Christopher Peterman, founder of Do Right BJU, expelled 9 days before his BJU graduation.
Forum category
My name is Christopher Peterman and I was asked to share my story on SI. Since my expulsion on April 24, 2012 my story has been all of the world so this is basically just a rehash of everything you have probably already read.
One of my goals in sharing my stories is that I hope it can help BJU see the problems there and the overwhelming need for the grace of God to permeate that place. There is no grace at BJU. There is no love.
Probably my favorite song is Only Grace by Matthew West. I would love for the meaning of these words to effect the very core of BJU.
Matthew West’s Only Grace
There is no guilt here
There is no shame
No pointing fingers
There is no blame
What happened yesterday has disappeared
The dirt has washed away
And now its clear
There’s only grace. There’s only love
There’s only mercy and believe me its enough
Your sins are gone
Without a trace
And there’s nothing left now
There’s only grace
Your starting over now
Under the sun
Your stepping forward now
A new life has begun
Your new life has begun
And there’s only grace
There’s only love
There’s only mercy and believe me its enough
Your sins are gone
Without a trace
and there’s nothing left now
There’s only grace
And if you should fall again
Get back up, get back up
Reach out and take my hand
And get back up, get back up
Get back up again
Ooh get back up again
There’s only grace
There’s only love
There’s only mercy and believe me its enough, its enough
Your sins are gone without a trace
and there’s nothing left now
There’s only…there’s only grace
There’s only mercy and believe me its enough, its enough
Your sins are gone without a trace
And there’s nothing left now
There’s only grace….
So get back up, get back up again
Get back up, get back up, get back up again
––––––––––––––––––––––––—
My story
I grew up in Bradenton, Florida where I attended Community Baptist Church and Community Christian School my entire life. CBC is an independent, fundamental, Baptist church within the Bob Jones University network. So from a very young age I knew that I was going to attend BJU in Greenville, South Carolina. That was what was expected of me and that was my dream.
I graduated from high school in 2006 and was immediately accepted to BJU. I attended BJU from 2006 to 2009 and then, I stayed out of school working full time from 2009 through the first semester of 2010 to save enough money to return to school.
During the time I sat out of school I began to interact with people outside of the independent fundamental Baptist church. I realized that there were good Christian people outside of the IFB and I realized that being a Christian wasn’t about following the law; it was about loving others and loving God.
I returned the second semester of 2010 to Bob Jones University with a radically changed view of Christ and the power of grace and love in a Christian’s life. I now realized that because God loves, I am suppose to love everyone. This was a radical shift from my fundamentalist upbringing and from the views of Bob Jones University. But I still returned to BJU expecting to finish my degree in a year and a half and to then be done with BJU.
Little did I know my plans would soon be changed forever.
Before I went back to BJU for second semester 2010 my friend, Beth Murschell, called me and begged me not to go back to school. Even though my personal views had already radically shifted I still supported BJU and I told Beth that I wasn’t going to transfer anywhere else. She told me that there was so much that I didn’t know that she was just finding out and she pleaded with me to transfer.
I refused. I packed my bags, loaded the car, and headed up to BJU, but I continued to remember Beth’s warnings in the back of my head.
My first semester back at BJU was normal. I went to classes, made new friends, and I got no demerits the entire semester. No problems whatsoever … until I read about Tina Anderson.
The beginning of the end began the first semester of 2011. I came across some articles online about a scandal that was happening in Concord, New Hampshire at Trinity Baptist Church. I began to research what was happening and I soon discovered that there were significant issues with the former pastor.
Reverend Chuck Phelps was the pastor at Trinity Baptist Church when Ernest Willis, a 35-year-old man and member of the church, raped Tina Anderson, a 15-year-old member of the same church. This story attracted so much national media attention that http://abcnews.go.com/2020/video/scarred-childhood-13334532: ABC’s 20/20 did an investigation on the abuse .
From my research I learned that Chuck Phelps was still on the Board of Trustees at Bob Jones University. It really troubled me that this man was being allowed to continue as a board member in good standing. I felt I had to speak out.
At first I posted links, articles, and even the 20/20 investigation link on my personal Facebook page, but I quickly was reported to the Dean of Men’s office. I was called into his office and the Dean of Men told me point blank that I had to stop talking about the Chuck Phelps situation on my personal Facebook or I would be expelled.
I left his office and immediately created a www.facebook.com/DoRightBJU: Facebook page called Do Right BJU where I wrote anonymously about the Chuck Phelps situation and organized a peaceful student protest. I called on students, faculty, staff and alumni to wear red in support of abuse victims. I also called on BJU to remove Chuck Phelps from the Board of Trustees and to begin educating the BJU students on abuse and signs of abuse.
The protest was held on December 12, 2011 — a handful of BJU students along with a group of alumni wore red that day. In solidarity, many people changed their profile photos to red, creating a virtual sea of red on Facebook.
BJU announced that there would be no consequences for those students organizing or involved with the protest. Chuck Phelps resigned and a committee was formed to investigate allegations of sexual abuse within BJU.
Everything was good, or so I thought. Our goals had been accomplished and the semester came to an end.
I came back for my final semester and that is when the problems began.
I was immediately required to have weekly meetings with the Dean of Men where it was implied that because I had questioned BJU’s authority and had gone against their wishes, I must have a deep spiritual problem that needed to be addressed and fixed. He required that I read an entire book of the Bible every day and write out my thoughts and devotions so I could talk to him about it.
As the semester progressed, the meetings changed from a spiritual focus to a focus on my social media activities. Also the frequency of the meetings increased, to the point where I was having midnight meetings.
Stacks of my Facebook and Twitter posts were printed out, highlighted, starred, and circled. I felt that I was being constantly watched, intimidated and harassed.
Surprisingly, only a year earlier, BJU had promised that they would not police students’ social media accounts when they unblocked them on the school networks, allowing us to use Facebook and some other social media sites on campus for the first time. Obviously, that had changed.
Around the final week of March I was called into the Dean of Men’s office for a tweet I had sent. This tweet was sent right before a required Bible Conference service, which is like a chapel service. According to BJU, students are allowed to use their phones up until the time the service actually begins. But I was given 25 demerits for “chapel misconduct” and that put me up to 55 demerits.
On April 12th I was called into the Dean of Men’s office again for allegations that I had been watching TV off campus. I was informed that I was receiving 50 demerits for watching the TV show Glee, but that I had the option to appeal these demerits in a Special Committee of the Discipline Committee. I pled my case that according to the Student Handbook of BJU it is not against the rules to watch TV off campus. There are no written rules about watching any shows while off campus.
