Specifically, a great to-do has been made of a map, supposedly flush with cross-hairs, released by Sarah Palin’s political action committee. Palin-haters jumped at the opportunity to indict a person they already despise for inciting a shooter to fulfill her supposed secret desire of violence against those with whom she differs politically. Though the Palin camp has credibly demonstrated that the “cross-hairs” in question are, in fact, surveyor’s marks (right at home on a map), there are those who—some out of their own ignorance—refuse to relent because deep in their hearts they want Sarah Palin to be a murderous wretch; it makes her so much more defeat-able.

The counter for this idiocy, thus far, has been to point out that Democrat campaigns and committees have released maps with bulls-eyes on them and that politicians, especially President Obama, have used language referencing knives, guns, fighting, etc. This has served to illustrate something that needs to be said expressly.

There’s a sick irony in that those who want to blame harsh political conversation for the Arizona shooting have done nothing but converse harshly and politically.

And I say this as one not opposed to political debate. It’s politics. It gets rowdy sometimes. That’s the nature of the beast. What I find unfathomable is that those who are most “offended” by the harshness of someone, say Sarah Palin, are the most offensive in their uninformed and malicious finger pointing and false accusations.

The bottom line is that in language, even political language, words mean things, and often they mean more than what they say. I deal with this in the spiritual realm, where I often encounter persons who miss the point of Scripture because they overemphasize the “literal” words on the page. The Bible is literature of varying genres, and as such it should be interpreted as literature. That means that sometimes we take what we see literally. That also means that sometimes we take what we see metaphorically. Our language, including charts or maps, is full of idioms and symbols that must be taken as such—comprehending what they mean rather than what they say. It really isn’t all that hard.

No sane, honest person believes that Sarah Palin wants anyone to take up guns against Congresspersons, even if those map symbols are cross-hairs (if they truly did, they would have moved heaven and earth to secure the other Congresspersons “targeted” by Palin). No sane, honest person believes that Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee wants anyone to take up bows and arrows against Congresspersons, even though their map had bulls-eyes on it. No sane, honest person believes that Barack Obama wants anyone to bring a gun to a knife fight. All this just as no sane, honest person believes they might step in a poodle when it’s “raining cats and dogs.”

We understand that language is full of idioms. We understand that what people mean often goes far beyond what they say. In short, we’re adults. Let’s start acting like it. The hypocrisy and feigned “shock” by those who can’t wait to say something shocking themselves are not lost on me.

No, folks, a lone and apparently mentally disturbed gunman perpetrated this evil. He bears the responsibility for it and will stand before his God and his government to give account. May God have mercy on his soul.

This leads to some questions:

• With the exit of trained, “old hand” mounts, how many horses are trained and ready to work with classes set to start soon?
• What does Bit by Bit view as the proper ratio of horses:students for the program?
• Was every horse lender who dared utter a word against RSU and/or has criticized the program of late told his or her horse(s) isn’t/aren’t needed?
• Is refusing a gift of horse use from generous people the best response to the situation, and for what purpose was it done?
• Is this an attempt to silence calls for greater openness and accountability from within the program by excluding critics from Bit by Bit?
• Will RSU, in fact, be changing the program to the Little by Little therapeutic stickhorse riding program?

Discuss…

[Original Post Below]

I have a wicked head cold and work is busier than busy, so I don’t have time to give many details, but I can make a few quick updates.

Megan Hart has also resigned from RSU’s Bit by Bit program. It appears she will be allowed to work out her notice (but seriously, how could she not, there’s no one left). It appears Ms. English will have a very clean slate when she arrives.

There’s been another firing resignation in another department at RSU. I’ll add more as I am able.

You Welchites, don’t forget the Welch Public Schools Enrichment Banquet tonight at 6:30. I’ll be there, head cold and all.

What led to Switala’s departure? Several allegations are swirling, and the WynnBlog has not yet confirmed all the circumstances surrounding her departure, but I’ll keep searching for the truth.

Also, those of you concerned with the continuation of the Bit by Bit program need to keep a couple of things in mind. First, what is to become of the horses that are committed to the program contingent upon Switala’s caring for them? Such contingencies do exist. Second, know that your concern about Bit by Bit and your calls and emails to those in power are beginning to make a difference. Be intrepid until you see the changes you know are needed to make Bit by Bit the program it is supposed to be–and that the Bit by Bit students need it to be.

