Raetus

He did. He also taught me in John 8:7 Nothing that was said overwhelmed me. The statement merely invoked empathy and pity.

As his eldest grandson, I loved my grandfather very much before he succumbed to cancer and he was one of the most important people in my life. His passing is still the only death I have experienced in my adult life that genuinely brought me to tears. Did I disagree with him often? Yes. Do I think he had antiquated views against women and homosexuals? Yes. Do I think he was a bad man? Not at all.

Just my opinion as someone who has first hand experience as a victim of both organizations.

I genuinely believe the KKK hurts less people, per year in 2016, then the LDS.

I genuinely don't even know where to begin with this. As the grandson of a Baptist pastor, I feel for you. Best of luck to you, dude.

I sincerely think that was a good decision if it conflicted with your belief system.

I'll bite. I'm not campaigning against BYU's right to exist. Much like the KKK, I think they have the right to exist. I'm saying that I don't think any organization that has those beliefs is someone that USF should actively seek to entangle themselves with. The KKK is an absurdly weak organization in comparison to LDS that wields almost zero power outside of cleaning highways and rural trailer parks. So, if the KKK had a football team, would you be fine with USF joining a conference along with them? They're basically just white nationalists and anti-semites in most incarnations. They rarely lynch or crucify minorities anymore outside of cornfields in Indiana (my home state). Serious question: Are you okay with being in a conference with the Fighting Ghosts?

LDS says that children of same-sex marriages (regardless of the child's own sexuality) aren't eligible to practice in their faith until they're 18. LDS launched an impressive door-to-door campaign against Prop 8 in California. LDS stated those in same-sex relationships are apostates from the church. It goes on and on. They're not recognized as 1st-class citizens or people.

I mostly agree with this, but the Big 12 network is operated by ESPN, which is owned by Disney. And Disney might be one of the most LGBT-friendly companies of its size in the United States.

Why am I responsible for revising this, again? I came up with this, though, while trying to assembly a piece of Ikea furniture: "Gay people are humans and should have the same right as all other humans." As for their stance on homosexuals, it's very vocal. You can read about it on suspect newsrags like "The Washington Post" or "The New York Times".

If you're talking about my personal distaste, I apologize, I didn't realize my opinions on all things USF were important. If you're willing to put together a questionnaire, I'm more than willing to answer it. If BYU is standing by their current opinions on the matter, then I'm not interested in playing them. Other than some great success in the 80s and 90s, BYU isn't terribly interesting to me. Good football team year-in-and-year out, but people desire them for their international fan base. They're like Notre Dame jr when it comes to fans. They will 100% add value to your television package if you add them.

If BYU accepts an invitation and intends to stand by their stances on homosexuals, then yes, I would want USF to decline that invitation. An acceptance says that the school is putting sports profits before many more important aspects of the university's mission. If BYU has an acceptable revision to their stance, then I have no problem with them. America and the world in general have marginalized groups time and time again... if I held some type of weird vendetta against everyone who once believed something bigoted, then I would have to hate my 72 year old father-in-law, which I don't (in fact, I love him quite a lot). With how fickle a conference affiliation has proved to USF over the past two decades, it would be extremely short-sighted to turn a blind-eye to what that says about our university in favor of short-term profits. It really comes down to whether or not sports/profits or the moral-fiber of your university is more important. Even with the new additions, are we saying the Big 12 will for sure be around in 10 years? What happens if Texas leaves? Oklahoma? Who knows what the landscape will look like. tldr: I'd be all for the Big 12 invite, but not at the cost of potentially harming the university as a public, inclusive, academic institute.

Tbh, I think it's completely relevant. BYU is owned and operated by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. If they are to be a member of the Big 12 and intend to stand by practices that marginalize groups, then that's not an organization I want USF (a public entity) to be involved with. The Big 12 already has TCU and Baylor who are faith-based schools, but to my knowledge, neither is directly operated by a church. While Baptist and Disciples of Christ faiths have each had their mishaps over the years, there aren't overarching institutions for either that own and operate either of these universities, so their beliefs (to me) are whatever principles the respective university says it stands behind and that's cool with me. That's completely different for BYU. LDS = BYU It's no different than SMU or Tulsa (both faith-affiliated universities instead of faith-owned-and-operated). Both universities are influenced by their faith and I think there is nothing wrong with that, but they aren't organizations actively advocating against certain groups. When I was at USF (2003 or 2004, I believe?), a group of LDS members dropped by my apartment. I had nothing better to do and they seemed like nice fellows, so I invited them in and said I had no problem listening to them. I asked them about their faith and they walked me through the Book of Mormon. That included discussions about how my skin color was likely either a product of being a descendant of Cain or a descendant of the Lamanites, which each were cursed by God/Jesus for their sins. They said this with a very matter-of-fact approach and in the nicest way possible. I believe, recently in the past couple of years, the Church has FINALLY dropped this approach from official doctrine, but that's a weird and unacceptable thing to be preaching to a brown-skinned person in 2003. If they're continuing the same with homosexuals, then I want no part of being affiliated with LDS. I would be offended to have my university in league with a BYU that hasn't disavowed that aspect of their belief.

It is indeed. Thank you.