The Special Committee heard my plea and then they deliberated on their verdict. They agreed with my assertion that it is not in the rule book that a BJU student can’t watch TV. But they still ruled against me, upholding the 50 demerits, because they said that the nature of Glee itself was so “morally reprehensible.” Specially, they disliked the cheerleader’s outfits, the music, the dancing and the homosexuality. I received 50 demerits for the content alone, even though there was no rule in the handbook about acceptable content.
That ruling put me at 105 demerits, much closer to the 150 limit than I had ever been. Two days later, on April 16th, I received 15 demerits for not shaving, putting me at 120. Now I was worried.
On April 24th I was called into the Dean of Men’s office at 11:00am for what became my final meeting. I was informed that I was receiving 50 demerits for posting lyrics to a Christian song, Matthew West’s “Only Grace,” on my Facebook. I was also informed that I was receiving 25 demerits for posting on Facebook during class.
These new demerits placed me at 195, well over the 150 limit. I was informed that I was expelled from Bob Jones University. I asked to appeal the ruling to the Special Committee and was told that the appeal would take place at 4:00 pm the same day.
Obviously, I was concerned. I had just been denied at my last appeal and the same people were going to be deciding whether or not I was able to remain in school.
I went back to my room and began preparing my defense. I researched information on TRACS, the national accrediting agency that BJU uses, and decided to contact them. I then called the Department of Education to see what my options were with them. I also called Congressman Buchanan (Florida), Senator Rubio (Florida), and Senator DeMint (South Carolina) to see if they could assist me in my predicament. Finally, I contacted the local news agencies that had covered the Do Right BJU story back in December. I informed them that BJU was planning to expel me and that I needed help. I was desperate.
The time for the Special Meeting quickly approached and I went into the meeting with almost full certainty that I was not going to come out of it a BJU student.
I pled my case to the Special Committee. I read the Student Handbook and showed that there were no rules about posting lyrics to songs on a student’s personal Facebook. I also informed them that because I stood to lose everything I had worked for I had contacted many agencies for help.
I left the room and waited for their decision. Once they deliberated and had come to a decision, I was brought back into the meeting and the Committee ruled that I would receive the demerits for posting a Facebook status in class and I would not receive the 50 demerits for the lyrics — bringing me up to 145 total demerits, five demerits shy of expulsion. I was shocked, overwhelmed and overjoyed. I even almost started to cry because I was so amazed. My prayers had been answered.
At this point all of the people on the Committee left the room except for the Dean of Men, the Dean of Students and myself. I assumed that they wanted to pray with me or that they wanted to clarify an issue. To my shock I was informed that I had tried to “intimidate” BJU by contacting outside agencies and that I was being expelled immediately. One moment I was safe and the next I was gone. A member of the Student Life staff followed me around campus until I had packed all of my bags packed and was completely off campus. It took a total of two hours.
Today I am barred from the campus of Bob Jones University, told that if I return I will be immediately arrested. I wasn’t expelled for breaking the rules, because most of my demerits are from arbitrary and capricious rulings. I believe I was expelled because I spoke out. I saw abuse happening and I talked about it. I didn’t back down when threatened. I didn’t give in when I felt stalked. I stood my ground and that, I believe, is why I was expelled just 9 days before my graduation.
One of my goals in sharing my stories is that I hope it can help BJU see the problems there and the overwhelming need for the grace of God to permeate that place. There is no grace at BJU. There is no love.
Probably my favorite song is Only Grace by Matthew West. I would love for the meaning of these words to effect the very core of BJU.
Matthew West’s Only Grace
There is no guilt here
There is no shame
No pointing fingers
There is no blame
What happened yesterday has disappeared
The dirt has washed away
And now its clear
There’s only grace. There’s only love
There’s only mercy and believe me its enough
Your sins are gone
Without a trace
And there’s nothing left now
There’s only grace
Your starting over now
Under the sun
Your stepping forward now
A new life has begun
Your new life has begun
And there’s only grace
There’s only love
There’s only mercy and believe me its enough
Your sins are gone
Without a trace
and there’s nothing left now
There’s only grace
And if you should fall again
Get back up, get back up
Reach out and take my hand
And get back up, get back up
Get back up again
Ooh get back up again
There’s only grace
There’s only love
There’s only mercy and believe me its enough, its enough
Your sins are gone without a trace
and there’s nothing left now
There’s only…there’s only grace
There’s only mercy and believe me its enough, its enough
Your sins are gone without a trace
And there’s nothing left now
There’s only grace….
So get back up, get back up again
Get back up, get back up, get back up again
––––––––––––––––––––––––—
My story
I grew up in Bradenton, Florida where I attended Community Baptist Church and Community Christian School my entire life. CBC is an independent, fundamental, Baptist church within the Bob Jones University network. So from a very young age I knew that I was going to attend BJU in Greenville, South Carolina. That was what was expected of me and that was my dream.
I graduated from high school in 2006 and was immediately accepted to BJU. I attended BJU from 2006 to 2009 and then, I stayed out of school working full time from 2009 through the first semester of 2010 to save enough money to return to school.
During the time I sat out of school I began to interact with people outside of the independent fundamental Baptist church. I realized that there were good Christian people outside of the IFB and I realized that being a Christian wasn’t about following the law; it was about loving others and loving God.
I returned the second semester of 2010 to Bob Jones University with a radically changed view of Christ and the power of grace and love in a Christian’s life. I now realized that because God loves, I am suppose to love everyone. This was a radical shift from my fundamentalist upbringing and from the views of Bob Jones University. But I still returned to BJU expecting to finish my degree in a year and a half and to then be done with BJU.
Little did I know my plans would soon be changed forever.
Before I went back to BJU for second semester 2010 my friend, Beth Murschell, called me and begged me not to go back to school. Even though my personal views had already radically shifted I still supported BJU and I told Beth that I wasn’t going to transfer anywhere else. She told me that there was so much that I didn’t know that she was just finding out and she pleaded with me to transfer.
I refused. I packed my bags, loaded the car, and headed up to BJU, but I continued to remember Beth’s warnings in the back of my head.
My first semester back at BJU was normal. I went to classes, made new friends, and I got no demerits the entire semester. No problems whatsoever … until I read about Tina Anderson.
The beginning of the end began the first semester of 2011. I came across some articles online about a scandal that was happening in Concord, New Hampshire at Trinity Baptist Church. I began to research what was happening and I soon discovered that there were significant issues with the former pastor.