More to come when I am able.

Here’s KOTV’s web story.

Your opinion?

First, what do I think of Jennifer England? All I know is what I have read in this press release. It appears she is a well qualified and competent person. Her years of involvement seem to indicate a sense of commitment and caring for persons with needs similar to those who so greatly benefit from Bit by Bit. I can’t argue with that.

That said, when was the last time you ever saw anyone issue a press release that said, “Please note, we have hired a complete loser.” Read me well: I am not saying England is a loser, but I am saying that if RSU, in its haste to install a new Bit by Bit director—maybe to help squelch public backlash over a blatant and idiotic administration blunder—did hire someone less than primo, do you think they’d tell you? RSU’s press release is merely its spin, designed to restore public trust in a program people know has some serious problems.

But let’s assume that Ms. England is absolutley as described, which I am sure she is, and that she is a caring, capable woman who will care deeply about the Bit by Bit program. How does that set her apart from the previous directors, all of whom have been described to me using the same words by volunteers in the program? How does that fix the issues with Bit by Bit, NONE OF WHICH HAVE BEEN IN REGARD THE DIRECTORS OF THE PROGRAM? It doesn’t. Period.

In short, a new Bit by Bit director does nothing to fix the problems in RSU administrative oversight and operation of the program. Further, if she is a smart and savvy professional who truly cares about the program, and nothing changes within the RSU administration, she will get frustrated, ask questions, and—most likely—be terminated like those before. I, for one, want Ms. England’s association with Bit by Bit to be more than a brief interlude before she has to file a wrongful termination lawsuit.  That means reform must occur.

And so I ask, What does reform look like? I’d like the many of you who are visiting this site to weigh in via the comments sections and tell me what you need to see from RSU to convince you to reinvest your time, talent, and treasure in the Bit by Bit program.

And let’s all be clear here. This issue is not dead. There are many volunteers and donors who are still livid over RSU’s (mis)administration of Bit by Bit. And while no one I have communicated with desires to see any Bit by Bit students harmed, they are committed to seeing Bit by Bit fixed—even if that means withdrawing themselves and their resources, including horses, until a real fix is executed. That, in the long term, will ensure that there is a Bit by Bit to serve those with special needs. In short, it’s the most caring and most responsible response. We all know Bit by Bit can exist and operate without being under the RSU umbrella. Is that what it will take? Is RSU willing to fix what is truly broken? Weigh in below.

As you may know, the lawsuit by former Bit by Bit director Jana Walstrom against Rogers State University for wrongful termination was kicked from the federal courts back to state court, specifically Rogers County District Court, where the case is presided over by Judge Post.

Here is RSU’s response to the allegations made in Walstrom’s First Amended Petition.

Here is the schedule both sides have agreed to for trying the case.

And, here is what I consider the most significant document in the file. This was attached to the back of Judge Eagan’s federal court opinion, which I previously shared here. I find this document noteworthy because, in all the litigation I have seen RSU involved in—and there has been a bunch—I have never seen RSU or any of its people represented by attorneys other than those of OU’s office of Legal Counsel. As this document clearly shows, former State Senator Pro Tempore—and RSU library namesake—Stratton Taylor is listed as lead counsel, as is Clint Russell, of Taylor’s law firm. To further muddy things, it should be noted that the Burrage of Taylor, Burrage, Foster, Mattett, Downs & Ramsey is current state senator Sean Burrage. Further, Sean Burrage’s wife, Carole, is a former RSU faculty member, and Stratton Taylor’s wife, Carolyn, is currently on the faculty of RSU’s History & Political Science Department. Clint Russell, of Taylor’s law firm, is also listed as lead attorney, and it appears as if he has been signing most of RSU’s documents; additionally, two attorneys from OU’s Office of Legal Counsel are listed.

I did a follow-up post January 23, 2009, in this post.

With the recent mess at Bit by Bit due to Dr. Ray Brown’s termination of interim director Trista Milliman, I thought the Walstrom case worth revisiting. I’m glad I did, because Walstrom’s case is very much still alive.

