Oklahoma Chapter of Americans United

Informative follow-up Discussion About the Legislative Preview

2012-01-31T12:48:00.001-06:00

http://ia700302.us.archive.org/21/items/GODCAST/AOK/2012-01-30_-_AOK_072.mp3

The link above will play the audio of an informative discussion of the bills discussed during our 2012 Legislative Preview. Going into more detail then we had the time for on Saturday, the discussion gives the viewpoints of three activists concerned about the encroachment on constitutional freedoms concerning the separation of church and state.

This discussion is NOT representing the viewpoints of either the Oklahoma City chapter specifically or the National office in Washington, DC, in general and is offered only for listeners as a supplement to use as they wish.

I have listened to the complete recording and find it useful for adult listeners.

Program and Bill numbers -- Protecting Religion from Itself

2012-01-29T19:15:00.000-06:00

AmericansUnited for Separation of Church and State

www.au.org

OklahomaCity Chapter

www.okau.org

Third AnnualLegislative Preview

Saturday, January 28,2012

Senate Chamber,Oklahoma Capitol Building

2300 N. Lincoln

10:00am to 12:00pm

Protecting ReligionFrom Itself

James Nimmo,communications chair

Welcome

Overviewof Thomas Jefferson's

VirginiaStatute for Religious Freedom, 1786

John Loghry, chapterpresident

Introduction

PRESENTERS

Dr. Victor Hutchison

GeorgeLynn Cross Research Professor, University of Oklahoma, retired

SB1742, Oklahoma Science Education Act, Sen. Brecheen

HB1001, Religious Viewpoints Anti-discriminationAct, Rep. Reynolds

Aimee Breeze, chapter secretary

additional comments on SB 1742 and HB 1001

Damion Reinhardt, chapter treasurer

SJR 23, Constitutional Amendment repealing ArticleII, sec. 5, relating to the use of public money or property forsectarian purposes, Sen. Anderson

HJR 1081, Constitutional Amendment repealing ArticleII, sec. 5 of the Oklahoma Constitution, Rep. Nelson

SB 1266, Income tax, providing deductions for certainfull-time students, Sen. Sparks

explanation of Blaine Amendments

Mike Fuller, immediate past president

SB 1433, Unborn children,creating the Personhood Act, Sen. Crain and Billy

SB 1692, Prohibiting theState from funding or contracting with entities that performabortions, Sen. Sykes

HJR 1067, Prohibiting intentional killing of any innocent person, Rep. Reynolds

Oklahoma City group wants state legislators to keep church, state matters separate

2012-01-29T12:04:00.000-06:00

http://newsok.com/oklahoma-city-group-wants-state-legislators-to-keep-church-state-matters-separate/article/3644486

Measures that would grant “personhood” status to a human embryo, make it illegal for public money to go to Planned Parenthood and other abortion rights groups, and allow religion in public schools should be defeated or not even taken up, a group of concerned residents said Saturday.

“Our feeling is that the best way to maintain religious freedom for all persons is to maintain separation,” said John Loghry, chapter president. “A lot of this legislation introduces religious bias or otherwise imposes a specific religious viewpoint into our civil law.”

OKC chapter president on KTOK TALK RADIO

2012-01-22T12:46:00.000-06:00

The Oklahoma City chapter of Americans United for Separation of Church & State has been invited to have its president, John Loghry, be a guest on the "The Gwin Faulconer-Lippert Show" with Gwin Louise Faulconer-Lippert , on Oklahoma City station KTOK, AM1000.

Call 405-840-1000 or Star 1000 to join Gwin as she discusses with John the hot topic of separation of church and state plus some of the recently filed bills in the Oklahoma State Legislature that could impact the civil rights of everyone.

You can listen live at the website, http://www.ktok.com/main.html

Mr. Loghry's segment is scheduled from 8:05pm to 8:30pm, CST, Sunday, January 22, 2012.

2012-01-17T12:49:00.000-06:00

http://au.org/media/press-releases/americans-united-hails-supreme-court-refusal-to-intervene-in-north-carolina

Americans United Hails Supreme Court Refusal To Intervene In North Carolina Prayer Case

Church-State Watchdog Group Says Government Should Never Show Favoritism Toward One Religion

January 17, 2012

The U.S. Supreme Court today announced that it will not intervene in a controversy over sectarian prayer before meetings of the Forsyth County, N.C., Board of Commissioners.

The justices’ action leaves in place an appellate court decision barring the county from regularly opening its meetings with Christian invocations.

Americans United for Separation of Church and State, one of the groups sponsoring the lawsuit, said the high court was right not to intervene.

Said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, Americans United executive director, “When government meetings are opened regularly with Christian prayer, it sends the unmistakable message that non-Christians are second-class citizens in their own community. That’s unconstitutional, and it’s just plain wrong.

“All Americans ought to feel welcome at governmental meetings,” he continued. “The Constitution clearly forbids government to play favorites when it comes to religion.”

The record in the Joyner v. Forsyth County case indicates that 26 of the 33 invocations given from May 29, 2007, until Dec. 15, 2008, contained at least one reference to Jesus, Jesus Christ, Christ, Savior or the Trinity.

Plaintiffs in the lawsuit are Janet Joyner and Constance Lynn Blackmon, two county residents and members of the Winston-Salem Chapter of Americans United. They are being represented by Americans United and the ACLU of North Carolina.

On July 29, the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the county’s prayer practice is unconstitutional.
"Faith is as deeply important as it is deeply personal,” wrote Judge J. Harvey Wilkinson, “and the government should not appear to suggest that some faiths have it wrong and others got it right."

Americans United Legal Director Ayesha N. Khan said the appeals court came to the correct conclusion.
“America is extremely diverse when it comes to religious opinion and government must respect that diversity,” Khan said. “Government preference for one faith over others is a recipe for social discord.”

Winston-Salem

Americans United is a religious liberty watchdog group based in Washington, D.C. Founded in 1947, the organization educates Americans about the importance of church-state separation in safeguarding religious freedom.

Statute of Virginia for Religious Freedom

2012-01-16T09:57:00.000-06:00

“[T]hat no man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer, on account of his religious opinions or belief: but that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinions in matters of religion, and that the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge, or affect their civil capacities.”

— Thomas Jefferson, The Statute of Virginia for Religious Freedom, enacted on January 16, 1786

Courtesy of Freedom from Religion Foundation, http://www.ffrf.org/

Romney's careful - and lengthy - response to the question never mentioned Mormonism.

2012-01-13T20:33:00.002-06:00

http://www.politico.com/blogs/burns-haberman/

clip Mitt Romney, one of two Mormon candidates in the Republican presidential field, was pressed about his faith by a woman who attended his veteran's event here.

He was asked to expand on his faith by a woman who asked him: "Do you believe in the divine saving grace of Jesus Christ?"

"Yes, I do," Romney responded. "I would hope that there are people in our nation that have different beliefs. There are people of the Jewish faith and the Islamic faith and other faiths who believe other things, and our president will be president of the people of all faiths," he said.

"We welcome people of other faiths. I happen to believe that Jesus Christ is the sone of God and my savior, but I know other people have differing views and I respect those views,and I don't believe those qualify or disqualify people for leadership in our nation," he said.

Romney's careful - and lengthy - response to the question never mentioned Mormonism.

Americans United Expresses Disappointment Over Supreme Court Ruling Granting Religious Groups Broad Right To Discriminate

2012-01-12T20:18:00.002-06:00

http://au.org/media/press-releases/americans-united-expresses-disappointment-over-supreme-court-ruling-granting

Church-State Watchdog Says ‘Ministerial Exception’ Has Been Taken Too Far

January 11, 2012

Americans United for Separation of Church and State today expressed disappointment over a Supreme Court decision that affirms the right of religious groups to ignore anti-discrimination laws in some cases.

The high court today handed down a ruling in Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. The case dealt with a Michigan religious school that fired a teacher because of a medical condition.

“Blatant discrimination is a social evil we have worked hard to eradicate in the United States,” said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United. “I’m afraid the court’s ruling today will make it harder to combat.”

