• Login
  • |
  • Contact

    LIVE SUPPORT

    SEND US A MESSAGE

    ContactCode

    OTHER

    Email:
    info@trackie.com

    Voicemail:
    1.877.456.5544

You are viewing page of 4.

Discussion Forum >>

Elementary School XC Super Meet
Reply to topic Go to last post
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 46532
    thumbs_up 3
    Report    REPLY #76 

    Anonymous said 3 months ago

    Quoting: Anonymous
    "There is a Student Accountability Policy on their website that deals with these. Googled: trinity west what if someone breaks the covenant

    The actions taken depend on the type and recurrence of offense as outlined in https://www.twu.ca/student-handbook/university-policies/student-accountability-policy. Expulsion may be grounds, but that would require a student performing, in TWU's eyes, recurring acts and/or serious offenses.

    Re: who goes to this school? Likely people who are striving for a higher education that can agree to the covenant."


    TWU has not participated in the McLean's annual survey of Canadian universities since 2014 which is a red flag.

    They have much easier admission standards than our top universities so I'd argue that kids go there that don't have the marks to get into other universities but have the cash.

    Quote comment
  • nc-blogger User since:
    Sep 12th, 2014
    Posts: 704
    thumbs_up 7
    Report    REPLY #77 

    NC Blogger said 3 months ago

    Quoting: Andrew Jones
    "I'll be Obvious for a second:

    https://www.twu.ca/sites/default/files/twu-community-covenant-agreement_0.pdf"


    No mention of race, gender or abortion in the Covenant, so it's actually a good question. One that could be answered with constructive arguments, instead of flippant, or dismissive statements.

    Some highlights:
    - treat all persons with respect and dignity
    - observe modesty, purity and appropriate intimacy in all relationships, reserve
    sexual expressions of intimacy for marriage (the one getting them in "trouble"
    - encourage and support other members of the community in their pursuit of these
    values and ideals, while extending forgiveness, accountability, restoration, and
    healing to one another

    Community members voluntarily abstain from the following actions:
    - harassment or any form of verbal or physical intimidation, including hazing
    - communication that is destructive to TWU community life and inter–personal
    relationships, including gossip, slander, vulgar/obscene language, and prejudice

    Sounds like a truly awful place.

    Having said the above, the conversation here has steered well away from the original thread (not uncommon here) to focus on the sensationalized court case.

    From the original article it sounds to me like Pike certainly did NOT abide by some of the covenants espoused by the University. Interesting that they would be selective in it's application.

    Quote comment
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 46532
    thumbs_up 6
    Report    REPLY #78 

    Anonymous said 3 months ago

    The allegations have never been denied by the university.

    Quoting: Runningman
    "1. Allegations are just that they are allegations reported in an article.

    2. Bomba's contract was not renewed. Can you please explain how you can sue for non renewal of a contract? I will save you the effort....you can not."

    Quote comment
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 46532
    thumbs_up 9
    Report    REPLY #79 

    Anonymous said 3 months ago

    Quoting: Anonymous
    ""


    Also Trinity's decision to hire Wiebe as the director of track/xc and make Pike more of an assistant coach makes me believe that the allegations in the article are true

    Quote comment
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 46532
    thumbs_up 0
    Report    REPLY #80 

    Andrew Jones said 3 months ago

    Quoting: NC Blogger
    "No mention of race, gender or abortion in the Covenant, so it's actually a good question. One that could be answered with constructive arguments, instead of flippant, or dismissive statements.

    Some highlights:
    - treat all persons with respect and dignity
    - observe modesty, purity and appropriate intimacy in all relationships, reserve
    sexual expressions of intimacy for marriage (the one getting them in "trouble"
    - encourage and support other members of the community in their pursuit of these
    values and ideals, while extending forgiveness, accountability, restoration, and
    healing to one another

    Community members voluntarily abstain from the following actions:
    - harassment or any form of verbal or physical intimidation, including hazing
    - communication that is destructive to TWU community life and inter–personal
    relationships, including gossip, slander, vulgar/obscene language, and prejudice

    Sounds like a truly awful place.