Reverend Chuck Phelps was the pastor at Trinity Baptist Church when Ernest Willis, a 35-year-old man and member of the church, raped Tina Anderson, a 15-year-old member of the same church. This story attracted so much national media attention that http://abcnews.go.com/2020/video/scarred-childhood-13334532: ABC’s 20/20 did an investigation on the abuse .
From my research I learned that Chuck Phelps was still on the Board of Trustees at Bob Jones University. It really troubled me that this man was being allowed to continue as a board member in good standing. I felt I had to speak out.
At first I posted links, articles, and even the 20/20 investigation link on my personal Facebook page, but I quickly was reported to the Dean of Men’s office. I was called into his office and the Dean of Men told me point blank that I had to stop talking about the Chuck Phelps situation on my personal Facebook or I would be expelled.
I left his office and immediately created a www.facebook.com/DoRightBJU: Facebook page called Do Right BJU where I wrote anonymously about the Chuck Phelps situation and organized a peaceful student protest. I called on students, faculty, staff and alumni to wear red in support of abuse victims. I also called on BJU to remove Chuck Phelps from the Board of Trustees and to begin educating the BJU students on abuse and signs of abuse.
The protest was held on December 12, 2011 — a handful of BJU students along with a group of alumni wore red that day. In solidarity, many people changed their profile photos to red, creating a virtual sea of red on Facebook.
BJU announced that there would be no consequences for those students organizing or involved with the protest. Chuck Phelps resigned and a committee was formed to investigate allegations of sexual abuse within BJU.
Everything was good, or so I thought. Our goals had been accomplished and the semester came to an end.
I came back for my final semester and that is when the problems began.
I was immediately required to have weekly meetings with the Dean of Men where it was implied that because I had questioned BJU’s authority and had gone against their wishes, I must have a deep spiritual problem that needed to be addressed and fixed. He required that I read an entire book of the Bible every day and write out my thoughts and devotions so I could talk to him about it.
As the semester progressed, the meetings changed from a spiritual focus to a focus on my social media activities. Also the frequency of the meetings increased, to the point where I was having midnight meetings.
Stacks of my Facebook and Twitter posts were printed out, highlighted, starred, and circled. I felt that I was being constantly watched, intimidated and harassed.
Surprisingly, only a year earlier, BJU had promised that they would not police students’ social media accounts when they unblocked them on the school networks, allowing us to use Facebook and some other social media sites on campus for the first time. Obviously, that had changed.
Around the final week of March I was called into the Dean of Men’s office for a tweet I had sent. This tweet was sent right before a required Bible Conference service, which is like a chapel service. According to BJU, students are allowed to use their phones up until the time the service actually begins. But I was given 25 demerits for “chapel misconduct” and that put me up to 55 demerits.
On April 12th I was called into the Dean of Men’s office again for allegations that I had been watching TV off campus. I was informed that I was receiving 50 demerits for watching the TV show Glee, but that I had the option to appeal these demerits in a Special Committee of the Discipline Committee. I pled my case that according to the Student Handbook of BJU it is not against the rules to watch TV off campus. There are no written rules about watching any shows while off campus.
The Special Committee heard my plea and then they deliberated on their verdict. They agreed with my assertion that it is not in the rule book that a BJU student can’t watch TV. But they still ruled against me, upholding the 50 demerits, because they said that the nature of Glee itself was so “morally reprehensible.” Specially, they disliked the cheerleader’s outfits, the music, the dancing and the homosexuality. I received 50 demerits for the content alone, even though there was no rule in the handbook about acceptable content.
That ruling put me at 105 demerits, much closer to the 150 limit than I had ever been. Two days later, on April 16th, I received 15 demerits for not shaving, putting me at 120. Now I was worried.
On April 24th I was called into the Dean of Men’s office at 11:00am for what became my final meeting. I was informed that I was receiving 50 demerits for posting lyrics to a Christian song, Matthew West’s “Only Grace,” on my Facebook. I was also informed that I was receiving 25 demerits for posting on Facebook during class.
These new demerits placed me at 195, well over the 150 limit. I was informed that I was expelled from Bob Jones University. I asked to appeal the ruling to the Special Committee and was told that the appeal would take place at 4:00 pm the same day.
Obviously, I was concerned. I had just been denied at my last appeal and the same people were going to be deciding whether or not I was able to remain in school.
I went back to my room and began preparing my defense. I researched information on TRACS, the national accrediting agency that BJU uses, and decided to contact them. I then called the Department of Education to see what my options were with them. I also called Congressman Buchanan (Florida), Senator Rubio (Florida), and Senator DeMint (South Carolina) to see if they could assist me in my predicament. Finally, I contacted the local news agencies that had covered the Do Right BJU story back in December. I informed them that BJU was planning to expel me and that I needed help. I was desperate.
The time for the Special Meeting quickly approached and I went into the meeting with almost full certainty that I was not going to come out of it a BJU student.
I pled my case to the Special Committee. I read the Student Handbook and showed that there were no rules about posting lyrics to songs on a student’s personal Facebook. I also informed them that because I stood to lose everything I had worked for I had contacted many agencies for help.
I left the room and waited for their decision. Once they deliberated and had come to a decision, I was brought back into the meeting and the Committee ruled that I would receive the demerits for posting a Facebook status in class and I would not receive the 50 demerits for the lyrics — bringing me up to 145 total demerits, five demerits shy of expulsion. I was shocked, overwhelmed and overjoyed. I even almost started to cry because I was so amazed. My prayers had been answered.
At this point all of the people on the Committee left the room except for the Dean of Men, the Dean of Students and myself. I assumed that they wanted to pray with me or that they wanted to clarify an issue. To my shock I was informed that I had tried to “intimidate” BJU by contacting outside agencies and that I was being expelled immediately. One moment I was safe and the next I was gone. A member of the Student Life staff followed me around campus until I had packed all of my bags packed and was completely off campus. It took a total of two hours.
Today I am barred from the campus of Bob Jones University, told that if I return I will be immediately arrested. I wasn’t expelled for breaking the rules, because most of my demerits are from arbitrary and capricious rulings. I believe I was expelled because I spoke out. I saw abuse happening and I talked about it. I didn’t back down when threatened. I didn’t give in when I felt stalked. I stood my ground and that, I believe, is why I was expelled just 9 days before my graduation.
