Link to some funny comments on the President of BYU Idaho's facebook page today.

Have fun laughing at this guy and all the people that make negative comments on his post.

https://www.facebook.com/pages/President-of-BYU-Idaho/263195743806502

One of the comments posted this photoshop of Supreme Leader of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (BYU-I President), commonly referred to as North Korea, endorsement of BYU-I

http://i.imgur.com/pVRscrV.jpg



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 09/19/2014 08:03PM by upsidedown.

Funny :)

Pretty sure that's North Korea, though -- not China :)

Ugh....fixed it. Wrong nation but who's keeping track...

Someone has an ankle fetish.

Wow, I am surprised there arent more comments from all the devoted TBMs defending this guy... or maybe even they realize how crazy it is?

Oh wait one lady said:

"This is more about supporting priesthood leaders and obedience. Or was he not called by revelation to serve in that position?"

LOLOLOL... I am gonna go out on a limb and guess he wasn't.

Haha....The sad look into the schizophrenic mind of a TBM.

"This is more about supporting priesthood leaders and obedience. Or was he not called by revelation to serve in that position?"

It's all about obedience...or maybe I am being obedient to an idiot...Help!!!

What a joke! I had to read it twice to believe it! Come on now! I am so glad I never went to a church school.

When Jesus meets with the FP and Qof12 does he wear his long hair, robes, and beard? Or does he come in missionary/BYU dress code appearance? LOL

I'm surprised the negative comments haven't been deleted.

I saw that there were 47 shares...but when I read the comments of those sharing, those too, were negative. A couple of sharers expressed gratitude that they opted out of going to a Church school.

Seems he's mixed himself up a nice little PR sh!tstorm.

Wow, Kim Clark has really fallen from his prior job. He was once the Dean of the most prestigious business school in the world (Harvard Business School), and now he's checking out pant legs that are 7 to 8 inches above the ankle. I'm sure is former colleagues are embarrassed for him, and probably also for themselves for having been associated with him professionally.

I agree, How can somebody be like this? It's about him being brainwashed so much!

IMO this is Clark's attempt to show the Dear Leaders why he should follow Bednar's path from BYU-I directly into the Q12 when the next vacant spot opens up.

The positioning and tryouts have begun. Clark vs. Clayton, and let the biggest douche win.

Anon Friend Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> He was once the Dean of the most prestigious business school in the world (Harvard Business School)

It used to be. However even back in the 80s my friends were selecting Stanford over Harvard for an M.B.A. program. I'm sure that Clark's tenure at Harvard did not improve the situation. But perhaps things have changed since then.

My fav. comments;

"This thread is one of the funniest I've read in a long time. Thanks Prez for making me laugh. Now I'm going to go look at some naughty pictures of girls in capris."
5 hours ago

Haha...."Kim Jong Clark"...LOL, I hate to be this dictator right now!!!

" I'm a Mormon and this DRIVES ME CRAZY to read!! That's why all my kids go to the U of U."

"Hyper-religiosity is a sign of mental illness."

Ron Burr??? "I took up space there in '66-'67....being exposed to LDS 24/7 led me out of the church..." Somehow, his name sounds very familiar to me!LOL

But this one makes me want to throw-up...talking about
Truly-Brain-Washed....

Ilana Smith..."The reason for this rule is God's way of testing you. (Believe it or not this is a LDS school so God is in charge of the rules here just like he would the Church) He needs obedient disciples to help fight the war that is currently going on. If his soldiers can't follow a rule as simple as wearing pants to school, what are they going to do when something hard comes their way? Yes, it can be a little silly but YOU are the one who signed the honor code. YOU are the one who said "I will follow the rules no matter how silly they are." If that's not what you wanted then why the heck did you even choose to come to BYU-I? There are plenty of other schools out there with less strict dress codes.

I came to BYU-I because God told me this was where I needed to be and if that means wearing pants in the heat then bring it! Then I can go to bed knowing I've made my Father in Heaven proud of me."BARF..PUKE...BARFFF!!!

Some people need religion.

Ilana obviously needs it. Without it she might be something much worse.

instead she got CULT, as most of us know it!!!

Oh wait, a person by the name of Ryan Swallow posted http://cesletter.com/....haha, ohhhhh this getting to be very
interesting!!!

Well, I hope so anyways....I could be wrong!

Meanwhile in real-world, companies are dropping their "no visible tattoos" policies like hot potatoes

From a comment:

"The worst sinners, according to Jesus, are not the harlots and publicans, but the religious leaders with their insistence on proper dress and grooming, their careful observance of all the rules, their precious concern for status symbols, their strict legality, their pious patriotism...the haircut becomes the test of virtue in a world where Satan deceives and rules by appearances." -Hugh Nibley
___________


How was Hugh not exed for this?