    Having said the above, the conversation here has steered well away from the original thread (not uncommon here) to focus on the sensationalized court case.

    From the original article it sounds to me like Pike certainly did NOT abide by some of the covenants espoused by the University. Interesting that they would be selective in it's application."


    Sensationalized court case? Sure, a digression has occurred on the thread, but to understand context may be a factor in the Bomba situation... and when the Supreme Court of Canada rules against a university for narrowness of thought and practice, one must realize that this is more than sensation -- it is a statement that this institution is iindeed an affront to the very origins of what a university was meant to be!

    Again, please refute the earlier point about gender, which is most certainly referred to in the conenant (you select "highlights" and ignore the archaic references to gender) and was central to the Supreme Court's decision, later quote by the provincial law societies than denied the accreditation:

    I put to you this again: Regarding gender, what part of this excerpt would you say speaks to modernity and the realities of gender in 2018?

    "Further, according to the Bible, sexual intimacy is reserved for marriage between one man and one woman, and within that marriage bond it is God’s intention that it be enjoyed as a means for marital intimacy and procreation. Honouring and upholding these principles, members
    of the TWU community strive for purity of thought and relationship, respectful
    modesty, personal responsibility for actions taken, and avoidance of contexts where
    temptation to compromise would be particularly strong."

    Quote comment
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 46532
    thumbs_up 2
    Report    REPLY #81 

    Anonymous said 3 months ago

    Quoting: Andrew Jones
    "I was actually referring to our frequent poster Obvious, who likes to link to source and reference documents that provide background to the topic concerned.

    But since you bring it up, you're so impassioned about the document TW published that you don't even identify yourself in a discussion about it? That indeed speaks volumes about you.

    Regarding gender, what part of this excerpt would you say speaks to modernity and the realities of gender in 2018?

    "Further, according to the Bible, sexual intimacy is reserved for marriage between one man and one woman, and within that marriage bond it is God’s intention that it be enjoyed as a means for marital intimacy and procreation. Honouring and upholding these principles, members
    of the TWU community strive for purity of thought and relationship, respectful
    modesty, personal responsibility for actions taken, and avoidance of contexts where
    temptation to compromise would be particularly strong."

    And this is not just my opinion on TW's version of gender - the Supreme Court of Canada ruled against this narrow definition during the rejection of the prospective TW law school. And the teaching school may be thusly decommissioned, one would imagine."



    1. I initially thought that might be a reference to Obvious, the poster, so I apologize for taking that out of context.

    2. My "passion" (what I could call seeking clarity) for the posts actually comes solely from seeing a poster make false and slanderous terms against an institution. It has nothing to do with the document itself. I merely asked for information as to why a poster, specifically Lobster, would say TWU has issues with race, gender and abortion.

    3. Why on Earth would I attach my name? So someone can make assumptions about my character based on a snapshot of information and attach a (insert adjective)-phobe next to my name? Sorry. Not going to happen. And why would you call me out on that? I thought that was only Oldster's stick.

    4. I have read it over and over and still can't see why you included the paragraph in regards to gender. I could see one having issue with the sexuality issue from that paragraph, but gender I do not see. If you do, I am open to your interpretation though. While we're at it, can you highlight the wording in the covenant that you would view TWU as being biased to others' race and views on abortion?

    5. I would love to have a conversation on the decision of the SCOC. However, here's not the place so I'm not touching it.

    I'm not going to relate this conversation to the issue with Bomba being let go. It's no secret that Bomba's athletes have accomplished a high amount of success in a very short time, and by all accounts, he is loved by his athletes and is highly respected by his colleagues. However, if he, as suggested earlier in this thread, refused to sign (perhaps abide by?) the covenant, his release actually really isn't an issue at all and is mostly the emotional in nature. If he indeed did not abide by or sign the covenant, then he would have essentially breached his contract and the appropriate procedure would be to let him go. It sucks, but I assume TWU would've made this clear when he was hired. If not, then people would certainly would have grounds to be miffed.

    Quote comment
  • nc-blogger User since:
    Sep 12th, 2014
    Posts: 704
    thumbs_up 2
    Report    REPLY #82 

    NC Blogger said 3 months ago

    Quoting: Andrew Jones
    "I put to you this again: Regarding gender, what part of this excerpt would you say speaks to modernity and the realities of gender in 2018?