Americans United had filed a friend-of-the-court brief noting that religious organizations have long had the right to limit employment to people who share their theology when those employees have clear religious duties – a concept known as the “ministerial exception.” But, AU asserted, some courts have taken this concept too far.

Today’s decision, AU says, reinforces that unfortunate trend. Under the ruling, AU says, a house of worship would have the right to fire a minister for reasons completely unrelated to religion. A pastor who objected to being sexually harassed, for example, could be fired for raising that issue and have no recourse in the courts.

“Clergy who are fired for reasons unrelated to matters of theology – no matter how capricious or venal those reasons may be – have just had the courthouse door slammed in their faces,” Lynn said.

The AU brief urged the Supreme Court not to deny judicial access to Americans who face discrimination by religious groups for reasons unrelated to theology. (Other organizations signing the brief are the American Civil Liberties Union Foundation, the ACLU of Michigan, the National Council of Jewish Women, the Sikh Council on Religion and Education and the Unitarian Universalist Association.)

Americans United Welcomes Appeals Court Decision Blocking Oklahoma Anti-Sharia Amendment

2012-01-10T19:21:00.004-06:00

Americans United Welcomes Appeals Court Decision Blocking Oklahoma Anti-Sharia Amendment

Church-State Watchdog Group Says First Amendment Is All We Need To Protect Against Religious Law

http://au.org/media/press-releases/americans-united-welcomes-appeals-court-decision-blocking-oklahoma-anti-sharia

January 10, 2012

Americans United for Separation of Church and State today hailed a federal appellate court ruling against an Oklahoma constitutional amendment that bars Islamic law in the state.

The 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a lower court’s ruling issuing an injunction blocking implementation of the so-called “Save Our State” amendment. The amendment was approved by 70 percent of Oklahoma voters in 2010, even though there is no drive to impose sharia in the state.
“This amendment is divisive, unnecessary and dangerous,” said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United, which filed a friend-of-the-court brief in the case. “I’m glad to see it go.”

A lawsuit against the amendment was filed by Muneer Awad, executive director of the Oklahoma Council for American-Islamic Relations, along with the American Civil Liberties Union.

Americans United signed on to a friend-of-the-court brief, drafted by the American Jewish Committee, arguing that the amendment is unconstitutional because it singles out Muslims for derogatory treatment. The Anti-Defamation League, the Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty, the Center for Islamic Pluralism, the Interfaith Alliance and the Union for Reform Judaism joined AU on the brief.
A three-judge panel of the appeals court ruled unanimously against the amendment.

“Appellants do not identify any actual problem the challenged amendment seeks to solve,” wrote Judge Scott M. Matheson for the unanimous court. “Indeed, they admitted at the preliminary injunction hearing that they did not know of even a single instance where an Oklahoma court had applied Sharia law or used the legal precepts of other nations or cultures, let alone that such applications or uses had resulted in concrete problems in Oklahoma.”

AU’s Lynn said the court made the right call in the Awad v. Ziriax case.

“The First Amendment protects Americans from government imposition of religious law, whether it be Islamic, Christian or something else,” Lynn said. “This amendment is simply an excuse for Islam bashing, and it’s an embarrassment to the state.”

Institute of Interfaith Dialog Lunch Invitation

2012-01-04T11:42:00.000-06:00

From all of us at the Institute of Interfaith Dialog, best wishes of this joyous season! May health, happiness and prosperity be yours in bountiful measure in the New Year.

The Institute of Interfaith Dialog Oklahoma Chapter is delighted to inform you that reputable writer Charles Kimball will be our guest speaker at 11:45am to 1:00pm on Wednesday, January 25th at Raindrop Turkish House.

Dr. Charles Kimball will sign his new book, WHEN RELIGION BECOMES LETHAL. He is Presidential Professor and Director of Religious Studies at the University of Oklahoma in Norman, OK. Between 1996 and 2008, he served as Chair of the Department of Religion and the Divinity School at Wake Forest University in Winston-Salem, NC. We kindly request that you to return RSVP due to the limited number of seats available, if you would like to participate the event.

Yours sincerely,

Orhan Kucukosman

The Institute of Interfaith Dialog

An example of defying the IRS 501(c)3 guidelines?

2012-01-04T10:47:00.000-06:00

From: juicerlady@hotmail.com
Sent: 1/3/2012 12:14:54 P.M. Central Standard Time
Subj: Frontier Country aka Liberty Republican Women meet Mon., Jan. 9

*****Frontier Country Republican Women voted December 12, AD 2011 to change our name.*****

LIBERTY REPUBLICAN WOMEN (awaiting approval)

INVITE YOU (monthly, 2nd Monday)

MONDAY, JANUARY 9, AD 2012

6 PM DUTCH DINNER, 7PM PROGRAM

MOORE'S WESTERN SIZZLIN' RESTAURANT

(I-35/N 12TH, WEST SERVICE RD.)

SPEAKER: PASTOR DAN FISHER

"PASTORS AND CHURCHES: INVOLVED IN ELECTIONS"

FISHER IS CAMPAIGNING FOR OK HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES IN NEW DISTRICT #60

(this will be a vacant seat by term limited Rep. Purcy Walker (D))

PASTOR DAN FISHER IS SENIOR PASTOR AT YUKON'S TRINITY BAPTIST CHURCH. DAN IS AN ACTIVE MEMBER IN THE BLACK ROBE REGIMENT OF PASTORS. (www.blackrobereg.org)

Dan Fisher has spoken at many events. Example, Dan delivered an energetic address, “Silencing Christianity in America” that described how Christians had become politically incorrect and, in some instances, Christians were declared a potential terrorist threat. Fisher gave example after example of Christians being persecuted in America. The pastor described how some are fighting back by showing that the First Amendment has been so twisted to exclude God from government, and along with that, morality of the populace. Pastor Fisher discussed the need for pastors to once again lead their flocks into the heat of battle to help right this wrong.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ANNOUNCEMENTS:

We welcome our new Liberty RW 2012 officers:

Mitzi Smith is secretary (executive recorder), Jan Collins is treasurer (financial executive), Connie Maxwell is 2nd vice president (club growth and door prize), Rep. Sally Kern is 1st vice president (procurement of speakers) and Judy Wesselhoft is president (custodian/overseer). Mega-dittos, Sally, on the procurement your first speaker of 2012 for Liberty RW.

Liberty Republican Women seek to recruit others to our club. Please forward this invitation. We must remove Obama from office!!!

OFRW (OK Federation of Republican Women) have the quarterly board meeting in OKC at the Embassy Suites on S. Meridian, 8 am-3 pm, January 21, AD 2012. Registration by January 14 of $25 (includes lunch) to Alice Boydston, 14915 W. 56th, Mulhall, OK 73063, 405-649-2566, 405-747-6370 (cell), brshpile@gmail.com.

Dates for the Calendar:

OK Presidential Preferential Primary, March 6, AD 2012
Candidate Filing, W, TH, F April 11-13, AD 2012
Primary Election, June 26, AD 2012
Runoff Primary Election, August 28, AD 2012
General Election, November 6, AD 2012
www.ok.gov/elections/ for additional information

Oklahoma GOP State Convention, May 12, AD 2012 Place: Norman, OK Embassy Suites (East of I-35 ~Robinson exit?)

2011 Liberty RW president, Meredith Dake is on the job with Andrew Breitbart organization (www.breitbart.com) at the Iowa Caucuses and New Hampshire Primaries. Come, hear the interesting updates from Susie Dake of Meredith's assignments.

For more information contact:
Judy Wesselhoft, president Liberty Republican Women

405-794-9464

On Guard In Oklahoma: When Defending Church-State Separation In A Challenging Area, Diversity Is A Plus

2012-01-04T09:44:00.000-06:00

http://www.au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/on-guard-in-oklahoma-when-defending-church-state-separation-in-a

EXCERPTS: When it comes to separation of church and state, some states present more of a challenge than others.

Oklahoma is one of the more challenging states.

....

Oklahoma is not easy. That’s all the more reason for Americans United and its allies to keep working there. The good people I met on Thursday night are leading the way.