Here’s the quick and dirty background. Walstrom filed her suit against RSU, its regents, and Dr. Larry Minks and Ms. Linda Andrews, two RSU administrators (at that time; Minks has departed, Andrews remains) in Rogers County District Court, which is the state court having jurisdiction over RSU, which is located in Claremore, Rogers County, Oklahoma. Walstrom alleged some very serious acts on the part of RSU, through Minks and Andrews, which, if true, should scare anyone from working for RSU ever again. There were also several similarities between Walstrom’s allegations and those made in other suits against RSU and its agents (yes, there have been several).

Back to Walstrom. RSU’s attorneys pulled a maneuver whereby they moved to have the case removed from the state court to federal court. The Rogers County courts have delivered some fairly harsh decisions against RSU in the past, and it’s likely that RSU attorneys view the federal court friendlier to their client. There’s another reason as well. It’s the Eleventh Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which states:

The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State.

For all practical purposes, the courts interpret this to mean that U.S. states cannot be sued in federal court, for which the term is “sovereign immunity.” This is not absolute, and there are a couple of exceptions. One of these exceptions is if a state gives permission to be sued in federal court, the federal court then has jurisdiction to hear the case. In the Walstrom case, RSU’s attorneys filed a motion to move the case from Rogers County court to the federal courts, the United States Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma, based in Tulsa. Once in federal court, RSU’s attorneys then moved to dismiss the case because, they allege, RSU (an arm of the State of Oklahoma) is immune from suits in federal court because of the Eleventh Amendment. Pretty snazzy, huh? Move to go to federal court, then move to dismiss because you’re immune to federal court, and call it a day.

To me, as a non-attorney, is seems preposterous that a party could make the motion to move a case to federal court then claim it hadn’t given permission to be sued in federal court. But the argument has been successful before, which, one assumes, is why it was tried again. But this time, the court reached the same conclusion I did, Judge Eagan ruling that RSU’s motion to move the case to federal court granted Walstrom permission to sue it in federal court, stating:

Plaintiff argues, and the Court agrees, that removal of a case to federal court constitutes an intentional waiver of the RSU’s defense of sovereign immunity. … Therefore, RSU has waived its Eleventh Amendment immunity and it is not immune to plaintiff’s wrongful termination claim.

Win one for Walstrom.

Because the case was not dismissed, the federal court went on to Walstrom’s claim that her Constitutional rights were violated by Dr. Minks and Ms. Andrews, who were acting under the color of state law, which is referred to as a §1983 claim (after the numbered section in which it appears in the statutes). There is a precise methodology for stating a claim under §1983. In the Walstrom case, the federal court ruled that Walstrom had failed to state a claim, meaning that she did not adequately meet the requirements of a 5-prong test in her allegations. The court’s opinion is that the Walstrom didn’t satisfactorily satisfy the 5-prong test, so her §1983 claim was dismissed.

Win one for RSU.

Since the §1983 claim was the only federal issue of Walstrom’s case, the court then ruled that state court is the best place for the remaining issues, all related to Oklahoma state law, to be decided, thus the federal court declined to exercise jurisdiction over what remains of the case and remanded it back to Rogers Country District Court for further action. So, Walstrom’s case is back in Judge Post’s Claremore court.

Win one for ??? Only time will tell. Rogers County judges have been fairly good at getting to the truth and issuing good opinions. We’ll see if that remains the case. I have every confidence Judge Post will do well. According to OSCN, the parties have agreed on a scheduling order. I’ll try to get by the courthouse this week and see what else has been filed recently.

And that’s all I have to say about that (for now). If you’d like to see the court document I have referenced for this post, it is here. Feel free to comment if you feel I have made an error in my analysis. I’ll be glad to correct mistakes.

And special thanks to the WynnBlog friend who helped me get the court document. You know who you are.

[UPDATE 5: Sept. 9, 2009 @11:52 PM]

Okay, kids, here’s the letter that started it all. This is Trista Milliman’s letter to Dr. Ray Brown asking for part-time help for the Bit by Bit program one last time and stating that if it was not forthcoming, he could consider the letter her notice. Of course, we all know she wasn’t even allowed the courtesy of serving out her two-week notice before Dr. Ray “The Terminator” Brown relieved her of her duties. Read this letter and tell me who has Bit by Bit and its students’ best interests—and safety—at heart.

