Again the seemingly contradictory "debate worth having" invite followed by the "I know this will be an unpopular opinion on here ..."
Are we just supposed to agree with you?
I'm not sure what your issue is? Didn't ND file a suit against ACA which they lost 2-1 in a lower court? Are you just pissed at Jenkins?
I don't see the connection between ACA and skyboxes? Would field turf and/or a jumbotron also cripple the school's mission?
Sorry I probably didn't phrase that well. ND complied with a mandate that violated the conscience of the University; they didn't pay the fine associated with standing up for religious freedom. Complying and not showing damages damaged their case to the 7th Circuit. But at the same time, Jenkins announced a $400 million renovation, highlighting the football stadium as the center of campus.
I feel like Jenkins' administration has focused more on putting up buildings and expanding campus outward at the expense of its Catholic mission. All 3 are important, not just the first 2. A jumbotron and field turf should have the purpose of
promoting the expansion of campus and its Catholic mission. If we lose sight of these three goals moving in unison, we run the risk of becoming like Stanford. A great school with a good football program that has little impact on Catholicism. These goals moving in unison is what makes Notre Dame so great. Jenkins is primarily moving two of them. I used the ACA/mandate to highlight a specific instance (and a very unacceptable one, IMO) to back up my point.
I figured this would be an unpopular opinion on here because this is primarily a football board. My perception is that the majority of posters don't hold this view and very much like the stadium expansion. Notre Dame's Catholic mission isn't as popular of a topic around these parts.
Better?