They’ve already seen some victories. The creationism bill that was introduced earlier this year did not pass. The American Civil Liberties Union went to court and won a judgment against a Ten Commandments display in Haskell County. A federal court invalidated the anti-shariah amendment to the state constitution.

The Religious Right is dogged and determined. So are we who defend the separation of church and state – and we’ve got something they don’t: religious and philosophical diversity. It’s our not-so-secret weapon that will help us win.

I know that Oklahomans will face many more challenges when it comes to separation of church and state. I also know that the people I met there will rise up to meet them. And I know, even though it will take some time, the ultimate victory will be theirs.

Rob Boston is senior policy analyst at Americans United for Separation of Church and State. Rob, who has worked at Americans United since 1987, also serves as assistant editor of AU's "Church & State" magazine. Rob is the author of three books: "Close Encounters with the Religious Right: Journeys into the Twilight Zone of Religion and Politics" (Prometheus Books, 2000); "The Most Dangerous Man in America? Pat Robertson and the Rise of the Christian Coalition" (Prometheus Books, 1996) and "Why the Religious Right Is Wrong About Separation of Church and State" (Prometheus Books, 1993; second edition, 2003).

Read the rest at: http://www.au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/on-guard-in-oklahoma-when-defending-church-state-separation-in-a

Begin the New Year a Step Ahead of the Legislature

2011-12-29T08:53:00.000-06:00

Some of our audience from 2011

Add caption

Americans United for Separation of Church & State
OKC Chapter

Begin the New Year a Step Ahead of the Legislature
Americans United for Separation of Church & State

3rd Legislative Preview

Saturday, January 28, 2012
Senate Chamber, Oklahoma Capitol Building
2300 N. Lincoln, Oklahoma City

10:00am to noon
Free, open to the public
Use the WEST entrance
Ample free parking

Bills introduced for the 2012 legislative session that could interfere with First Amendment freedom of religion that could encumber the rights of others will be presented in a civil open discussion with participation from the audience encouraged.

Contact: James Nimmo, 405-843-3651
james.nimmo@gmail.com
www.okau.org
2406 NW 59th St
Oklahoma City, OK 73112-7348

2011-12-29T08:41:00.000-06:00

To quote James Madison, "Who does not see that the same authority which can establish Christianity in exclusion of all other religions may establish, with the same ease, any particular sect of Christians in exclusion of all other sects? That the same authority which can force a citizen to contribute threepence only of his property for the support of any one establishment may force him to conform to any other establishment in all cases whatsoever?"

Distortion Historian David Barton encroaching into Oklahoma curriculum

2011-11-23T18:00:00.001-06:00

complete story here: http://www.okgazette.com/oklahoma/article-13561-shaping-social-studies.html

clip--

Barton’s background

At press time, Barton had not returned calls seeking comment for this story, and he did not attend the committee’s most recent meeting on Nov. 9, although he has attended previous meetings.

Barton is often cited and promoted by high-profile conservative personalities such as Glenn Beck and Mike Huckabee. He has stated that separation of church and state is “a myth,” sits on the board of directors for the Providence Foundation, an organization with the mission to “train and network leaders to transform their culture for Christ.”

Barton, who served as vice chair of the Texas Republican Party, has been characterized in the past as a “biased amateur who cherry-picks quotes from history and the Bible,” according to one 2011 New York Times profile. He also was involved in the Texas school curriculum controversy in 2010, where he and others worked to purge important civil rights leaders such as César Chávez and Thurgood Marshall, as well as downplay the role of Martin Luther King Jr.

“Only majorities can expand political rights in America’s constitutional society,” Barton has reportedly said.

Department of Education spokesman Damon Gardenhire said Barresi reached out to educators and others to be part of the committee, and to Barton because of her respect for him.

“Barresi asked David Barton to participate because he has been dedicated to the pursuit of history and the lessons we can learn from it. The many participants in the 65-member committee offer a range of backgrounds to round out their work,” he said.

20 Founding Father quotes against America being a Christian Nation

2011-11-14T11:59:00.005-06:00

graphic credit: google.com

Moderator's note: Readers will remember hearing of the association of Roger Barton and GOPer Rep Sally Kern with a group named Wall Builders. (http://www.wallbuilders.com/) Mr. Barton's historical specialty is inventing quotes from America's early politicians and writers but when questioned as to the authenticity of the quotes we find the quotes are apocryphal or taken out of context.

Dr. Bruce Prescott, a recent national board member of AU, has an article on his Mainstream Baptist website outlining the deception Mr. Barton is noted for using.

Separation of religious internecine dogma from our American political process improves the quality of government.

One example is the intrusion of religion in the medical offices of the doctors of pregnant women. The legislatures of Oklahoma and some other states have begun practicing ob/gyn medicine without a license by requiring pregnant women considering abortion to submit to invasive procedures and misleading information that no reputable doctor would permit.

One technique the religious anti-choicers are using is the attempt to pass "personhood" amendments declaring a fertilized egg a fully-qualified citizen. Even Mississippi, a deeply conservative state, recently gave a determined NO vote to this anti-human intent to take away the right of privacy from pregnant women. The same attempt has failed twice in Colorado.

Below is an excerpt, with link, that provides some authentic quotes from the Framers of America's founding documents and speeches.

clip The separation of church and state is an issue that those in Washington debate just like co-workers do around the water-cooler or families around the dinner table. How much religion, if any, should be involved in government? When the 2nd "red scare" happened in the late 1940s until the late 1950s, Americans were scared that communism would overtake the country. The greatest example of this was Republican Senator, Joseph McCarthy of Wisconsin, who drove home the paranoia that not only would communism take over the United States, but that many Americans were communist themselves. Of course this all proved to be false and forever known as "McCarthyism." One of the ways the government wanted to show that they were somehow above communism was their love for god. "In god we trust" was added to all paper currency in 1957 as well as adding "Under God" to the Pledge of Allegiance in 1954.

Today, many conservative politicians and Christians around the country claim that the United States was founded as a "Christian Nation." These claims, however, are not based on factual information. While many of the Founding Fathers were Christians, others were not. Some believed in God, but held no religious preference and others had no belief in anything supernatural. Here are twenty quotes from the Founding Fathers and other great Americans that show that the United States was not founded as a "Christian Nation."

Continue reading on Examiner.com 20 Founding Father quotes against America being a Christian Nation - Orlando liberal | Examiner.com http://www.examiner.com/liberal-in-orlando/20-founding-father-quotes-against-america-being-a-christian-nation?mid=52#ixzz1dhhqjR2R

Halting Harassment: Public School Efforts To Protect Students Run Into Religious Right Bullies

2011-11-08T12:02:00.000-06:00

clip -- Dan Savage, a syndicated sex-advice columnist who runs a campaign aimed to help gay teens, also blasted the Michigan law.

“It’s a law that specifically empowers students, teachers, administrators [and] principals to bully LGBT kids if they can point to a moral justification,” Savage told ABC News.com. “You have a right to your own religious beliefs. You don’t have a right to inflict your private moral judgments on those people in a place where you are a public servant and an employee of the state…. Michigan should be ashamed of itself.”

read more at: http://www.au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/halting-harassment-public-school-efforts-to-protect-students-run-into

Is Religion Above the Law?

2011-10-18T12:31:00.001-05:00

OPINION | October 17, 2011
Stanley Fish: Is Religion Above the Law?

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/10/17/is-religion-above-the-law/
By STANLEY FISH
In supposedly avoiding certain questions, a ministerial-exception case raises other, unanswerable ones.

Government Neutrality Is Not "Anti-Religion"

2011-10-17T20:31:00.001-05:00

Government Neutrality Is Not "Anti-Religion"
Understanding church-state separation.

http://www.psychologytoday.com/em/75869

This article illustrates what real anti-religion views would look like.

Compare it with a neutral POV.

Staunch Oklahoma Defender of Separation Receives Academic Honor

2011-10-04T21:37:00.001-05:00

Dr. Hutchison has been given the "Jack Renner Distinguished Service to
Oklahoma Science Education Award" by the Oklahoma Science Teachers
Association!

Here's the announcement from the OSTA website.

