On June 30th, Rep. Andy Biggs (R-AZ) retweeted a post from Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT), which read “Et tu, BYU?” followed by a thread of tweets with the hashtag #CancelCulture. The tweet was in reference to Brigham Young University’s recent decision to change the name of its law school due to concerns over former church leader and university namesake Brigham Young’s history of racism.
The decision to change the name of BYU’s J. Reuben Clark Law School was not made lightly or without consideration for the university’s values and mission. According to an official statement released by BYU President Kevin J Worthen, the decision came after months of research and discussion among students, faculty, staff, alumni, and community members.
The statement explained that while Brigham Young played an important role in establishing the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and founding BYU itself, his views on race were deeply troubling and inconsistent with the values held by both the Church and the university today.
“Brigham Young did some things well,” Worthen said in an interview with Deseret News. “But he also did some things poorly when it comes to this issue [of race]. And so we want our graduates leaving here understanding what we stand for.”
The decision has been met with mixed reactions from both within and outside of Mormon communities. Some have praised BYU for taking a necessary step towards acknowledging past wrongs and promoting greater inclusivity on campus. Others have criticized the move as caving to political correctness or erasing history.
Rep. Biggs’ retweet falls squarely into this latter category – one that sees efforts at reconciliation or progress through changing language or symbols as evidence of an increasingly intolerant society.
However, such claims ignore historical context surrounding figures like Brigham Young – namely that their legacies are often more complex than simple hero/villain narratives would suggest.
For example, while Young’s views on race were undoubtedly prejudiced by modern standards, they also evolved over time. As a prophet and leader in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, he received revelations that challenged his previous beliefs about black individuals and priesthood ordination.
Additionally, Brigham Young was a key figure in establishing settlements throughout Utah and the broader Western United States. His leadership and vision played a significant role in shaping the region’s economy, culture, and politics – for better or worse.
By reducing figures like Young to either saints or sinners based solely on their views on race or other sensitive topics, we risk oversimplifying complex historical legacies into soundbites that do little to promote understanding or progress.
Rep. Biggs’ tweet is just one example of how charged political rhetoric can polarize discussions around sensitive topics like race and history. While it may be tempting to view these debates as black-and-white issues with clear right or wrong answers, reality is often much more nuanced.
In this case, BYU’s decision to change the name of its law school reflects an ongoing process of self-reflection and growth within an institution that seeks to uphold its values while remaining open to new perspectives.
Whether we agree with such decisions or not, it is important that our discussions around them remain grounded in fact-based analysis rather than partisan posturing. Only then can we hope to move towards greater understanding and empathy for all those impacted by our nation’s complicated past.