- 204 views
Charlie, as a BJU grad and, as of yesterday, father of four BJU grads, the big chunks of demerits are the final straw, but an accumulation of 50ish demerits in any given semester is not a sign of someone who is working with the system. When I was in school (late 70s), my impression was that the school was much stricter than it is now. Most students, I would venture to say, were well under 50 “Ds”. Those who were obstreperous, pushing the envelope, would get in the danger line, get over 75 and have their privileges severely restricted. Very often, fellows like that would find themselves doing something incredibly stupid that would give them the big whack of demerits that would push them over the edge. I had a roommate in that situation, came home from extension one night to find my roommate had slugged someone outside the Dining Common. It was game over for him.
My senior year, some classmates decided it would be a good idea to go to a movie a couple of weeks before graduation… game over for them as well.
In the current era, in a LESS strict environment, I would find it hard to believe that someone could accumulated 50 plus demerits in a semester unless they were bucking the system. In Chris’ “interview” that he posted on FB, he admitted to having had somewhere around 50 Ds first semester as well (as I recall). That was before “Dorightbju” — looks to me like a guy who was just kicking against the system. Its not surprising that he was expelled. Guys like that usually end up on the outside looking in.
My senior year, some classmates decided it would be a good idea to go to a movie a couple of weeks before graduation… game over for them as well.
In the current era, in a LESS strict environment, I would find it hard to believe that someone could accumulated 50 plus demerits in a semester unless they were bucking the system. In Chris’ “interview” that he posted on FB, he admitted to having had somewhere around 50 Ds first semester as well (as I recall). That was before “Dorightbju” — looks to me like a guy who was just kicking against the system. Its not surprising that he was expelled. Guys like that usually end up on the outside looking in.
Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3
No one is addressing the most important question here, and one that is the legal issue. Chris received his last 5 demerits for contacting outside agencies! That’s the legal right of any student. For all the rights you lay down when you sign the student handbook at BJ, legal recourse with accrediting agencies is not one of them. THAT is what is scandalous on the part of BJ.
And I don’t think Chris is deliberately avoiding discussion here. I think he’s not following it.
And I don’t think Chris is deliberately avoiding discussion here. I think he’s not following it.
[Dan Frank] And I don’t think Chris is deliberately avoiding discussion here. I think he’s not following it.It is disrespectful (and in some places a violation of forum policy) to post a thread in which you have no intention of participating. So Chris got to unload his story at SI, but feels no responsibility to follow and respond? Very bad internet etiquette.
[Susan R]Actually, it’s not, Susan. You may not know this, but Jim and I asked Chris to post his story here after I tried to start a thread on the topic. The moderators preferred for Chris himself to share his story, in which case the thread would not be closed (as my original one was). So, after being asked if he wanted to share his story, he did. I solicited this from him, and I made no comment to him about a need to continue interacting on the topic.[Dan Frank] And I don’t think Chris is deliberately avoiding discussion here. I think he’s not following it.It is disrespectful (and in some places a violation of forum policy) to post a thread in which you have no intention of participating. So Chris got to unload his story at SI, but feels no responsibility to follow and respond? Very bad internet etiquette.
I see no reason to investigate or ask questions over the first 145 demerits that Chris got during the semester. If we combed through them with a fine tooth comb, we’d probably find that some were deserved and some were downright ridiculous. But what is possibly illegal (and at least unethical for a school with TRACS accreditation) is to expel a student with demerits for “intimidation” because he contacted outside accrediting agencies.
I visited the Tracs website and looked at their rules of accreditation. I didn’t see anything there that speaks to expulsion of students
My initial “sniff test” is that BJU did not do anything illegal. Intimidation? To me that’s a subjective evaluation that would be difficult to prove.
There must be scores of students expelled every year (I really don’t know the count). What makes Peterman’s case stand out? For me “nothing”
BJU and other schools - even some secular schools - have a demerit system. It will always be subjective (the application of rules in systems like these)
As events have unfolded, it’s clear to me that Peterman basically despises BJU. He would not be proud to have graduated from there anyway. For him, he is better off expelled.
My initial “sniff test” is that BJU did not do anything illegal. Intimidation? To me that’s a subjective evaluation that would be difficult to prove.
There must be scores of students expelled every year (I really don’t know the count). What makes Peterman’s case stand out? For me “nothing”
BJU and other schools - even some secular schools - have a demerit system. It will always be subjective (the application of rules in systems like these)
As events have unfolded, it’s clear to me that Peterman basically despises BJU. He would not be proud to have graduated from there anyway. For him, he is better off expelled.
What Frank Dan said is true. He started a thread re Peterman I asked him to contact Peterman to have him post his own story. I then unpublished his thread.
The mods and the admins know all about this because I informed them.
The mods and the admins know all about this because I informed them.
[Dan Frank]Actually, it is, regardless of the how and why he posted. This is a forum, and the expectation of being able to interact with the OP is understood. There are a slew of good questions and requests for clarification, so Chris came here and post his life story for people to read, but he can’t be bothered to respond?[Susan R]Actually, it’s not, Susan.[Dan Frank] And I don’t think Chris is deliberately avoiding discussion here. I think he’s not following it.It is disrespectful (and in some places a violation of forum policy) to post a thread in which you have no intention of participating. So Chris got to unload his story at SI, but feels no responsibility to follow and respond? Very bad internet etiquette.
[Jim Peet]But he didn’t start out that way. He was a “good” BJU student through the majority of his years there. At the end, after witnessing the University’s handling of Phelps, things changed for him. Too bad for him — because his credits won’t transfer easily and he’s already paid many thousands of dollars that he doesn’t have now to spend somewhere else.
As events have unfolded, it’s clear to me that Peterman basically despises BJU. He would not be proud to have graduated from there anyway. For him, he is better off expelled.
Expelling a student for contacting accrediting organizations isn’t subjective. It’s objectively wrong. Certainly unethical according to TRACS own spokesperson.
[Dan Frank] Certainly unethical according to TRACS own spokesperson.Who said this? Any documentation to support?
[Jim Peet]I’ll find it. It was a spokesperson who talked with someone who called and asked about it specifically.[Dan Frank] Certainly unethical according to TRACS own spokesperson.Who said this? Any documentation to support?
I imagine that BJU can’t respond because of privacy considerations, but I think that if you go to the media with your story, you have waived your right to privacy, and your student record should be examined by the public. That would do away with much of the he said/they said. So right now we are stuck with Peterman’s version, lots of hearsay, and a boatload of speculation. The only aspects we can really respond to are those things which Peterman readily admits.