    "Further, according to the Bible, sexual intimacy is reserved for marriage between one man and one woman, and within that marriage bond it is God’s intention that it be enjoyed as a means for marital intimacy and procreation. Honouring and upholding these principles, members
    of the TWU community strive for purity of thought and relationship, respectful
    modesty, personal responsibility for actions taken, and avoidance of contexts where
    temptation to compromise would be particularly strong.""


    I would say it flies in the face of "modernity" but I certainly wouldn't consider that a bad thing, as, with any covenant, it only applies to the individuals who have entered into the covenant. No one is forcing anyone to attend, or work at, TWU.

    As to the realities of gender, well that certainly is much more difficult to answer. Seeing as research differs on whether gender is a social construct or not, there is still a whole lot we don't know about gender and our learning is still evolving. Holding onto conservative values may not be the popular thing to do right now, but I am willing to respect others religious views, even when the don't completely align with mine.

    As the last poster though, apologies for missing the capital "O" on obvious...."ze" does have a tendency to try and end arguments with a link!

    Quote comment
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 46532
    thumbs_up 1
    Report    REPLY #83 

    Andrew Jones said 3 months ago

    4. I have read it over and over and still can't see why you included the paragraph in regards to gender. I could see one having issue with the sexuality issue from that paragraph, but gender I do not see. If you do, I am open to your interpretation though. While we're at it, can you highlight the wording in the covenant that you would view TWU as being biased to others' race and views on abortion?

    I agree that the covenant does not include text or subtext re. race and abortion. That is why I confine my point to gender.

    Regarding gender, the covenant section I refer to does contain very firm, binary references to (traditional) genders. By any estimation of the current world, and in the estimation of the Supreme Court, this definition is not appropriate in the creation of professional* and competent lawyers in this country.

    *Lawyers, as mentioned, will not all be private practice, and some will work in the public sphere and be assigned clients of all gender identifications. Towards fairness and justness for those clients, the Supreme Court (endorsed by two provincial law societies) has ruled that in the estate of law, narrow definitions like the ones asserted in the covenant, are not acceptable.

    Quote comment
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 46532
    thumbs_up 2
    Report    REPLY #84 

    Anonymous said 3 months ago

    Quoting: NC Blogger


    As the last poster though, apologies for missing the capital "O" on obvious...."ze" does have a tendency to try and end arguments with a link!"


    Haha! Well played

    Quote comment
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 46532
    thumbs_up 0
    Report    REPLY #85 

    Anonymous said 3 months ago

    Quoting: Andrew Jones
    "4. I have read it over and over and still can't see why you included the paragraph in regards to gender. I could see one having issue with the sexuality issue from that paragraph, but gender I do not see. If you do, I am open to your interpretation though. While we're at it, can you highlight the wording in the covenant that you would view TWU as being biased to others' race and views on abortion?

    I agree that the covenant does not include text or subtext re. race and abortion. That is why I confine my point to gender.

    Regarding gender, the covenant section I refer to does contain very firm, binary references to (traditional) genders. By any estimation of the current world, and in the estimation of the Supreme Court, this definition is not appropriate in the creation of professional* and competent lawyers in this country.

    *Lawyers, as mentioned, will not all be private practice, and some will work in the public sphere and be assigned clients of all gender identifications. Towards fairness and justness for those clients, the Supreme Court (endorsed by two provincial law societies) has ruled that in the estate of law, narrow definitions like the ones asserted in the covenant, are not acceptable."


    Except that the Supreme Court decision did not engage with the protected categories of gender (either identity or expression). The Court decision was based on consideration of balancing the rights of two other protected categories - "religion" and "sexual orientation". And the decision was specifically about the law societies consideration of "public interest" as part of its function of accrediting law schools not whether individual law graduates would be limited in their abilities to become "professional and competent lawyers in this country" due to their religious beliefs.
    https://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/17141/index.do

    Quote comment
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 46532
    thumbs_up 7
    Report    REPLY #86 

    No Religion said 3 months ago

    AI update: http://athleticsillustrated.com/opinion/trinity-western-university-hires-shane-wiebe-rob-pike-continues-to-work-with-athletes/

    Quote comment
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 46532
    thumbs_up 0
    Report    REPLY #87 

    Anonymous said 3 months ago

    Bomba was not an official employee of the university, but instead had a contact with them, so there was never any issue with the covenant. As well, the athletes were told his non-renewal had nothing to do with him not being a Christian.