[UPDATE 4: Sept. 7, 2009 @ 8:45 PM]

Sunday’s Claremore Progress carried a guest column in which RSU president Dr. Larry Rice answered none of the questions I and many others are asking, while extolling the virtues of Bit by Bit. There’s no question Bit by Bit is an excellent program, and it has become such due to the diligent efforts of under-appreciated staff, selfless volunteers, and generous benefactors. Any success has been, largely, in spite of RSU administration involvement. So then, Dr. Rice, if it’s such a great program, why are you allowing your underlings to destroy it? Or maybe a more appropriate question, who is really in charge on College Hill?

[UPDATE 3: Sept. 4, 2009 @ 3:51 PM]

Several of things have happened today. I am still receiving communiques from Bit by Bit volunteers who have had it with RSU’s management of the program. If all of them are contacting the university, they are a force to be reckoned with.

Second, Brent Ortolani, director of public relations at RSU, actually replied to my email. In my email I asked:

Does the university have any comment on the termination of Trista Milliman as interim director of the Bit by Bit program Monday? Has the university located a new director yet? What is the university’s response to news of a Bit by Bit volunteer backlash over Milliman’s termination? What steps is [sic] the university taking to cover all the Bit by Bit classes starting Sept. 15 with such a small paid staff and volunteers pulling out? What are the current Bit by Bit enrollment and staffing numbers?

He responded by sending me a Microsoft Word document attached to an email, which I have converted to PDF for you. Here it is.

In short, he uses the typical we-don’t-reply-on-personnel-issues catch all to avoid that question. He also provides the typical we’ve-got-everything-under-control response. Interestingly enough, he did not mention postponing classes as a possibility, as Dr. Brown did in my previous update (see below). Probably the most telling of Ortolani’s response, though, is the question he did not answer, specifically: “What is the university’s response to news of a Bit by Bit volunteer backlash over Milliman’s termination?” His non-answer indicates the university seems to expect that program volunteers will eventually shut up and toe the line. He states, “The university anticipates a similar number of volunteers this year,” the number of which he earlier fixed at approximately 75. The information I am receiving makes it appear that that would be highly unlikely given the current circumstances. What say you?

Lastly, the lawsuit by former Bit by Bit director Jana Walstrom has not been settled. More info on that will show up as a new post here.

**************************

[UPDATE 2: Sept. 4, 2009 @9:55 AM]

I have permission to share a reply Dr. Ray Brown made to an email inquiry.

Thank you for your email regarding the Bit by Bit program. The university began the Bit by Bit program approximately 11 years ago and has served children/clients continuously since then. A lot of great things have happened at Bit by Bit over the years. Many students have shown remarkable progress. I want to reassure you that the program will continue in spite of temporary setbacks. The search for the director position is drawing to a close. Interviews are currently underway and the director should be hired very soon. A search has started for a full-time instructor. We fully intend to have Bit by Bit staffed with certified and experienced instructors. We have several NARHA certified instructors who have applied to the Bit by Bit program. In the event that sufficient qualified instructors are not employed, the university will delay the start of classes. At this time, I do not believe that will be necessary. The resignation of the Interim Director was unfortunate and poorly timed. Nevertheless, the university is committed to continuing the same high quality program that has been offered for the last decade. Thank you for expressing your concern and giving me an opportunity to explain our plans.
Ray Brown

Some observations and questions:

1. Milliman made the university aware she would resign IF more staff wasn’t hired. If, as Dr. Brown states, they are close to filling these positions, Milliman would not have needed to resign.
2. As it has been reported, Milliman did not resign. She submitted her letter last week asking again for more staff (and stating she would resign if they denied her request), and Brown terminated her this Monday.
3. As for the timing, all accounts lay that squarely in the university’s lap, specifically that of Dr. Ray Brown.
4. What does the university consider “sufficient qualified instructors”? The underlying issue here is requiring too much of too few. I am calling for RSU to define and state for public judgment what it considers the criteria for a “qualified instructor” and what it means by “sufficient,” and how it reached that determination. Bottom line, share with the world what RSU considers a safe and proper ratio of students to “qualified instructors.”

**************************

[UPDATE 1: Sept. 3, 2009 @ 7: 11 PM]

The Claremore Progress today covered this very issue. You can see its report here.

**************************

[ORIGINAL POST BELOW]

For some time now, the WynnBlog has received occasional inquiries regarding the Bit by Bit therapeutic equine program that runs under the auspices of Rogers State University. As the resident RSU critic and watchdog (see previous reports here), people come to me. I’ve never really had any information about the program and its travails. Until this week.