So- bottom line for me- If you decide to attend a strict Christian college, buckle down, do the work, keep your nose clean, and get your degree. If you decide to poke at the rules with a stick, don’t act surprised when someone takes that stick and beats you over the head with it. Seriously- your IQ has to be in the single digits and your moral compass in the Bermuda Triangle to think that “Students are to avoid any types of entertainment that could be considered immodest or that contain profanity, scatological realism, sexual perversion, erotic realism, lurid violence, occultism and false philosophical or religious assumptions” doesn’t apply to Glee, even if it is on network television.
If you believe an administration has done something immoral, unethical, or illegal, go first to the admin, and if unsuccessful, get your pastor, deacon, parents, trusted adults… involved. Don’t meet privately with anyone, always take notes of what is said and done, and have those attending the meeting date and initial those notes. If they refuse, note that too. My phone has a voice recorder on it- I’d use it in a heartbeat if I thought someone was up to no good.
Live and learn. And stop whining.
So- bottom line for me- If you decide to attend a strict Christian college, buckle down, do the work, keep your nose clean, and get your degree. If you decide to poke at the rules with a stick, don’t act surprised when someone takes that stick and beats you over the head with it. Seriously- your IQ has to be in the single digits and your moral compass in the Bermuda Triangle to think that “Students are to avoid any types of entertainment that could be considered immodest or that contain profanity, scatological realism, sexual perversion, erotic realism, lurid violence, occultism and false philosophical or religious assumptions” doesn’t apply to Glee, even if it is on network television.
If you believe an administration has done something immoral, unethical, or illegal, go first to the admin, and if unsuccessful, get your pastor, deacon, parents, trusted adults… involved. Don’t meet privately with anyone, always take notes of what is said and done, and have those attending the meeting date and initial those notes. If they refuse, note that too. My phone has a voice recorder on it- I’d use it in a heartbeat if I thought someone was up to no good.
Live and learn. And stop whining.
I suggest that this scale may be helpful:
(1) Blame BJU completely for Peterman’s expulsion <––––––––––-> Peterman’s expulsion 100% his problem (10)
The who’s to blame scale:
(1) Blame BJU completely for Peterman’s expulsion <––––––––––-> Peterman’s expulsion 100% his problem (10)
The who’s to blame scale:
- 100% BJU: Peterman completely innocent. BJU hounded him because of Do Right BJU and basically made up the demerits
- In between: But more BJU than Peterman
- In between: But more BJU than Peterman
- In between: But more BJU than Peterman
- In between: Basically 50% - 50%.
- In between: More Peterman than BJU
- In between: More Peterman than BJU
- In between: More Peterman than BJU
- In between: More Peterman than BJU
- 100% Peterman: He earned every demerit. Do Right BJU had NOTHING to do with his expulsion
My view is about 8 or 9 on the scale. I’ll concede that Do Right BJU probably influenced the decision.
Question for Frank Dan: Are you 1 on this scale? Where would you be?
[Jim Peet] Question for Frank Dan: Are you 1 on this scale? Where would you be?I’m definitely a 1 on the scale. That’s a no brainer in my opinion, because only 1 issue actually got him EXPELLED. He contacted TRACS after they told him they were going to expel him but before the final meeting with the disciplinary committee to see if he had any rights this close to graduation with all this tuition paid. At the disciplinary committee meeting, they tallied up all his demerits to that point and he only had 145. Without contacting TRACS, he would have just been, like many students before him, someone on probation to the very end. Penalizing him for contacting TRACS is the issue, not Glee. That’s unethical and I’m pretty sure it’s against TRACS own standards, but I’m working on getting confirmation of that.
If a school accepts accreditation by an organization, then that organization (in this case TRACS) is an overseer of the institution. Students have the right, even in an over the top conservative Christian college like BJU, to contact governing organizations.
Thanks. I appreciate your response
If it were “1” (and we probably will never know) … it would be absolutely scandalous
If it were “1” (and we probably will never know) … it would be absolutely scandalous
But he contact many others than just TRACS, by his own admission. If he had only contracted TRACS, you would have a point about having the right to contact the governing organization. However he contacted the board of education, a congressman, two senators and the local news. Getting the government and the news involves seems like a pretty clear attempt to make Bob Jones feel inteminated, wouldn’t you say? Don’t know for sure but if he had only contracted TRACS, he might still be there to earn his last 5 demits.
[wkessel1] But he contact many others than just TRACS, by his own admission. If he had only contracted TRACS, you would have a point about having the right to contact the governing organization. However he contacted the board of education, a congressman, two senators and the local news. Getting the government and the news involves seems like a pretty clear attempt to make Bob Jones feel inteminated, wouldn’t you say? Don’t know for sure but if he had only contracted TRACS, he might still be there to earn his last 5 demits.What’s wrong with contacting the board of education, a congressman, two senators, and the local news? I don’t know if he did that, but in our nation, we have this right. We don’t live in China or Syria, and I am uncomfortable with associating the contacting of accrediting agencies, governing officials, or news agencies (all which are accepted institutions in the United States for protecting civil rights) with the type of behavior worthy of EXPULSION for a student at a Christian university in the United States. Remember, when he contacted them, he thought he was ALREADY expelled.
And I just heard back personally from the President of TRACS, who was kind enough to answer my specific questions. Christopher definitely has the right to contact TRACS and file a complaint with them. However, whatever he did initially over the phone, he has not yet filed (according to them) a written complaint. I certainly hope he will.
[Dan Frank] I’m definitely a 1 on the scale. That’s a no brainer in my opinion, because only 1 issue actually got him EXPELLED.Actually, that’s not true. It took 150 demerits to get expelled, not 5. It was the accumulation of demerits that got him shipped. If these final demerits had been the only ones he received, he still would have walked. Argue the merits of the case if you feel you must, but let’s not resort to propaganda trying to sway the crowd.
Why is it that my voice always seems to be loudest when I am saying the dumbest things?
[Chip Van Emmerik] Argue the merits of the case if you feel you must, but let’s not resort to propaganda trying to sway the crowd.Chip, let’s be really honest right now. This whole PR spin and media blitz by Peterman and DRBJU is propaganda to sway the crowd against BJU; haven’t you read the news headlines? This isn’t really about Peterman getting shipped - this is about people using Peterman as a tool to attack BJU. That’s why the Department of Education and Congressmen/Congresswomen were called in to defend Chris, who, in my opinion, did more than enough to merit getting expelled. He was a student there for seven semesters before this came up - six if you exclude the first semester of this year - and I don’t think it was any big shock to him that BJU would look askance at behavior like ignoring the dean, blasting the CEO on Facebook, or threatening the school by saying that he was recording all of their meetings. If he honestly thought that BJU was OK with him watching Glee, then he either didn’t pay attention to the student handbook that he had to read every semester or he’s just ignoring the rules.
