The principle in question is supposedly that BYU's students pledge not to engage in pre-marital sex (or alcohol or coffee). Brandon Davies allegedly violated this principle when he confessed to having sex with another student.
What CNN won't tell you is Brandon Davies is black, and this other student is white. Maybe this had nothing to do with the decision, but I have my doubts considering that 58% of BYU students admit to engaging in pre-marital sex. Why haven't the BYU inquisitors taken action against these students' transgressions?
Perhaps they're just trying to set an example, but to target a black student in a predominantly white state/school for such a commonplace violation should definitely raise questions. And not the obsequious ones the media has chosen to ask.
What they should be asking is whether this incident is an example of the kind of pre-civil rights era racism, according to the principles of which Obama's very birth was illegal in most states. (He was born in 1961 of interracial parents).
But that question is way too easy to answer, and the answer way too uncomfortable. The Mormon Church of Ladder Day Saints to this day discourages interracial marriage in its current priesthood manual:
“We recommend that people marry those who are of the same racial background generally, and of somewhat the same economic and social and educational background (some of those are not an absolute necessity, but preferred), and above all, the same religious background, without question” (“Marriage and Divorce,” in 1976 Devotional Speeches of the Year [Provo: Brigham Young University Press, 1977], p. 144).BYU is definitely standing on principle here, but the principle they're standing on might be the same one that led black men to be lynched for so much as looking at white women 50 years ago.
Why is it that abstinence education and racism always dove-tail so nicely?