If a primary tenant of your sexuality involves discrimination against a religion, then, no, it is not okay. If a primary tenant of your religion involves discrimination against the race, gender or sexual activities between consenting adults, then, no it is not okay. The difference is that this particular religion isn't being discriminated against for existing, it's being discriminated against for its discrimination. If discriminatory tenants were removed, then it wouldn't be a target of discrimination for this matter. Homosexuals don't inherently have a problem with Mormons... just the beliefs they hold against them. If you can't remove hate-based belief systems from your organization and still stand as an organization, then you're a hate group -- plain and simple. The Mormon church held that Blacks could not be ordained within the church until 1978, but, after facing civil rights backlashes, the Divine gave them the A-Okay that Black people were, indeed, people. And the Church stands just as strong as it ever was. In fact, it might be stronger. The Church has shown that it can remove hateful and discriminatory caveats without affecting faith and there's no reason this needs to be any different. If you hate gay people and don't want them to be happy, it's certainly your right to be a bigot, but you don't get to hide behind your faith and cry victim in the process.

**** the Mormon Church. **** BYU.

It's unfortunate but true.

I'm a staunch believer that an American university degree has inflated to a price where it greatly exceeds its worth. How much is a credit hour nowadays? Drop the price of attendance, lower the administrative salaries and there will be plenty of TV, sales and licensing money to pay for student athletes tuition. It's not a USF problem on this one; it's widespread. In no way is that charity to me. The current price of a public university is insane. I'll stick to buying computers for underprivileged or marginalized kids who want to learn programming and music instruments for those interesting in the arts. That's just me, though. It's great that someone is contributing to their tuition, but in my mind, there's no reason that anyone should have to in the first place.

Agreed. I don't think I've mentioned or even know the winning combination when it comes to fundraising, which is probably why I don't work in collegiate fundraising. But what I'd like to see is some out-of-the-box thinking in this regard instead of copying and pasting ideas from other universities with different histories and demographics and wondering why it didn't work.

I'm more than happy to donate to USF charitable causes and have done so in the past. Things such as cancer research and music education for youth are both USF ventures that I actively support and donate to. In my opinion, there's nothing charitable about USF Football or NCAA football in general.

I completely disagree. I merely said that USF has to offer me value to earn a substantial donation and so far, I'm not seeing it. Don't get me wrong, I fully meant to imply that USF has not done enough to cater my donation, but I never implied that an OCS is the only thing that would pique that interest. Statements like these fully support that: Also, it doesn't have to be strictly for a stadium, either; if they put forth something that I want, I'll be all about it. I'd pay $2500 for a parking pass that let me park in whatever zone I want up-to 5 times a year and was good for 15 years -- that'd be worth it to me. That's what it will take to get significant money out of me -- something that I actually want. Personally, I don't even care if we have an OCS stadium or not. If they want to build it, then it's something I would support and would find value in. If they don't, I'll continue to spend money on season tickets in other states and countries. What I won't be doing is writing a check for $10,000 to USF Football and say "Spend it well, boys and girls... I trust you." It's just not something I'm interested in. I'm never going to be a mega donor, so maybe the effort would be better spent catering to others, but I think a large degree of the disparity you see in the level of support between USF and the targeted universities comes from a severe lack of effort in the fundraising sector. Maybe it's because I've handled fundraising efforts for large entities before, but the current way of garnering donations is extremely limiting. When was the last time you saw USF reach out to the alumni base to find business owners or decision makers willing to render services for free or discounted to raise funds for USF Athletics? I've never had anyone reach out to me for something like this. You know who does do this? Girl Scouts of America. Make A Wish Foundation. Joshua House. Ronald McDonald House. Call Publix and ask them if $1 from every sub sold on game day can be donated to USF Athletics. How about asking people at the register if they'd like to donate a dollar to support USF Athletics? Garner support from the local community and businesses. Small things like that are things that corporations jump on in a second. I'm a small business owner and I'd have no problem rendering services for free to support USF Athletics -- the fact that the effort isn't being put in on the other side, though, tells me that it's wasted effort. My point is that USF's fundraising and branding problem isn't because of poor product on the field -- it's from a lack of leadership in that department. Sure, if the product gets better, the ticket sales will go back up, but we weren't flush with money even during the best years. With Big East money, #2 Ranking, and sold-out stadiums, we still weren't at the level of support that is desired. But, there's some new blood in the back offices and we'll see where it goes. As I currently have no children, discretionary income is more flush than I imagine it would be if I had kids. This is probably the time of my life where a university like USF should be targeting me the most as I'm sure I will inevitably plan to spend my money differently during a child's formative years, which would mean certain donations and ticket purchases would be lessened. Right now, donations to a university that I didn't go to and don't actively follow are beating out USF for my support, which is what I find to be sad.

Where in my post did I say the only thing I would donate toward was an OCS? Also, yes I read the strategic plan. [Edit] Also, why are only female graduates donating $100? [/Edit]

I have to agree on this point. From a business standpoint, I think it's absolutely insane that the former Big East teams didn't pursue litigation. Depending on the state, the statute of limitations on those claims has to be tolled or nearing tolled.

One of them is writer for BCSNN... a website that once approached ME to write for them... that's WAY worse than obscure when it comes to credibility.

Fair point, for sure. I'd want access to buy 2 seats for that price.