If this story wasn’t about propaganda, DRBJU would have stopped once Phelps resigned and they got what they wanted, and Peterman would probably be responding to the questions on this thread instead of using SI as a platform to make his statement and then wandering away.
Dan - what do you really want TRACS to do? Order Peterman reinstated as a student? Force BJU to hand Peterman a degree? Or is there something else?
"Our task today is to tell people — who no longer know what sin is...no longer see themselves as sinners, and no longer have room for these categories — that Christ died for sins of which they do not think they’re guilty." - David Wells
I agree Jay. My point is just that we should individually take responsibility not to fall into that trap ourselves.
Why is it that my voice always seems to be loudest when I am saying the dumbest things?
Propaganda has a subjective definition. It’s irrelevant to the specifics of this case.
Modern whistleblower laws are important here. It’s no longer legal to retaliate against a student/employee for the simple act of talking to authorities, EVEN if their case does not have merit. So, let’s say Christopher legitimately earned the first 145 demerits (which is certainly arguable) and had no case when he contacted TRACS or other organizations. It is still unethical (and possibly illegal according to modern whistleblower laws) to penalize someone for the mere act of talking to authorities to see if they have a case.
Modern whistleblower laws are important here. It’s no longer legal to retaliate against a student/employee for the simple act of talking to authorities, EVEN if their case does not have merit. So, let’s say Christopher legitimately earned the first 145 demerits (which is certainly arguable) and had no case when he contacted TRACS or other organizations. It is still unethical (and possibly illegal according to modern whistleblower laws) to penalize someone for the mere act of talking to authorities to see if they have a case.
This website is helpful on determining whistleblower laws.
http://www.whistleblowers.gov/ http://www.whistleblowers.gov/
http://www.whistleblowers.gov/ http://www.whistleblowers.gov/
Whistleblower laws only apply when there’s violations of the law; I’m fairly sure that watching glee, not shaving, listening to uncheckable music, and badmouthing school administrators do not rise to violations of the law. You might be able to argue whistleblower laws would apply if he was reporting on violations of BJU’s rules to BJU admins, but Peterman wasn’t turning himself in.
So what exactly would you like to see BJU do in this case, Dan?
So what exactly would you like to see BJU do in this case, Dan?
"Our task today is to tell people — who no longer know what sin is...no longer see themselves as sinners, and no longer have room for these categories — that Christ died for sins of which they do not think they’re guilty." - David Wells
[Jay] Whistleblower laws only apply when there’s violations of the law; I’m fairly sure that watching glee, not shaving, listening to uncheckable music, and badmouthing school administrators do not rise to violations of the law. You might be able to argue whistleblower laws would apply if he was reporting on violations of BJU’s rules to BJU admins, but Peterman wasn’t turning himself in.Whistleblower laws would apply if you were raising awareness of sexual abuse policies (or the lack thereof) on a campus and they moved an RA into your room for the next semester to nitpick you to death with demerits for not shaving and so forth even though your previous demerit total didn’t warrant you being put on spiritual probabation. Christopher’s entire point was that he felt he was targeted after setting up Do Right BJU. Did you miss that part of his statement?
So what exactly would you like to see BJU do in this case, Dan?
Remember the old thread on BJU’s sexual abuse policy? The original policy was poorly worded and set up a process contrary to SC Law. BJU changed the wording to accurately reflect the law after awareness was raised via DRBJU and others. That was a legal issue. Whether BJU really targeted him because of that (and all of us who have been students at BJU know that is highly likely) is only part of the issue. Because even if they didn’t target him, the final demerits for contacting outside authorities because Christopher THOUGHT BJU was targeting him are unethical.
BJU should at the minimum refund his tuition. But if they want to put themselves back in a place of looking like they took the high road in a questionable situation, they need to make a way for him to finish his degree as he planned without paying additional money.
That would make sense if ‘raising awareness of policies’ was a crime, but it’s not. Furthermore, Mr. Peterman has been claiming he was expelled for watching Glee (see above statement), not raising ‘awareness of policies’.
Furthermore, it appears several people told him he should not return, and he was told by the Dean not to pursue this. So why then did he decide to double down on it and draw more attention to himself?
Furthermore, it appears several people told him he should not return, and he was told by the Dean not to pursue this. So why then did he decide to double down on it and draw more attention to himself?
"Our task today is to tell people — who no longer know what sin is...no longer see themselves as sinners, and no longer have room for these categories — that Christ died for sins of which they do not think they’re guilty." - David Wells
[Jay] That would make sense if ‘raising awareness of policies’ was a crime, but it’s not. Furthermore, Mr. Peterman has been claiming he was expelled for watching Glee (see above statement), not raising ‘awareness of policies’.I don’t understand your line of reasoning at all.
Furthermore, it appears several people told him he should not return, and he was told by the Dean not to pursue this. So why then did he decide to double down on it and draw more attention to himself?
Christopher may have said above he was expelled for Glee. But technically, he would not have been expelled if it had ended there. He was put over the top for contacting authorities. Glee or no Glee, that is unethical on the part of BJU.
Long ago, in a church in Greenville, SC, I heard a conversation involving a University faculty member. Her comment was “Any time I hear somebody complain about The University I ask them two questions: How much money do you owe? or What were you shipped for?”
From 1927, there have been those who sincerely believe that The University (or the college, depending on date) can do no wrong.
I detect that opinion base in many of the posts on this thread.
*****
Several years after graduating, my dear wife had opportunity to talk with the Dean of Women at The University. During that conversation she told my wife that *her* class (Freshman Class 1977) was “the first of the bad years.” The Bad Years were those in which the students began to ask questions, instead of just accepting what the faculty/staff/admin said as gospel and law.
******
As a student in the late ’70s, when I would discuss these issues with my father, his response would be “The only thing wrong with The University is people. As long as you have people involved, you will have problems.”
In the issue being discussed here, I am sure that what was said by one party was misconstrued by the other party, many time.
Just some random observations and comments.
Karl Silva
From 1927, there have been those who sincerely believe that The University (or the college, depending on date) can do no wrong.
I detect that opinion base in many of the posts on this thread.