    Quoting: Anonymous


    I'm not going to relate this conversation to the issue with Bomba being let go. It's no secret that Bomba's athletes have accomplished a high amount of success in a very short time, and by all accounts, he is loved by his athletes and is highly respected by his colleagues. However, if he, as suggested earlier in this thread, refused to sign (perhaps abide by?) the covenant, his release actually really isn't an issue at all and is mostly the emotional in nature. If he indeed did not abide by or sign the covenant, then he would have essentially breached his contract and the appropriate procedure would be to let him go. It sucks, but I assume TWU would've made this clear when he was hired. If not, then people would certainly would have grounds to be miffed."

    Quote comment
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 46532
    thumbs_up 1
    Report    REPLY #88 

    Anonymous said 3 months ago



    Thanks for posting! I liked the update until the last few paragraphs when the writer changes tone from a news article to an op-ed using language similar to a vindictive Facebook post from an adolescent.

    Its very unfortunate for the many talented athletes that have had success under Bomba. I know the value of having excellent coaches and how frustrating it can be training under inadequate coaches. However, I think the threat of saying a team will quit is going to fall on deaf ears. It’s not like track is a big money time sport and the people would notice if the athletes quit. Aside from that, an extremely low percentage of athletes make a career out of athletics, especially after U Sports. Therefore, obtaining an education should be paramount and I doubt athletes would leave school and likely have to change or alterate post secondary programs. Running as a private club, I could see that, but I can’t see them leaving school altogether.

    Hoping for the best though for the ones impacted.

    Quote comment
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 46532
    thumbs_up 5
    Report    REPLY #89 

    Change the toner said 3 months ago

    Quoting: Anonymous
    "Thanks for posting! I liked the update until the last few paragraphs when the writer changes tone from a news article to an op-ed using language similar to a vindictive Facebook post from an adolescent.

    Its very unfortunate for the many talented athletes that have had success under Bomba. I know the value of having excellent coaches and how frustrating it can be training under inadequate coaches. However, I think the threat of saying a team will quit is going to fall on deaf ears. It’s not like track is a big money time sport and the people would notice if the athletes quit. Aside from that, an extremely low percentage of athletes make a career out of athletics, especially after U Sports. Therefore, obtaining an education should be paramount and I doubt athletes would leave school and likely have to change or alterate post secondary programs. Running as a private club, I could see that, but I can’t see them leaving school altogether.

    Hoping for the best though for the ones impacted."


    Quoting: Anonymous
    "Thanks for posting! I liked the update until the last few paragraphs when the writer changes tone from a news article to an op-ed using language similar to a vindictive Facebook post from an adolescent.

    Its very unfortunate for the many talented athletes that have had success under Bomba. I know the value of having excellent coaches and how frustrating it can be training under inadequate coaches. However, I think the threat of saying a team will quit is going to fall on deaf ears. It’s not like track is a big money time sport and the people would notice if the athletes quit. Aside from that, an extremely low percentage of athletes make a career out of athletics, especially after U Sports. Therefore, obtaining an education should be paramount and I doubt athletes would leave school and likely have to change or alterate post secondary programs. Running as a private club, I could see that, but I can’t see them leaving school altogether.

    Hoping for the best though for the ones impacted."


    The category for the article is indicated as "Opinion". Reading it, I see it first tells some of the background, then goes into the opinion aspect. Nothing wrong with that, but more conventional style would be to write an opinionated opening to establish the tone. But don't expect convention from Kelsall, who is a very creative writer with a panache that we can use a lot more of these days. Note his "divinely forgiven" comment. Appreciate some of the style.

    But his forte might be in writing for Charlie Hebdo or the Onion.