2011 OSTA Awards – Jack Renner Distinquished Service to Oklahoma
Science Education Award

Dr. John W. “Jack” Renner taught science education at OU from
1962-1988, His work on the Learning Cycle in the 1970′s lead to its
use as foundation for the Biological Science Curriculum Study (BSCS)
and the Full Option Science System (FOSS). The Learning Cycle
approach and it’s underlying teaching philosophy of constructivism
shows itself today in the inquiry approach defined by the National
Science Education Standards (NSES) and the process skill development
required by our own Priority Academic Student Skills (PASS). Jack was
recognized for his contributions by NSTA with the Robert H. Carleton
Award, which annually recognizes one individual who has made
outstanding contributions to, and provided leadership in, science
education at the national level and to NSTA in particular. It is
NSTA’s highest honor. In like manner, the Jack Renner Award is OSTA’s
highest honor given each year to a person or organization in
recognition for significant contributions to science education in
Oklahoma.

This year, we honor Dr. Victor Hutchinson, George Lynn Cross Research
Professor emeritus for the University of Oklahoma. Dr. Hutchinson’s
list of accomplishments is long and varied. A retired Colonel in the
Army Reserve, a fellow in the American Academy for the Advancement of
Science, a member of the American Institute of Biological Sciences,
holder of leadership positions in the American Society of
Ichthyologists and Herpetologists, author or co-author for nearly 150
peer reviewed scientific papers, supervisor for 28 PhD’s … The list
goes on and on and Dr. Hutchinson has had a very full and active
career as a research scientist and University professor.

But our story goes back to the dark days of 1999 when members of the
state textbook committee attempted to introduce creationist textbook
disclaimers into any textbook used in Oklahoma that discussed
Evolution. I attended those hearings and so did Vic Hutchinson and
through his efforts and those of others the disclaimers did not make
it into law. But from that experience was born Oklahomans for
Excellence in Science Education, founded by Vic with a small group of
educators, scientists, theologians, laypersons, and persons interested
in maintaining the constitutional separation of church and state.
There have been political efforts every year since 1999 to inject
religion into public schools and diminish or prohibit the teaching of
evolution in Oklahoma science classrooms. And every attempt has been
met by Dr. Hutchinson and his colleagues in OESE. He is a tireless
advocate for quality science education in our public schools, a
regular representative on our behalf in the halls of the legislature,
and is a frequent speaker to school and civic groups as well as a
commentator on radio and television. He maintains the Oklahoma
Evolution listserv, and the OESE website has become a treasure-trove
of resources about evolution, evolution education, and science and
religion. OESE also sponsors a number of education efforts and by
leveraging grants and donations, has made a Teachers Evolution
Workshop available to Oklahoma teachers for each of the last six
years. His efforts in this realm have been recognized by the Oklahoma
Chapter of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, with
their Constitutional Heritage Award, by the Tulsa Interfaith Alliance
with their Award for Science Education and Anti-creationism Efforts,
the National Center for Science Education, Friend of Darwin Award and
now by the Oklahoma Science Teachers Association with the Jack Renner
Distinguished Service to Oklahoma Science Education Award – Bob Melton

http://www.oklahomascienceteachersassociation.org/?p=3258

Pulpit Freedom Sunday’ Is Stunt To Lure Churches Into Illegal Electioneering

2011-09-29T05:56:00.001-05:00

Clergy Should Be Wary Of Religious Right Attempts To Politicize Churches, Says Americans United

September 28, 2011

‘Pulpit Freedom Sunday’ Is Stunt To Lure Churches Into Illegal Electioneering, Watchdog Group Says

Americans United for Separation of Church and State today called on the nation’s clergy to reject Religious Right attempts to turn houses of worship into centers for partisan politicking.

This Sunday (Oct. 2) the Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) is sponsoring “Pulpit Freedom Sunday,” an event in which evangelical pastors are urged to break the law by endorsing or opposing candidates as they conduct religious services.

“This is an appalling attempt by the Religious Right to turn houses of worship into houses of partisan politics,” said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United. “Americans attend church for spiritual guidance, not to get a list of candidates to vote for on Election Day.

“I know the Religious Right would like to forge fundamentalist churches into a partisan political machine,” Lynn continued, “but the law doesn’t allow it, and the American people don’t want it.”

The ADF, a legal group founded by TV preachers, insists that pastors should have the right to endorse candidates from the pulpit. But Americans United points out that all non-profit groups in the 501(c)(3) category — whether religious or secular — are barred under federal tax law from using non-profit personnel or resources to intervene in elections.

AU’s Lynn noted that the American people do not support church electioneering. A recent study found that 73 percent of Americans agree that religious leaders should not intervene in elections.

Americans United sponsors Project Fair Play, a project that educates clergy and congregants about the requirements of federal tax law. Through Project Fair Play (www.projectfairplay.org), Americans United makes a variety of educational materials available that explain what houses of worship can and can’t do in the political arena.

In cases of flagrant violations of the law, Americans United reports offending religious institutions to the IRS.

“Church electioneering is illegal, and the people don’t support it,” Lynn remarked. “It’s time for the Religious Right to stop trying to drag churches into backroom politics.”

The Internal Revenue Service is charged with enforcing this tax law provision. Religious groups that have been either sanctioned or investigated include:

Christian Broadcasting Network, Virginia Beach, Va.: TV preacher Pat Robertson’s Christian Broadcasting Network was stripped of its tax-exempt status retroactively for the years 1986 and 1987 for supporting Robertson’s presidential bid. CBN was required to make a “significant payment” to the IRS, pledge to avoid partisan campaign activities in the future, place more outside directors on its board and implement other organizational and operational changes to ensure tax law compliance.

Old Time Gospel Hour, Lynchburg, Va.: The late Jerry Falwell’s TV ministry lost its tax-exempt status retroactively for the years 1986 and 1987 after a four-year IRS audit determined that the ministry had diverted money to a political action committee. The ministry agreed to pay the IRS $50,000 for those years and to change its organizational structure so that no future political campaign intervention activities would occur.

Church at Pierce Creek, Binghamton, N.Y.: This church lost its tax-exempt status after running newspaper ads in 1992 urging people not to vote for Bill Clinton. Assisted by attorneys with TV preacher Pat Robertson’s American Center for Law and Justice, the church sued to get its exemption back but lost in federal court.

Second Baptist Church, Houston, Texas: This prominent Texas church endured a three-year IRS audit after the church was reported to the federal tax agency for alleged involvement with a special project in 1996 designed to encourage members to attend a GOP precinct convention with the aim of electing certain individuals to local committees.

Allen African Methodist Episcopal Church, New York, N.Y.: This church was visited by IRS agents and its pastor, the Rev. Floyd Flake, was asked to sign documents stating that he would not intervene in election campaigns after he endorsed presidential candidate Al Gore from the pulpit in 2000.

Bill Keller Ministries/Live Prayer, St. Petersburg, Fla.: The founder of this ministry was contacted by the IRS, which sent him a list of detailed questions to answer about his political activity, after he issued a “devotional” on the ministry’s website in 2007 asserting that voting for Mitt Romney is the same as voting for Satan.

In addition, in 2006 the IRS issued a report stating that it examined 132 non-profits during the 2004 election cycle. The tax agency noted that “fewer than half” of the entities examined were churches and concluded that in many of the cases, significant violations of the law had occurred. Written warnings were issued in 55 cases.

In 2008, the IRS took the step of sending letters to officials in the national political parties, reminding them that houses of worship and other tax-exempt entities cannot endorse candidates.

Being Fair versus Being Righteous

2011-09-27T12:18:00.004-05:00

graphic courtesy of www.toppun.com

John Loghry was recently elected president of the Oklahoma City chapter of American United for Separation of Church & State (www.okau.org, www.au.org), one of the more publicly active chapters in the country.