*****
Several years after graduating, my dear wife had opportunity to talk with the Dean of Women at The University. During that conversation she told my wife that *her* class (Freshman Class 1977) was “the first of the bad years.” The Bad Years were those in which the students began to ask questions, instead of just accepting what the faculty/staff/admin said as gospel and law.
******
As a student in the late ’70s, when I would discuss these issues with my father, his response would be “The only thing wrong with The University is people. As long as you have people involved, you will have problems.”
In the issue being discussed here, I am sure that what was said by one party was misconstrued by the other party, many time.
Just some random observations and comments.
Karl Silva
[Dan Frank] Modern whistle blower laws are important here. It’s no longer legal to retaliate against a student/employee for the simple act of talking to authorities, EVEN if their case does not have merit.is this how whistleblower laws work in your state? because from what i’ve seen, south carolina has pretty weak protection for whistle blowers. assuming the crux of this case is retaliation about drbju, i’m not sure that south carolina whistle blower laws offer peterman any protection at all. does the site you linked (http://www.whistleblowers.gov/) mention anything at all about protection for students against retaliation by their school? it seemed like it was about employer retaliation and mostly about situations involving osha.
From BJU handbook: http://www.bju.edu/student-life/2011-student-handbook.pdf
p 45:
p 45:
Students who feel that their issue was not handled in a satisfactory manner may submit a formal grievance to the Office of the Provost via campus mail. The Provost will then refer the matter to a grievance committee consisting of academic and Student Life officials. If a satisfactory resolution is not reached at that point, students are free to report the matter to BJU’s accrediting agency: Transnational Association of Christian Colleges and Schools; P.O. Box 328, Forest, Virginia 24551; phone (434)525-9539, fax (434)525-9538;
email: info@tracs.org.
[ChrisC]I doubt he meets the criteria of any federal whistleblower law. Like you said they mainly address workplace safety. He does have recourse with TRACS though. TRACS definitely assures students the right to address grievances with them. It is not considered “intimidation.”[Dan Frank] Modern whistle blower laws are important here. It’s no longer legal to retaliate against a student/employee for the simple act of talking to authorities, EVEN if their case does not have merit.is this how whistleblower laws work in your state? because from what i’ve seen, south carolina has pretty weak protection for whistle blowers. assuming the crux of this case is retaliation about drbju, i’m not sure that south carolina whistle blower laws offer peterman any protection at all. does the site you linked (http://www.whistleblowers.gov/) mention anything at all about protection for students against retaliation by their school? it seemed like it was about employer retaliation and mostly about situations involving osha.
[Jim Peet] From BJU handbook: http://www.bju.edu/student-life/2011-student-handbook.pdfBut is that still the process when you are a former student? What if you will be a former student by the time the committee meets?
p 45:Students who feel that their issue was not handled in a satisfactory manner may submit a formal grievance to the Office of the Provost via campus mail. The Provost will then refer the matter to a grievance committee consisting of academic and Student Life officials. If a satisfactory resolution is not reached at that point, students are free to report the matter to BJU’s accrediting agency: Transnational Association of Christian Colleges and Schools; P.O. Box 328, Forest, Virginia 24551; phone (434)525-9539, fax (434)525-9538;
email: info@tracs.org.
Not piling on here. Just wondering what the Provost does if a grievance from a former student comes in his mailbox.
Re:
But is that still the process when you are a former student?Not sure how the process is supposed to work!
[Dan Frank] He does have recourse with TRACS though. TRACS definitely assures students the right to address grievances with them.can you point to where tracs says anything about this? i looked quickly through their latest http://www.tracs.org/files/Policies_and_Procedures_Manual,_January_2012…] policies & procedures , but i didn’t see anything about this kind of situation.
I don’t know where it is online, but the president of TRACS sent me a word document of their complaint. Here are the pertinent pieces. Italics mine.
COMPLAINTSHere’s an interesting note. As I read through the TRACS Accreditation Standards, which you can find http://www.tracs.org/tracs_standards.htm here , I found this.
TRACS addresses complaints against member institutions and complaints against TRACS itself. All concerns about member institutions are considered under either this policy or the Adverse Action Policy. To be considered under this policy, the concern must provide information (1) in writing (2) that alleges a member institution is not in compliance with one or more Standard or which provides sufficient information for TRACS’ President to determine if there is the potential that the member institution is not in compliance with one or more Standard; (3) that includes the complainant’s name; and (4) that includes enough information for TRACS to contact the complainant. All concerns which do not include the elements of a complaint will be considered under the Adverse Action Policy.
A complaint against TRACS is an allegation that the Accreditation Commission or one of its employees has not followed its written policies or procedures or has acted in a manner that is discriminatory or arbitrary.
As part of an investigation, TRACS may ask for clarifications or additional information from the complainant, including a statement of what the complainant has done prior to submitting the complaint and copies of any relevant documents. Complaints against TRACS itself do not require a statement of what the complainant has done with respect to the complaint prior to filing it; however, the complainant is encouraged to include such a statement.
TRACS only acts on complaints against a member institution when the complaint is related to that member institution’s apparent or actual noncompliance with at least one Accreditation Standard. Although complainants are encouraged to identify the Accreditation Standard(s) which relate(s) to the complaint, TRACS’ President will determine from the specifics of the complaint if the complaint relates to any of the Accreditation Standards.
TRACS does not address requests for intervention on behalf of individuals with respect to admission decisions, the granting of transfer credit, the number or amount of fees, disciplinary actions which are consistent with the institution’s written policies, collective bargaining, faculty appointments, or academic dismissals in accord with the institution’s written policies.
If a complainant alleges actions which involve someone other than the complainant or the complainant’s dependent minor, the information provided to the complainant will be limited to information the institution would be allowed to provide under the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act.
At each regular meeting of the Accreditation Commission, TRACS’ President will provide a report on the status of all complaints received or acted on since the previous regular meeting.
A. Complaints Against a Member Institution
1. All allegations are to be sent to TRACS. They will be addressed by TRACS’ President.
2. Within 14 days of the date TRACS receives an allegation, TRACS will send an acknowledgement letter or email, as appropriate, and a copy of this policy to the complainant.
3. TRACS’ President will review each allegation to determine if it relates to any of the Accreditation Standards. …
Board members are to be free of any conflict of interest in their relationship with the institution and therefore are not involved in any manner with a business or other enterprise that does business with the institution.Dr. Bob III owns a controlling interest in a bank that finances student loans.