    Quote comment
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 46532
    thumbs_up 2
    Report    REPLY #90 

    Anonymous said 3 months ago

    Quoting: Change the toner
    "The category for the article is indicated as "Opinion". Reading it, I see it first tells some of the background, then goes into the opinion aspect. ."


    Correct. My bad.

    Quote comment
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 46532
    thumbs_up 3
    Report    REPLY #91 

    Anonymous said 3 months ago

    I don’t like either of the AI articles. Very biased. Quite obvious the author is buddy-buddy with Bomba.

    Quote comment
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 46532
    thumbs_up 0
    Report    REPLY #92 

    Andrew Jones said 3 months ago

    Quoting: Anonymous
    "Except that the Supreme Court decision did not engage with the protected categories of gender (either identity or expression). The Court decision was based on consideration of balancing the rights of two other protected categories - "religion" and "sexual orientation". And the decision was specifically about the law societies consideration of "public interest" as part of its function of accrediting law schools not whether individual law graduates would be limited in their abilities to become "professional and competent lawyers in this country" due to their religious beliefs.
    https://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/17141/index.do"


    Fair enough on the text of the ruling but it is strong possibility that gender wasn't alluded to owing to the current fluidity of the word and its meaning. To go there likely would have belaboured the process.

    As for the public interest, by quoting the ruling re. "religion" you underline what I mentioned about professionalism: the covenant/religious beliefs required to function at TW (and a law school therein) would likely produce lawyers that would not serve the best interests of the public. Again, the specificity (and limited, anachronistic version) of gender mentioned explicitly in the covenant no doubt figures into the religiosity (and objectivity/sense of fairness and justness) of prospective law graduates.

    Quote comment
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 46532
    thumbs_up 0
    Report    REPLY #93 

    Anonymous said 3 months ago

    Quoting: Andrew Jones
    "Fair enough on the text of the ruling but it is strong possibility that gender wasn't alluded to owing to the current fluidity of the word and its meaning. To go there likely would have belaboured the process.

    As for the public interest, by quoting the ruling re. "religion" you underline what I mentioned about professionalism: Again, the specificity (and limited, anachronistic version) of gender mentioned explicitly in the covenant no doubt figures into the religiosity (and objectivity/sense of fairness and justness) of prospective law graduates."




    There are two anonymous posters on here that have been engaging with you. One, me who asked about race, gender, abortion, etc and all subsequent posts associated with that topic afterward. The other was the individual who you quoted.

    However, I do want to chime in on this. If I'm reading/interpreting your post correctly, I don't agree with your statement "the covenant/religious beliefs required to function at TW (and a law school therein) would likely produce lawyers that would not serve the best interests of the public." for two reasons.

    1. Unless I'm wrong and perhaps someone much higher up TWU can respond (which is unlikely), I don't feel that the beliefs held by TWU are REQUIRED to function. To me, the covenant states this is what we (TWU) believe and we are asking students to adhere to. I don't feel TWU is requiring people to believe in everything they do as well, they just want students to agree to it. Can there not be a difference? There are certain things I don't agree with politically, legally and morally, but will abide by the rules.

    Furthermore,

    2. I think it's extremely erroneous (and borderline discriminatory) to assume that because one attends TWU and signs the covenant that they wouldn't possess the free thought and conscience to professionally defend or serve people who do not live according to TWU's covenant, including those from the LGBTQ community.

    Did you know that this was TWU's first dealings with the Supreme Court of Canada? The BC Teacher's College also attempted to deny certification to TWU's College of Education because of the values system of TWU. The Teacher's College lost and since then, I haven't seen many cases where students/parents have complained about a TWU not teaching a student due to their sexual preferences. Why does the SCOC insist that it would happen in the legal profession?

    NOTE: I didn't actually check to see if there have been any complaints made about teachers from TWU and teaching students who identify as LBGTQ so it my have happened, but it also may have happened with teachers who have not received their degrees from TWU.

    Quote comment
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 46532
    thumbs_up 0
    Report    REPLY #94 

    Andrew Jones said 3 months ago

    If the ruling explanation from the Court isn't satisfactory to you, I'm not sure there is an avenue you can pursue. The SCoC decisions are, naturally, rather binding.