In his acceptance remarks to the membership Mr. Loghry spoke of the age-old idea of fairness in a society based on civil law and a diverse population:

"I think we may already live by this mantra, but I want to make it explicit: it is more important to be fair than to be right. The people we oppose are so convinced they are right—so convinced of their righteousness—that they feel no compulsion to be fair to those of us that do not share their convictions. This is not to say their convictions are not valid; but being unfair makes a person wrong, no matter how right he was before. We are coming up against communities that demand bias from their members and their representatives, and it is important to remember that it is sometimes dangerous for persons in religious communities to be fair—that is, failing to act in a heavy-handed way is often seen by the community as a betrayal. We will be working with people who are wedged between these two demands—the demand for bias from their religious communities and the demand for fairness by the AU. As we move forward into the next two years, I would like us to carry this idea with us—that it is better to be fair."

John holds two Master’s degrees, one in Clinical Psychology from the Fuller Seminary School of Psychology, and one in Depth (or Deep) Psychology from Pacifica Graduate Institute, and is completing a PhD in Depth Psychology.

His dissertation work is focused on artificial intelligence and its potential to critique and advance epistemological frames. He is a member of AOK (the Atheists of Oklahoma) and the Jungian Society for Scholarly Studies. His research interest is the psychology of religion, specifically what underlying factors cause certain religious behaviors, and he will be presenting a paper on this subject at a meeting of AOK in October.

Alabama Town’s ‘Jesus Or Jail’ Policy Violates The Constitution, Americans United Says

2011-09-26T18:17:00.001-05:00

Bay Minette May Not Force Offenders To Choose Between Going To Jail Or Going To Church, Says Church-State Watchdog

-------------------------------------------------------------

September 26, 2011

Bay Minette May Not Force Offenders To Choose Between Going To Jail Or Going To Church, Says Church-State Watchdog

Officials in Bay Minette, Ala., have crossed a constitutional line by creating a program that allows low-level offenders to choose between fines and jail or going to church for a year, says Americans United for Separation of Church and State.

“I have just two words for this ill-considered scheme: blatantly unconstitutional,” said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United. “Government simply can’t put people in a position where their only choice is Jesus or jail.”

Bay Minette Police Chief Mike Rowland says 56 churches have agreed to take part in the program, dubbed “Operation Restore Our Community.” Rowland says the plan is legal because no one is forced to go to church – they can choose fines or incarceration instead.

Americans United says Bay Minette is offering no real choice at all and that the scheme will clearly have the effect of funneling people into houses of worship.

In a letter to Rowland and Mayor Jamie Tillery sent today, attorneys with Americans United urged the town to drop the plan.

“Under well-established decisions, the City may not force individuals – even those convicted of crimes – to choose between religion and jail,” reads the letter.

The letter goes on to say, “The Program would be unconstitutional even if participants could, as the City has asserted, attend the religious service of their choice. For one, any such choice is purely theoretical: only churches participate in the Program and so in practice defendants must attend Christian services. In any event, the Program would violate the Constitution even if other religions did participate because the First Amendment also requires the government to remain neutral between religion and non-religion.”

The letter requests a response within 14 days.

Americans United’s letter was drafted by Gregory M. Lipper, AU litigation counsel, and AU Legal Director Ayesha N. Khan.

Americans United is a religious liberty watchdog group based in Washington, D.C. Founded in 1947, the organization educates Americans about the importance of church-state separation in safeguarding religious freedom.

New Officers Begin Two-Year Term

2011-09-24T11:32:00.002-05:00

(OKLAHOMA CITY) The Oklahoma City chapter of Americans United for Separation of Church & State (www.okau.org, www.au.org) held its annual membership meeting in September where it elected three new officers and returned one incumbent for two-year terms.

Elected president was John Loghry. John holds two Master’s degrees, one in Clinical Psychology from the Fuller Seminary School of Psychology, and one in Depth (or Deep) Psychology from Pacifica Graduate Institute, and is completing a PhD in Depth Psychology. His dissertation work is focused on artificial intelligence and its potential to critique and advance epistemological frames. He is a member of AOK (the Atheists of Oklahoma) and the Jungian Society for Scholarly Studies. His research interest is the psychology of religion, specifically what underlying factors cause certain religious behaviors, and he will be presenting a paper on this subject at a meeting of AOK in October.

The new vice-president will be Sophia Hernandez who is employed at OETA . She is a graduate of the University of Oklahoma with a degree in Film and Video Studies with a minor in philosophy. Ms.Hernandez looks forward to being a part of OKAU's healthy participation in honoring the First Amendment's separation of church and state.

The office of secretary will be held by Aimee Breeze. Aimee is originally from Salt Lake City, Utah and is a member of the ACLU, the Freedom From Religion Foundation, and American Atheists. Ms. Breeze is a Piping Designer for Chesapeake Energy. Her family includes two sons, a daughter, and three grandchildren.

Elected to another term as treasurer is Damion Reinhardt who is very active in atheist events in Oklahoma City and is the host of Oklahoma Atheists Godcast available on its website or iTunes.

The Oklahoma City chapter is considered one of the more active and influential chapters in the national organization. Annual events include a January legislative preview of proposed bills in the Oklahoma Legislature, a Spring Dialogue that discusses current events regarding First Amendment separation issues and a formal debate that provides some transparency on civil and religious viewpoints.

All of the OKAU chapter's events are open to the public.

Americans United For Separation of Church and State (AU) is a nonpartisan educational organization dedicated to preserving the constitutional principle of church-state separation as the only way to ensure religious freedom for all Americans. Americans United represents over 70,000 individual members and 5,000 churches and other houses of worship nationwide.

Coalition Of Organizations Asks Obama To Clarify Stand On Hiring Bias In ‘Faith-Based’ Initiative

2011-09-19T19:58:00.001-05:00

President’s Recent Comments About Issue Have Sown Confusion, 56 Groups Say

September 19, 2011

Americans United for Separation of Church and State has joined a coalition of religious, education, civil rights and health organizations in a letter to President Barack Obama expressing concern over his approach to hiring bias in the “faith-based” initiative.

The 56 groups decided to write after Obama discussed the issue during a town hall meeting in College Park, Md., July 22. They assert that his remarks have only served to cloud the issue.

“The question here is simple: Has the president changed his position on subsidizing religious discrimination with tax funds?” said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, Americans United executive director. “If not, he should take action to restore civil rights protections in federally funded social services that were undercut during the Bush administration. Taxpayer dollars should never underwrite hiring bias.”

During the July 22 event, Obama was asked why he did not ban religious discrimination in taxpayer-funded programs operated by religious agencies, as he promised to do when running for president in 2008.

Obama made the original pledge while campaigning in Zanesville, Ohio, on July 1, 2008. He told a crowd, “If you get a federal grant, you can’t use that grant money to proselytize to the people you help and you can’t discriminate against them – or against the people you hire – on the basis of their religion.”

But after taking office, Obama failed to make this change, indicating instead that the Department of Justice would examine the issue. Nothing has happened since then.

“Your recent statement, combined with the Administration’s failure to take any concrete steps thus far to restore anti-discrimination protections, causes us great disappointment,” wrote the groups. “We write, therefore, to ask that you clarify your July 22 remarks and take steps to fulfill your commitment to end federally funded employment discrimination.”

During the College Park town hall event, Obama opined that religious organizations have “more leeway” to “hire somebody who is a believer of that particular faith.”

Observed the groups in the letter to Obama, “We hope that this statement does not reflect a reversal of your commitment to end federally funded religious discrimination.”

The letter went on to list a number of instances where Obama could have curbed hiring bias in these programs but did not do so.

Asserted the letter, “Mr. President, we have been patiently waiting. If you have reversed your policy position on the issue of government-funded religious discrimination, we need to know that. If not, we would ask you to take concrete steps to fulfill the commitment you made in 2008 in Zanesville.”

In addition to Americans United, signers of the letter include: African American Ministers in Action, American Association of University Women, American Civil Liberties Union, Anti-Defamation League, Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty, Human Rights Campaign, Muslim Advocates, National Organization for Women, PFLAG, Rainbow PUSH Coalition, Secular Coalition for America and United Methodist Church, General Board of Church and Society.