The board will have a minimum of five voting members, with no more than one of these members being a paid employee of the institution. In addition, the chair of the board cannot, nor can the president of the institution, have as voting members on the board any member of their immediate or an in-law family. The president of the institution cannot serve as the chair of the governing board or its executive or nominating committees.BJU blatantly violates this.
17.17. The institution must have a legally approved, clearly stated, and published student complaint policy.
a. The policy is approved by the governing board.
b. The policy is clearly stated.
c. The plan provides for equitable student input and includes:
1) the address and phone number of TRACS.
2) a process which allows for confidential student input.
3) an appropriate office for collecting and filing of all student complaints.
what you quoted from is basically the same as http://www.tracs.org/files/Policies_and_Procedures_Manual,_January_2012…] the policy i linked to above. i’m still not clear on how peterman could have lodged a legitimate complaint with tracs related to his perception of retaliation over his involvement with drbju. the only sections that talk about retaliation are related to discrimination and harassment on the basis of a federally protected area (see pages 16-18). i don’t see anything about protection from retaliation that could apply to peterman.
[Dan Frank]IMO .. If he was so upset with the way a matter was handled he should have gone to the administration .. and then if it was not resolved to his satisfaction he should have left on his own.[Jim Peet]But he didn’t start out that way. He was a “good” BJU student through the majority of his years there. At the end, after witnessing the University’s handling of Phelps, things changed for him. Too bad for him — because his credits won’t transfer easily and he’s already paid many thousands of dollars that he doesn’t have now to spend somewhere else.
As events have unfolded, it’s clear to me that Peterman basically despises BJU. He would not be proud to have graduated from there anyway. For him, he is better off expelled.
Expelling a student for contacting accrediting organizations isn’t subjective. It’s objectively wrong. Certainly unethical according to TRACS own spokesperson.
Instead it appears he decided to go out on a limb .. stir the pot .. then complain when he got burned.
[PLewis]Um … the administration that just expelled him? That makes no sense to me.
IMO .. If he was so upset with the way a matter was handled he should have gone to the administration .. and then if it was not resolved to his satisfaction he should have left on his own.
Instead it appears he decided to go out on a limb .. stir the pot .. then complain when he got burned.
Contacting organizations to find out your legal rights when you stand to lose over $10,000 in tuition, room, and board seems prudent.
A prudent man sees danger and takes precautions (Prov. 22:3)
A guy makes himself a target. He knows they are watching him. He posts stupid stuff on his Facebook page, stupidly threatens them that he’s recording everything, posts stupid stuff elsewhere on the Internet, stupidly watches Glee, and then stupidly calls the media and a bunch of other people to try to intimidate them into not doing anything about his misadventures.
Maybe they decided he shouldn’t have a diploma because they figured he was just too stupid to have one. :)
The comment just above this one cites Proverbs 22:3 talking about a prudent man.
A prudent man, if he knows he’s being watched, goes out of his way to demonstrate respect and submission to the rules. Under no circumstances will he do anything that is even borderline — if he’s prudent. A prudent man would have taken steps to reassure them that, despite his disagreement with them on Chuck Phelps, he was a supporter of the school and respected the rules. They’d have quickly tired of watching him if there was nothing to see.
But he kept saying, “Hey, keep an eye on me! I’m likely to break another rule soon or do something else you won’t like!”
Sin makes us stupid. It wasn’t sin to have a different view from BJU about Chuck Phelps, and it wasn’t sin to say so. But there’s plenty of evidence that sin and stupidity were at work here, whether BJU was “stalking” him or not.
Maybe they decided he shouldn’t have a diploma because they figured he was just too stupid to have one. :)
The comment just above this one cites Proverbs 22:3 talking about a prudent man.
A prudent man, if he knows he’s being watched, goes out of his way to demonstrate respect and submission to the rules. Under no circumstances will he do anything that is even borderline — if he’s prudent. A prudent man would have taken steps to reassure them that, despite his disagreement with them on Chuck Phelps, he was a supporter of the school and respected the rules. They’d have quickly tired of watching him if there was nothing to see.
But he kept saying, “Hey, keep an eye on me! I’m likely to break another rule soon or do something else you won’t like!”
Sin makes us stupid. It wasn’t sin to have a different view from BJU about Chuck Phelps, and it wasn’t sin to say so. But there’s plenty of evidence that sin and stupidity were at work here, whether BJU was “stalking” him or not.
[Dan Frank]I was speaking of the Phelps situation .. not his current situation.[PLewis]Um … the administration that just expelled him? That makes no sense to me.
IMO .. If he was so upset with the way a matter was handled he should have gone to the administration .. and then if it was not resolved to his satisfaction he should have left on his own.
Instead it appears he decided to go out on a limb .. stir the pot .. then complain when he got burned.
Contacting organizations to find out your legal rights when you stand to lose over $10,000 in tuition, room, and board seems prudent.A prudent man sees danger and takes precautions (Prov. 22:3)
You may feel strongly that this was ALL the result of his “speaking out” .. And if he didn’t have such an accumulation of demerits I might be inclined to agree..
Someone up-line mentioned being at the school in the 70’s when there were probably even MORE rules to break.. (even inadvertently break) .. I was by no means an angel. I even questioned policies (quite vocally) .. and yet I was treated fairly .. and even managed to get through whole semesters with NO demerits .. I think the most I had in any given semester was 10 or 12 .. (all due to not having my room jobs accomplished .. or by being late to class.
Chris’ own recounting of the past year shows a basic disregard for authority. Even if he did not agree with the way things were handled regarding the Phelps deal - he (Chris) CHOSE to stay at the school .. and he CHOSE to break rules. If his heart was truly wanting to BETTER the school with his speaking out - you’d think he would work in the framework of the school rules, with a loving heart.
Every bit of this to me shows a fellow who’s got a rebellious heart ..
I know the school’s not perfect - and I don’t doubt that they get it wrong sometimes .. however I think the little “hate BJU” crowd chose poorly in Chris as their latest scapegoat .. If his record was SPOTLESS .. (or even just dingy) and THEN got into trouble .. now THAT might show the school was “out to get ‘im” .. but he brought it on himself..
Would it change some of this if he had more problems than just demerits? I’m not talking in terms of his expulsion. What about his grades? Was he really about to graduate? When I was a student I knew of others who battled demerits AND grades. Either can prevent graduation. He says that he was nine days from graduation but that would only be true if he was passing his classes. I’d like to know if he was. I think his martyr status might be viewed a bit differently if he would have failed to graduate anyway.
Matt
Matt
Discussion