Bit by Bit is an program for young people with developmental challenges. According to the Bit by Bit page on RSU’s website:

The documented benefits of therapeutic horseback riding are great. They can be seen in the following:

• speech
• movement
• balance
• strength
• emotional health
• motivation

Therapeutic horseback riding is a growing resource for health, behavioral and educational specialists.

Students who have lost the ability to move in a three-dimensional way, make great progress through the experience of riding and reintegrating the use of:

• muscles
• mental processing
• motor planning and strength
• moving closer to independent living goals

Students termed “at risk” benefit from the emotional bond of handling the horse, performing tasks of responsible care-giving as well as the accomplishment of horsemanship skills, that carry over to the home, family relationships, self-esteem and school activities.

Bit by Bit has been the site of first time speech motivated by the desire to communicate with the horse and we often hear reports of lessened falling due to improved balance.

The Bit by Bit program has been a huge success. Operating for over a decade, the program has grown to serve approximately 90 young persons. Its success is due to lots of caring volunteers who give freely of their time, energy, money, and livestock. Dr. Ray Brown, the RSU exec immediately responsible for Bit by Bit, acknowledged as much in a letter following the departure of Bit by Bit director Velinda Baker, writing, in part:

“Our volunteers are critical to the successful operation of the Bit by Bit program…. Your support is invaluable…. We are dedicated to having the best possible therapeutic riding program and we could not accomplish that goal without your help.”

It seems RSU may, then, have trouble accomplishing the goal of beginning Bit by Bit classes on schedule September 15.

Monday, interim director of Bit by Bit, Trista Milliman, was terminated by Dr. Brown. This following a letter she sent last week asking for more part time instructors to be hired to serve the student load, which has nearly doubled while the number of paid staff positions has remained unchanged (with some unfilled at times) thus making a net reduction in the ratio of trained instructors to students, which some within the program have considered a safety concern. Brown, who draws a salary of nearly $11,000 per month as RSU’s Vice President for Economic and Community Development, reportedly balked at the notion of hiring more part-time instructors at $13 per hour for three nights a week. Milliman’s letter further stated that if the university again refused to approve additional help for upcoming classes, RSU could consider the letter her two-weeks’ notice. Not content to let Milliman to serve out the notice, Dr. Brown fired her Monday, after which she was—all together now—escorted to her car. The RSU pattern has changed little.

Problematic as Milliman’s termination just two weeks before classes is, it’s just the most recent trouble for the Bit by Bit program. Previous Bit by Bit director, Jana Walstom, sued RSU for wrongful termination on August 21, 2008. As part of her petition, Walstrom alleged, among other things, that, after she questioned what she suspected was misappropriation of certain funds, she was terminated. Specifically, Walstrom alleges she contacted Dr. Larry Minks because $6,500.00 of funds budgeted for the Bit by Bit program were spent by another non-Bit by Bit-related department. She also alleged she signed a statement that she was resigning under duress after being threatened by RSU administrators that she would not be paid for her services if she did not. And there was, of course, a confidentiality agreement as well (read my previous post here). The suit was removed from Rogers County District Court to federal court and I haven’t been following its progress. I was recently told it was settled out of court. When I have time I’ll check. If it was settled, who’ll give me odds it contained a confidentiality agreement?

I have been told the Bit by Bit program is supported in large part by grants, and I am working to learn just how the program’s finances work. But I have been told that, as Walstrom claimed in her lawsuit, there appears to be some disconnect between grant funds received and actual purchases made for the program. I have no way to know yet whether those claims are true, but I will be researching it. If I were a grantor to the program, I would certainly request documentation from the university proving granted funds had been used in accordance with the grant proposal, but grantors should do that as a matter of course.

I said above that RSU may have problems beginning Bit by Bit classes September 15. Why? Bit by Bit is a program dependent on volunteers, and the volunteers are not happy. Thus, Bit by Bit may lack the manpower and resources to serve the special needs students who so desperately need it.  Bit by Bit volunteers have united behind Milliman and are vocally challenging Brown’s termination of her. Milliman was a Bit by Bit volunteer from late 2007. She is certified by the North American Riding for the Handicapped Association (NARHA), and she was asked to serve as interim director when Velinda Baker departed. Baker was made director after Walstrom’s resignation/termination, and Walstrom had taken over from Linda Baron, who began the program on RSU’s campus, departed. Milliman is regarded by many volunteers to be a superbly professional and competent director who works hard, sometimes from 7 AM to 9 PM, to make sure the kids of Bit by Bit are served. RSU’s recent actions have caused the volunteers to band together to to seek an accounting of the entire program, some demanding the program be removed from under the auspices of RSU altogether.