Americans United is a religious liberty watchdog group based in Washington, D.C. Founded in 1947, the organization educates Americans about the importance of church-state separation in safeguarding religious freedom.

http://www.au.org/media/press-releases/archives/2011/09/coalition-of-organizations.html

Is the GOP a Religion

2011-09-14T12:10:00.002-05:00

"The GOP, deep down, is behaving as a religious movement, not as a political party, and a radical religious movement at that."http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/7412-is-the-gop-a-religion

NYC Mayor Bloomberg Demonstrates Good Sense

2011-09-08T13:38:00.003-05:00

Graphic courtesy of www.leftyparent.com/blog

Much to the consternation and umbrage of Catholic and Southern Baptist Convention leaders, Mayor Bloomberg has decided to not have any official religious speakers at the 9/11 ceremony this Sunday in NYC.

Bloomberg is to be congratulated for leaving religious devotions to one's own conscience and personal taste.

In observing the 10th anniversary of the destruction of the World Trade Center, that was in part brought on by religious fanaticism, we should be relieved that even more religious strife will not be a part of the official ceremony.

You can email Mayor Bloomberg at:
http://www.nyc.gov/html/mail/html/mayor.html

You can listen to the NPR story at this link:

http://www.npr.org/2011/09/08/140279184/clergy-insulted-theyre-barred-from-speaking-at-sept-11-event

Why We Need To Hear What JFK Said 51 Years Ago

2011-08-29T11:57:00.003-05:00

Why We Need To Hear What JFK Said 51 Years Ago

http://front.moveon.org/why-we-need-to-hear-what-jfk-said-51-years-ago/?rc=fb.fan

Americans United Challenge Indiana City's Proposed Aid To Religious School

2011-08-16T20:05:00.001-05:00

Americans United, ACLU Challenge Indiana City's Proposed Aid To Religious School
South Bend Funding Of St. Joseph’s High School Unconstitutionally Forces Taxpayers To Support Religion, Says Federal Lawsuit

August 16, 2011

Americans United for Separation of Church and State, the ACLU of Indiana and the national ACLU today asked a federal court to block an Indiana city's plan to use public funds in support of a religious school.

The South Bend Common Council voted 5-4 to spend $1.2 million to buy property that will be transferred to the Catholic Diocese of Ft. Wayne-South Bend for $1. The land will be used by St. Joseph's High School to build a football stadium.

Such public funding of a religious school violates the church-state separation provisions of the U.S. and Indiana constitutions, the lawsuit charges.

Said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, Americans United executive director, "Taxpayers should never be forced to support religion. If South Bend council members want to make a million-dollar donation to a religious school, they ought to dig into their own pockets, not those of the taxpayers. This action is just plain wrong."

http://www.au.org/media/press-releases/archives/2011/08/americans-united-aclu.html

PDF of legal filing--
http://www.au.org/media/press-releases/archives/2011/08/wirtx-v-south-bend-complaint.pdf

2011-08-15T11:50:00.001-05:00

Annual Membership Meeting of OKC chapter of
Americans United for Separation of Church & State
for renewing and new members
Thursday, September 15, 2011

Gatti Town Pizza, 5833 NW Expressway, OKC
Dutch-treat dinner: 6:00pm
Business meeting: 7:00pm
with election of officers for 2012

If unable to attend, membership is $25
and can be mailed to
P.O.Box 892747, Oklahoma City, OK 73189

Contact Mike Fuller, retiring president,
405-570-3244,mf12@sbcglobal.net
James Nimmo, 405-843-3651

Spring Dialogues Videos - Part 1/3

2011-06-17T11:15:00.004-05:00

Martha Skeeters speaks at Oklahoma State Capitol on Vimeo.

On Saturday, 11 June 2011 Americans United for Separation of Church and State hosted an event at the State Capitol at which various distinguished persons spoke out on various kinds of encroachment of certain churches upon the secular state.

In this video, Professor Martha Skeeters speaks about reproductive choice and the recent history of religious opposition thereto.

Removal of Religious Freedom Protection held up in Committee

2011-06-08T12:37:00.004-05:00

The passage of the resolution would allow the use of tax money to promote religion in Oklahoma with no oversight or supervision. We dodged the bullet this legislative session of 2011, but the resolution is still alive

Text of Article 2, Section 5 of the Oklahoma Constitution:
Public Money or Property - Use for Sectarian Purposes

No public money or property shall ever be appropriated, applied, donated, or used, directly or indirectly, for the use, benefit, or support of any sect, church, denomination, or system of religion, or for the use, benefit, or support of any priest, preacher, minister, or other religious teacher or dignitary, or sectarian institution as such.
http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Article_II,_Oklahoma_Constitution
---------------------------------

http://newlsb.lsb.state.ok.us/BillInfo.aspx?Bill=SJR23&session=1100

SJR 23 by Anderson

Constitutional amendment; repealing Section 5 of Article II, which relates to the use of public money or property for sectarian purposes. Ballot title. Filing.

History For SJR 23

First Reading 266 02/07/2011 S

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Authored by Senator Anderson 266 02/07/2011 S

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Second Reading referred to Judiciary 308 02/14/2011 S

Candidates Ought Not Kowtow To Religious Right

2011-06-02T15:48:00.002-05:00

June 2, 2011

Candidates Ought To Reaffirm Church-State Separation, Not Kowtow To Religious Right, Says AU’s Lynn

Presidential Hopefuls At Ralph Reed Event Signal Troubling Power Of Religious Right

The Religious Right has too much influence in American public life as the speaker line-up at a Ralph Reed event this week demonstrates, according to Americans United for Separation of Church and State.

An array of presidential hopefuls and major congressional leaders is scheduled to appear at Reed’s “Faith & Freedom Conference and Strategy Briefing” June 3 and 4 in Washington, D.C.

Reed is the former head of the Christian Coalition, a religious-political group founded by TV preacher Pat Robertson. Today, Reed is a political consultant and head of the Faith & Freedom Coalition, an organization supposedly dedicated to “educating, equipping, and mobilizing people of faith and like-minded individuals.” He has also made efforts to lure the Tea Party into an alliance with the Religious Right.

“I don’t think Ralph Reed has anyone fooled,” said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, Americans United executive director. “He wants to forge fundamentalist churches and church members into a disciplined voting bloc and force political candidates to kneel before it.

“This kind of mixture of religion and politics is a grave danger to American public life,” said Lynn, who has monitored the Religious Right for some 25 years. “It is a sad day when our politicians start preaching and our preachers start politicking.”

Concluded Lynn, “I wish all the candidates would have the courage to stand up and say – as John F. Kennedy did in 1960 – ‘I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute.’ Today, the Religious Right’s power is such that a statement like Kennedy’s is almost unthinkable. As a matter of fact, candidates are more likely to give their personal profession of faith.”

A recent Americans United survey of the top Religious Right ministries and groups in America revealed a tax-exempt fundamentalist empire with an annual income approaching one billion dollars.

Americans United is a religious liberty watchdog group based in Washington, D.C. Founded in 1947, the organization educates Americans about the importance of church-state separation in safeguarding religious freedom.

http://www.au.org/media/press-releases/archives/2011/06/appearance-of-presidential.html

It's that time of year again: Graduation, Public Schools & Churches

2011-05-25T12:21:00.003-05:00

clip:

When contemplating use of a church for graduation, school officials would do well to consider Justice Sandra Day O'Connor's views in Lynch v. Donnelly, a 1984 Supreme Court decision.

The establishment clause of the First Amendment is violated, she argued, when government endorsement of religion "sends a message to nonadherents that they are outsiders, not full members of the political community, and an accompanying message to adherents that they are insiders, favored members of the political community."

If there's any time when students shouldn't be made to feel like outsiders, it would be at their high school graduation.