I think these guys have redefined obedience. It no longer means following sensible rules for the benefit of others. It now means following senseless rules to show your faith in the person who made them up.

White Cliffs Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It now means following senseless rules to show your
> faith in the person who made them up.

I agree...there is a tightening of the screws going on...timed at a one-ninth turn by one-ninth turn...but overall, taking place quite swiftly (by the standards of a normal lifetime).

In a post today, someone in disagreement with the BYU-I president's Facebook post talked about bonnets, and how (in effect) obligatory bonnets may be next.

Ankles have not been considered publicly risqué in American culture since the late 1800s...yet suddenly, here we are, 125 years later...living at a time when "naked ankles" are actually something to be guarded against by at least some of our citizens (decades after human beings left their footprints on the Moon).

Judging by the long historical record of female oppression: hair, elbows and wrists, and lips are next on the list (and in approximately that order).

Far from being the religion of the future, Mormonism is fast---and VERY publicly!!!---reverting to the religious standards of centuries past (or centuries present, in the many of the most repressive parts of the planet).

Possible simultaneous next move: no mixed-gender seating in classrooms...and then, somewhere down the time line, the introduction of separate classes for each gender in the same subjects (two identical Chem 101 classes: one for male students only, one for female students only).

If naked ankles are now an actual issue at BYU-I, these further scenarios will soon not seem fantastical at all.

...and then, somewhere down the time line, the next logical move is the introduction of higher education for male students only...

So, wait...

Dresses only have to go down to the knees (or slightly below), leaving (gasp!) bare ankles showing.
But pants can't leave bare ankles showing?

WTF??

Sigh.

I love a nicely shaped ankle...:)

These standards have nothing to do with the church. Youth in our ward can come to seminary in shorts and with facial hair. They can wear shorts to mutual and come with a beard if they want.

The idea is to welcome everyone.

Even if someone came to Sacrament Meeting in shorts and with a full beard they are welcome.

How is BYUI more righteous than the church that supports it? How is what you wear and what you look like a sign of your righteousness?

I'm surprised that none of the critical comments have been deleted - especially since a new post was added this morning. If Mr. Kim Clark is the only administrator on the account, then it appears that he doesn't trouble himself to ever actually read the comments. I'm sure he or any other account administrators just assumed all the comments would be supportive and brown-nosing in nature. There are currently 345 "likes" of his original post and 243 comments - the majority of which are critical of his statement and some even include links to the CES letter and other "anti" sites.

TSCC is worried about the length of pants on their female students but isn't paying any attention to a public FaceBook account of a prominent, salaried employee. They just don't get how the internet works and how quickly unflattering items can be shared to communities beyond their cloistered little world. I never thought I'd live to see the day when the mormon PR machine would be so obviously behind the times and floundering.

I just checked back a few minutes later and it has dropped to 239 comments - the most recent comments containing links to CES letter and similar sites have been deleted and there are several new "rah, rah" comments so I don't know how many in total were deleted in the past 10 minutes.

Edited to add: Five more minutes have elapsed and the comments total has dropped down to 231. So far, the page administrator is going after the low-hanging fruit of obvious "negative" links but there are still a lot of negative typed-out comments still there. I wonder how long until they all disappear?



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 09/20/2014 07:33PM by Plaid n Paisley.

I posted on his page that I wasted a year at Ricks....looks like it got the boot too.

Ron Burr



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/20/2014 11:25PM by Lethbridge Reprobate.

Pants that are seven or eight inches above the ankle?!
Wouldn't those be Capri pants, or perhaps something like
the "clamdiggers" gals wore back in the day? Seriously,
this is what Doris Day and Vivian Vance had on in 1961! :-))

This doesn't make much sense. I have seen wives of GAs wear
the very same type of pants and I don't think anybody thought that they were lacking in modesty...

Exactly! Audrey Hepburn even wore them in the 1950s. Garment-clad Morridor women wear them all the time in warm weather. They cover the g's, are not form-fitting -- what's the problem here?

Maybe Clark is paying way too much attention to the shapely ankles and calves of the female student bodies. That could be the real problem here.

Kim, you are not strict enough. Please consult with the Taliban for further light and knowledge on the proper wrangling of females.

The Internet has really taken a lot of power from church leaders.

Before the Internet they could say things like this and nobody would dare question them, but now behind the safety of a keyboard people are actively voicing their disagreement.