What bargaining chip do the volunteers have? Themselves. Brown has acknowledged that volunteers are critical to Bit by Bit’s success. If they unite and refuse en masse to provide their services (and refuse the use of their horses, as some have), the program has very little chance of success, and kids who really need to be served will not be. I have been sharply critical of RSU’s actions in the past. I believe the repeated litigation with similar details, not to mention the U.S. Department of Education’s scathing report on RSU’s federal grant programs, indicate there are serious issues on College Hill. I had the highest of hopes that President Rice, who many have told me is a good and decent man, would seek to get to the bottom of these issues. Truthfully, I have been underwhelmed by his pursuit of reform. If there ever was a time for him to step in and rein back his underlings, it is now. Very many special young students will be harmed in a way terminated employees never could be if RSU does not reverse course, adequately staff Bit by Bit, and provide open and transparent accounting of the entire program. And some apologies are in order, too. I wish I could be hopeful, but if the past is truly an indication of the future, I won’t hold my breath.

Oh, and what does the university have to say about all this? Apparently nothing. I emailed RSU’s head of communications, Brent Ortolani, today asking some questions about the situation and for RSU’s statement. Though I received an email read receipt stating Brent Ortolani read my email at 09:56:54 this morning, he has not responded, which is not surprising, as he never replies to my inquiries. My email to Ortolani was CC:ed to President Rice. I have received no reply from him either.

You are welcome to comment here, but if you want to see things change, you should contact the university. I’ll make it easy for you:

Rogers State University
1701 W. Will Rogers Blvd.
Claremore, OK 74017
800-256-7511
918-341-7510

Dr. Larry Rice, President of RSU
lrice@rsu.edu
(918) 343-7613

Dr. Ray Brown, Vice President for Economic and Community Development
rbrown@rsu.edu
(918) 343-7622

Oh, and if you call the president’s office and Sharon Kern answers, tell her her old pal Tyson Wynn says hi!

WE THE PEOPLE OF OKLAHOMA, Invoking the guidance of almighty god, in
order to secure and perpetuate the blessings of liberty; to secure
just and rightful Government; to promote our mutual Welfare and
Happiness, do establish this proclamation and call upon the people of
the great State of Oklahoma, and our fellow Patriots in these United
States of America who look to the Lord for guidance, to acknowledge
the need for a national awakening of righteousness in our land.

WHEREAS, “It is Religion and Morality alone, which can establish the
Principles upon which Freedom can securely stand” (John Adams); and

WHEREAS, “We have no government armed with power capable of
contending with human passions unbridled by Religion and
Morality” (John Adams); and

WHEREAS, “Our Constitution was made only for a Moral and Religious
people” (John Adams), and

WHEREAS, “We have staked the whole future of American civilization,
not upon the power of government…. But upon the capacity of mankind
for self-government, upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern
ourselves, to control ourselves, to sustain ourselves according to the
Ten Commandments of God” (James Madison); and

WHEREAS, “Freedom is not a gift bestowed upon us by other men, but a
right that belongs to us by the laws of God” (Benjamin Franklin); and

WHEREAS, “God who gave us life gave us liberty and can the liberties
of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm
basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties
are of the Gift of God” (Thomas Jefferson); and

WHEREAS, “Whether any free government can be permanent, where the
public worship of God, and the support of Religion, constitute no part
of the policy or duty of the state” (Joseph Story); and

WHEREAS, “We hold sacred the rights of conscience, and promise to the
people…. The free and undisturbed exercise of their religion” (Roger
Sherman); and

WHEREAS, “This great nation was founded, not by religionists, but by
Christians” (Patrick Henry); and

WHEREAS, “When you…. Exercise the right of voting for public
officers, let it be impressed upon your mind that God commands you to
chose just men who will rule in the fear of God” (Noah Webster); and

WHEREAS, “The principles of genuine Liberty and of wise laws and
administrations are to be drawn from the Bible” (Noah Webster); and

WHEREAS, the people of Oklahoma have a strong tradition of reliance
upon the Creator of the Universe; and