Read the rest at:
http://www.news-leader.com/article/20110525/OPINIONS02/105250361/1002/SPORTS/?odyssey=nav|head

or http://tinyurl.com/426vgl6

Charles C. Haynes is director of the Religious Freedom Education Project at the Newseum, 555 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C., 20001. Web: firstamendmentcenter.org . E-mail: chaynes@freedomforum.org

Spring Dialogue Sat. June 11, 2011

2011-05-21T10:22:00.004-05:00

Oklahoma Chapter of Americans United for Separation & State
invites you to a Spring Dialogue Sat. June 11, 2011, 9:30am to 11:30am
Okla. State Senate Chamber, NE 23rd & Lincoln, OKC

Speakers to include
Rep. Al McAffrey, House District 88
Prof. Martha Skeeter, OU Dept. of Women's & Gender Studies
Scott Hamilton, exec. dir. Cimarron Alliance

Open to the public and free of charge
Use WEST entrance

For more information contact
chapter president Mike Fuller, mf12@sbcglobal.net
Jim Huff, jah30@cox.net
or Jim Nimmo, 405-843-3651
www.okau.org, www.au.org

Oklahoma Anti-Sharia Amendment Violates U.S. Constitution

2011-05-18T09:07:00.001-05:00

May 17, 2011

Religious And Civil Liberties Organizations Urge Federal Appeals Court To Reject Religious Bigotry

An Oklahoma constitutional amendment that purports to ban Islamic law in the state singles out Muslims for discrimination and should not be enforced, Americans United for Separation of Church and State and other groups have told a federal appeals court.

The so-called “Save Our State Amendment” barring enforcement of sharia passed with 70 percent of the vote in November, but Americans United and the other organizations assert that the provision is unconstitutional.

“The amendment singles out one faith tradition for government hostility,” said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, Americans United executive director. “That violates our fundamental constitutional requirement that government remain neutral on religion.

“Oklahoma doesn’t need a special amendment to protect it from government-imposed Islamic law,” he continued. “The First Amendment already does that.

“I think we all know that sharia has no chance of taking over Oklahoma,” Lynn concluded. “This entire incident has been a sad example of politically motivated religious intolerance.”

A lawsuit against the amendment was filed by Muneer Awad, executive director of the Oklahoma Council for American-Islamic Relations. In November, U.S. District Judge Vicki Miles-LaGrange issued a preliminary injunction in Awad v. Ziriax, to stop the Oklahoma State Election Board from certifying the election results.

The case is now on appeal to the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. In a friend-of-the-court brief, Americans United and other organizations urge the appeals court to void the amendment.

The brief asserts that the amendment was passed after a wave of anti-Islamic sentiment that was often led by state legislators. The amendment, the groups argue, sends a clear message of governmental disapproval of Islam.

“[A] provision like the Save Our State Amendment communicates to Muslims that they – and they alone – are likely to receive inferior treatment on account of their religion,” asserts the brief.

The brief was drafted by the American Jewish Committee and attorneys Craig C. Martin and Joshua M. Segal of the firm of Jenner & Block LLP, with input from attorneys at Americans United and other organizations.

Other groups joining the brief are the Anti-Defamation League, the Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty, the Center for Islamic Pluralism, the Interfaith Alliance and the Union for Reform Judaism.

Americans United is a religious liberty watchdog group based in Washington, D.C. Founded in 1947, the organization educates Americans about the importance of church-state separation in safeguarding religious freedom.

http://www.au.org/media/press-releases/archives/2011/05/oklahoma-anti-sharia.html

NDP 2011

2011-05-13T12:27:00.003-05:00

What exactly does creeping theocracy look like?

It looks like an exclusively Christian worship service held in the rotunda of the State Capitol, resulting from an enthusiastic response to a federal law “respecting an establishment of religion” insofar as it mandates an official day of prayer. It looks like government officials taking time off from their duties in order to preach sermons to the assembled citizens. It looks like government officials (in collaboration with powerful evangelical lobbyists) telling the citizens when to worship, where to worship, how to worship, and whom to worship. It looks, in brief, more-or-less exactly like the National Day of Prayer worship service held at the Oklahoma State Capitol on Thursday, May 5^th of 2011.

For critical and archival purposes, we are reproducing here a few aspects of the NDP 2011 program. The following are the quotations from the inside front page of the event program.

“It is impossible to rightly govern a nation without God and the Bible.” – George Washington

“But we have forgotten God. We have forgotten the gracious
Hand which preserved us in peace, and multiplied and enriched
and strengthened us; and we have vainly imagined, in the
deceitfulness of our hearts, that all these blessings were produced
by some superior wisdom and virtue of our own.”
President Abraham Lincoln

“Righteousness Exalts A Nation…But Sin Is A Disgrace to Any
People” - Proverbs 14:34

“What other nation is so great to have their gods near them the
way the Lord our God is near us whenever we pray to Him”
Deuteronomy 4:7

“Let us therefore draw near with confidence to the throne of grace,
that we may receive mercy and find grace to help in the time of
need.” - Hebrews 4:16

“Men may spurn our appeals, reject our message, oppose our
arguments, despise our persons, but they are helpless against our
prayers.” - J. Sidlow Baxter

If we ever forget that we are One Nation Under God, then we will
be a Nation gone under.” - President Ronald Reagan

“If we gather together on our knees, we solidify that sense within
our hearts that God is with us. And if He is with us, and if He is for
us, who can be against us?” - Beth Moore (Bible study leader)

“All that is necessary for evil to triumph
is for good men to do nothing.” - Edmund Burke

First off, it must be said that George Washington never said or wrote the first quote, either in his farewell address of 17 September 1796, or anywhere else in his voluminous writings. Substantively and in terms of intellectual honesty, we are off to a rocky start here. This is why our English teachers taught us to carefully cite to original sources.

As to the quotations from a certain holy book, it must be pointed out that only one religion is represented on this page. This would not be a problem on any given Sunday in a private church bulletin, but this public event was billed as a “national day” intended for everyone, whereas this collection of quotations smack of a strictly Christian Nationalism. This impression is reinforced by mixing quotations from U.S. Presidents together with quotations taken from Protestant translations of Scripture and Protestant authors such as Baxter and Moore. This impression is further reinforced by the top billing of the event itself:

What we have here are the three top officials of the Oklahoma State government, presiding over an exclusively Christian worship service, in the heart of the State Capitol. Can one even conceive of a more perfectly calculated symbol for the integration of church and state?

Oklahoma Voucher Program Goes to Court

2011-05-04T12:42:00.004-05:00

Oklahoma school districts are caught between a rock and a hard place, that is, between a voucher program carefully designed to funnel tax dollars into parochial schools, and a state constitutional provision which forbids precisely that sort of funding. It would appear that the courts are going to have to sort this mess out. More details here and here.

Debate Video now available

2011-03-04T21:26:00.000-06:00

The full video of the February 24th Debate sponsored by the OKC chapter of Americans United for Separation of Church and State is now available at
http://vimeo.com/20413733

Two Stories about the Feb. 24 Constitutional Debate

2011-03-02T22:15:00.003-06:00

photo courtesy of David Wheelock
left to right, Dr. Bruce Prescott, Rev. Jim Shields, Dr. Steve Kern

www.newsok.com/article/3545319

http://www.okgazette.com/oklahoma/article-10920-separation-deliberation.html

Separation deliberation
Two pastors, including Sally Kern’s husband, debate whether the Constitution was intended as a religious document.

Letter to the Editor: No doubt about evolution

2011-03-01T21:05:00.001-06:00

http://www.tulsaworld.com/images/template/TW_Logo.jpg

Letter to the Editor: No doubt about evolution

By Larry Forrest, Catoosa

Published: 2/26/2011 5:36 AM

It was with amazement and amusement that I read the recent letters in the
Tulsa World disputing the theory of evolution. Evolution deniers would have
us believe that the vast majority of scientists who regard evolution as
being true have been blinded by ... what? A delusion of Satan?

Scientists of all religious faiths (or no faith at all) accept evolution,
whereas it is primarily fundamentalist Christians who reject it. The latter
would have the Hebrew creation myth found in the Book of Genesis taught
alongside evolution in public schools.

While we're at it, why not teach the Demon Theory of Disease with the Germ
Theory? Perhaps astrology could find a place in behavioral psychology. And
wouldn't it be fun to teach alchemy in chemistry class? After all, Sir Isaac
Newton believed that base metals could be turned into gold.

