare that it could make it easier to get abortions, which is untrue, because childbearing is solely a woman’s issue and there can thus be no discrimination based on sex that would possibly affect abortion.

They also state that it would force homosexual marriages to become legal.

Again, this is irrelevant because the ERA only protects against inequities between

individuals ndividuals of differen different sexes, not those of the authors raise the he same sex. The a concern would be drafted rn that women wo and forced combat, which ced to serve in c would be possible without the ERA because the Constitution nev never prohibits it. Today, the women serving in e issue of wome combat is irrelevant relevant because of the new Department of Defense policy allowing it.

Other concerns that the ERA cerns were tha could remove the legal requi requirement for husbands to provide for the their families or add a tax on stay-at-hom stay-at-home moms to account for their daily labo labor, which is absurd because already merely use the law alre requires the e spouse with the greater income to be e responsible for providing for the children, tax is alren, and any potential pote ready in the purview of Co Congress to levy.

The authors uthors were also concerned that the language of the am amendment would blur lur gender roles- as if the ERA could people to abandon their somehow force peo gender roles- and that its vague wording might be dangerous because it could have u unintended consequences. wording is a bad thing, perhaps If vague w should rewrite our entire vaguely we sho worded Constitution. wo Lastly, the article authors feared that the ERA would “further erode the constitutional division of powers.” Section 2 of the ERA is a customary enforcement clause that does not transfer any authority from the states to the federal government. The ERA has no bearing on the separation of powers as outlined in the Constitution.

Hopefully, as the ERA continues to be introduced in Congress, Mormons everywhere will recognize the reason we should pass it: to ensure equal protection for women under the law. Not to force people to have abortions, use unisex bathrooms, or thrust pregnant women into combat. We should support the ERA simply because we, as Mormons, ought to support legislation that ensures women equal protection under the Constitution. █

JOIN THE STUDENT REVIEW

Build your resumé! If you can WRITE, EDIT, DO BUSINESS, PR, WEB DESIGN, OR PHOTOGRAPHY then join our staff! For more information email thestudentreview2@gmail.com

STAFF