    1. Unless I'm wrong and perhaps someone much higher up TWU can respond (which is unlikely), I don't feel that the beliefs held by TWU are REQUIRED to function. To me, the covenant states this is what we (TWU) believe and we are asking students to adhere to. I don't feel TWU is requiring people to believe in everything they do as well, they just want students to agree to it. Can there not be a difference? There are certain things I don't agree with politically, legally and morally, but will abide by the rules.

    2. I think it's extremely erroneous (and borderline discriminatory) to assume that because one attends TWU and signs the covenant that they wouldn't possess the free thought and conscience to professionally defend or serve people who do not live according to TWU's covenant, including those from the LGBTQ community.


    Re. 1. the covenant (and other factors) was enough for the SCoC and the provincial law societies. One can disagree with those agencies, but again I can't see this decision being overturned.

    Re. 2, again, there may be those that are able to separate their personal beliefs from their professional conduct, but TW has, frankly, painted itself into a corner as regards graduating students from their own professional schools. Times have changed, and TW must also -- if they are to (as they seek to) produce professionals that work with the broad public.

    Did you know that this was TWU's first dealings with the Supreme Court of Canada? The BC Teacher's College also attempted to deny certification to TWU's College of Education because of the values system of TWU

    I previously alluded to the teacher's college issue.

    Quote comment
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 46532
    thumbs_up 7
    Report    REPLY #95 

    Anonymous said 3 months ago

    Quoting: Anonymous
    "I don’t like either of the AI articles. Very biased. Quite obvious the author is buddy-buddy with Bomba."


    That's the way "Opinion" works. If you were to listen to a podcast with say Joe Rogan, you will hear his opinion orated over and over and over again.

    Listen to Sports Talk Radio and the video version: Conjecture, Opinion, over and over and over again.

    Move to the arts, a creative medium of journalism, stand-up comedians, satire, movies, jazz music rap/hip-hop, rock etc etc, the genres are rife with a singular perspective - some with buddy-buddies.

    Look at the portrait on President Donald Trump on the cover of Time Magazine when he was first elected, there is an article that explains all of the touches that make it a photo - a piece of art that shares an opinion - I am not sure where I saw it, but the article did a great job of explaining the objective of the photographer - shining a very negative light on POTUS.

    Dr. Zuess had a few books that are very one-perspective-ish.

    Poetry. Read more poetry....

    Need more opinion in traditional style media writing.

    Quote comment
  • new-post-last-visitanonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 46532
    thumbs_up 0
    Report    REPLY #96 

    Anonymous said 3 months ago

    Quoting: Andrew Jones
    "If the ruling explanation from the Court isn't satisfactory to you, I'm not sure there is an avenue you can pursue. The SCoC decisions are, naturally, rather binding

    Re. 1. the covenant (and other factors) was enough for the SCoC and the provincial law societies. One can disagree with those agencies, but again I can't see this decision being overturned.

    Re. 2, again, there may be those that are able to separate their personal beliefs from their professional conduct, but TW has, frankly, painted itself into a corner as regards graduating students from their own professional schools. Times have changed, and TW must also -- if they are to (as they seek to) produce professionals that work with the broad public

    I previously alluded to the teacher's college issue."


    I understand the results of the ruling of the SCoC and that there isn’t an avenue for me to address it. I’m fine with that. It was just in my opinion and I think.

    I didn’t see the previous connection. Will go back and check.

    Thank you for the respectful engaging though, but I don’t feel I have anything more to add so I’m done here. Have a good one.

    Quote comment
Previous | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4
Anonymous

says…    

Quote Underline Italics Bold
Submit Preview

By posting on our forum you are agreeing to the following guidelines.

To help prevent spammers please
enter the two words below.


image-display1

 

Benefits of creating an account!

  • No need to reveal your real name.
  • Quicker to post (no need to enter the "two words" above each time).
  • Gives you the ability to edit your own comments and subscribe to topics.
  • It's free & quick to create an account!
Submit & Create Account

 

To help prevent spammers please
enter the two words below.


image-display1

To help prevent spammers please
enter the two words below.


image-display1