WHEREAS, we believe our economic woes are consequences of our greater
national moral crisis; and

WHEREAS, this nation has become a world leader in promoting abortion,
pornography, same sex marriage, sex trafficking, divorce, illegitimate
births, child abuse, and many other forms of debauchery; and

WHEREAS, alarmed that the Government of the United States of America
is forsaking the rich Christian heritage upon which this nation was
built; and

WHEREAS, grieved that the Office of the President of these United
States has refused to uphold the long held tradition of past
presidents in giving recognition to our National Day of Prayer; and

WHEREAS, deeply disturbed that the Office of the President of these
United States disregards the biblical admonitions to live clean and
pure lives by proclaiming an entire month to an immoral behavior;

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that we, the undersigned elected
officials of the people of Oklahoma, religious leaders and citizens of
the State of Oklahoma, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world,
solemnly declare that the HOPE of the great State of Oklahoma and of
these United States, rests upon the Principles of Religion and
Morality as put forth in the HOLY BIBLE; and

BE IT RESOLVED that we, the undersigned, believers in the One True
God and His only Son, call upon all to join with us in recognizing
that “Blessed is the Nation whose God is the Lord” and humbly implore
all who love Truth and Virtue to live above reproach in the sight of
God and man with a firm reliance on the leadership and protection of
Almighty God; and

BE IT RESOLVED that we, the undersigned, humbly call upon Holy God,
our Creator, Sustainer, and Redeemer, to have mercy on this nation, to
stay His hand of judgment, and grant a national awakening of
righteousness and Christian renewal as we repent of our great sin.

Signed on the Second Day of July in the Year of our Lord Christ Two
Thousand and Nine.

So there you have it. It’s long, as proclamations tend to be, and it employs many good words—some from our Founders, and most of the sentiments I find biblical and worthy of support. But, there’s one thing in particular that bothers me.

WHEREAS, we believe our economic woes are consequences of our greater
national moral crisis; and

Really? Sorry, but I don’t buy it. What if our current economic woes are due to persons at all levels making bad economic choices  and/or many being the victims of fraud and/or the federal government being altogether too entangled in the affairs of her subjects citizens?

Can and does God bring economic calamity as a punishment for moral lapses. Certainly. Is every economic travail an indication of rampant sinfulness in the lives of those affected. Certainly not! This is some of the wrong-headed thinking about the Gospel that I can’t stomach, and I hate to see that my fellow Baptist Sally Kern has made this leap into what I can only term as error.

Think about Christians down through the ages. We Christians, historically, have certainly not been characterized by wealth. What about those Christians today who suffer both abject poverty and acute persecution? Are they paying economically for their views on abortion, homosexuality, and pornography? I know it’s counter to a whole segment of prosperity preachers of this modern age, but Christ said that foxes had holes and birds had nests but the Son of Man had no place to lay His head. This, from the same Guy who said that a servant is no better than his Master. If we believe Him, and I think it’s a pretty good idea that we do, we understand that there is no guarantee of financial blessing because we claim Him as our Lord.

We have, no doubt, been a supremely blessed people. Being born in this country is a blessing above all blessings. And even in a nation that is currently slouching toward the false promises of socialized this and government-guaranteed that, we are freer, richer, and better off than most people on the planet in any era of history. Why? This thing called Liberty.

The same liberty that allows persons to choose other than Christ allows persons to shift gears mid-stream and embrace the offer of grace. I know it’s a silly notion, but what if abortions plummeted not because they were illegal but because our collective hearts were changed to the point that the physical expression of love occurred between committed, married couples who would welcome a child into the world? What if smut no longer sold because the market dried up due to God’s replacing hearts of stone with hearts of flesh? What if child and elder abuse died because we simply loved life? I know, I know. I am an idealist trapped in a realist’s body. It is right and proper that we have laws against these things on the books, but I long for the day when His government rules and the law of love is perfected. For now, though, dark as the world is, it sure looks white unto a harvest. Does this Proclamation for Morality do anything to bring in the sheaves? I’m unconvinced it does.

And so for now, though I can agree with much in Kern’s proclamation and the sentiment behind it, I cannot endorse it or encourage others to do so. If I need to get behind a proclamation, I’ll continue to support the proclamation of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. I am convinced that committed Christ followers elect better representatives, so if we want morality to reign in the halls of government, we best share Christ.