To those not wearing theological blinders, the evidence for evolution is
overwhelming. From the nearly three decades of meticulous study by Charles
Darwin, resulting in the publication of his book "On the Origin of Species,"
to Mendelian genetics, to DNA, to such stunning fossil finds as
Archaeopteryx (a bird-reptile combo), and Lucy (a 3.2 million-year- old
bipedal ancestor of ours), the case for evolution has been made irrefutably.

As Friedrich Nietzsche put it, "If you wish to strive for peace of soul and
pleasure, then believe; if you wish to be a devotee of truth, then inquire."

Science inquires.

This letter was published exclusively online.

Read more from this Tulsa World article at
http://www.tulsaworld.com/opinion/article.aspx?subjectid=62&articleid=201102
26_62_0_Iaihaa37852 3

Letter to the Editor: No doubt about evolution
haa378523>

HB 1001 Religious Anti-discrimination Act

2011-02-27T21:19:00.002-06:00

HB 1001 Religious Anti-discrimination Act

Wolf in Sheep's Clothing

Here's another bill that is scheduled to be heard Tuesday morning. Email contacts for committee members are included. Email contacts and talking points are included below. Further legislator information is available here:
http://www.oklegislature.gov/

Attached below is the text of HB 1001.

Mike Fuller, OK AU president

Also on Tuesday at 10:30 am, the House Common Education Committee will hear HB 1001.

HB 1001 is a bill designed to get around the Supreme Court case, Santa Fe Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Doe, which held that student prayer over the loudspeaker before a high school football game was unconstitutional.

Currently, students are fully protected by the US and Oklahoma Constitutions when they voluntarily express their religious beliefs. This bill, however, requires that schools have majority-elected students speak at designated school events and sanctions these students to practice and profess their religion in the classroom and at official school functions, where children of different religious beliefs are a captive audience. Schools would have to choose between violating this state law or the US Constitution. Furthermore, the bill would force school districts to open and manage “limited public forums” even if they determine it is not in students’ educational interest or school officials’ capacity. The bill could easily result in costly litigation for schools across the state.

This bill and its model policy would mandate that, when a student speaks during the school day or during graduation or sporting events, the forum in which the student speaks is a public forum. In particular, schools will have to create a public forum during all school announcements, graduations, and varsity football games.

This should mean that any student could speak on any subject. But under the bill, the school would designate certain students as eligible to speak and then would create criteria for choosing which students, among the eligible students, may speak. And the only students eligible are students who have achieved positions of honor, such as sports captain, student council president, or homecoming queen. The bill also sets restrictions on what the students may say.

Please contact the committee members to tell them you strongly oppose the bill:

Jabar Shumate jabarshumate@okhouse.gov
Gus Blackwell gusblackwell@okhouse.gov
Ed Cannaday ed.cannaday@okhouse.gov
Dennis Casey dennis.casey@okhouse.gov
Donnie Condit Donnie.condit@okhouse.gov
Doug Cox dougcox@okhouse.gov
Corey Holland corey.holland@okhouse.gov
Fred Jordan fred.jordan@okhouse.gov
Jeannie McDaniel jeanniemcdaniel@okhouse.gov
Jason Nelson Jason.nelson@okhouse.gov
Jadine Nollan jadine.nollan@okhouse.gov
Pat Ownbey pat.ownbey@okhouse.gov
Dustin Roberts dustin.roberts@okhouse.gov
Emily Virgin Emily.virgin@okhouse.gov

STATE OF OKLAHOMA

1st Session of the 53rd Legislature (2011)

HOUSE BILL 1001 By: Reynolds

AS INTRODUCED

An Act relating to schools; creating the Religious Viewpoints Antidiscrimination Act; requiring school districts to treat student expression in certain manner; directing school districts to adopt a limited public forum for student speakers policy; stating purpose of the policy; listing certain provisions; requiring school district disclaimers to be provided at certain events; prohibiting the exclusion of student expression of religious viewpoints on an otherwise permissible subject from the limited public forum; providing for equal treatment of student expression in class assignments; specifying standards for judging homework and classroom assignments; allowing students to organize religious groups and activities; specifying treatment of religious groups; allowing school districts to disclaim school sponsorship of student groups; requiring school districts to adopt and implement the model policy; specifying that school districts adopting the model policy are compliant with the act; defining term; providing for equal treatment of student expression; providing for student speakers at nongraduation events; establishing public forum limits; providing for notification of eligible students; specifying subject limitations; requiring distribution of a school district disclaimer; allowing certain student speakers based on special positions of honor; providing for student speakers at graduation ceremonies; establishing limited public forum; specifying student eligibility criteria; specifying topic limitations; allowing certain student speakers based on special positions of honor; specifying subject matter; requiring a written disclaimer on graduation programs; providing for equal treatment of student expression in class assignments; requiring homework and classroom work to be judged on certain standard; providing for equal treatment for organizing religious groups and activities; specifying treatment of religious groups; allowing school districts to disclaim sponsorship of groups and events; requiring enforcement by the Attorney General; allowing a civil cause of action for certain violations against certain entities and persons; providing for remedies and costs; providing for codification; providing an effective date; and declaring an emergency.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA:

SECTION 1. NEW LAW A new section of law to be codified in the Oklahoma Statutes as Section 27-101 of Title 70, unless there is created a duplication in numbering, reads as follows:
This act shall be known and may be cited as the “Religious Viewpoints Antidiscrimination Act”.

SECTION 2. NEW LAW A new section of law to be codified in the Oklahoma Statutes as Section 27-102 of Title 70, unless there is created a duplication in numbering, reads as follows:
A school district shall treat the voluntary expression by a student of a religious viewpoint, if any, on an otherwise permissible subject in the same manner the district treats the voluntary expression by a student of a secular or other viewpoint on an otherwise permissible subject and may not discriminate against the student based on a religious viewpoint, if any, expressed by the student on an otherwise permissible subject.

SECTION 3. NEW LAW A new section of law to be codified in the Oklahoma Statutes as Section 27-103 of Title 70, unless there is created a duplication in numbering, reads as follows:

A. To ensure that a school district does not discriminate against the publicly stated voluntary expression by a student of a religious viewpoint, if any, and to eliminate any actual or perceived affirmative school sponsorship or attribution to the district of the expression by a student of a religious viewpoint, if any, each school district in the state shall adopt a policy, which shall include the establishment of a limited public forum for student speakers at all school events at which a student is to publicly speak. The policy regarding the limited public forum shall also require the school district to:
1. Provide the forum in a manner that does not discriminate against the voluntary expression by a student of a religious viewpoint, if any, on an otherwise permissible subject;
2. Provide a method, based on neutral criteria, for the selection of student speakers at school events and graduation ceremonies;
3. Ensure that a student speaker does not engage in obscene, vulgar, offensively lewd, or indecent speech or speech promoting illegal drug use; and
4. State, in writing, orally, or both, that the speech of a student does not reflect the endorsement, sponsorship, position, or expression of the district.
B. The school district disclaimer required by paragraph 4 of subsection A of this section shall be provided at all graduation ceremonies. The school district shall also continue to provide the disclaimer at any other event in which a student speaks publicly for as long as a need exists to dispel confusion over the nonsponsorship of the student speech by the district.
C. Student expression on an otherwise permissible subject shall not be excluded from the limited public forum because the subject is expressed from a religious viewpoint.

SECTION 4. NEW LAW A new section of law to be codified in the Oklahoma Statutes as Section 27-104 of Title 70, unless there is created a duplication in numbering, reads as follows:
Students may express their beliefs about religion in homework, artwork, and other written and oral assignments free from discrimination based on the religious content of their submissions. Homework and classroom assignments shall be judged by ordinary academic standards of substance and relevance and against other legitimate pedagogical concerns identified by the school district. Students shall not be penalized or rewarded on account of the religious content of their work.
SECTION 5. NEW LAW A new section of law to be codified in the Oklahoma Statutes as Section 27-105 of Title 70, unless there is created a duplication in numbering, reads as follows:

Students may organize prayer groups, religious clubs, "see you at the pole" gatherings, or other religious gatherings before, during, and after school to the same extent that students are permitted to organize other noncurricular student activities and groups. Religious groups shall be given the same access to school facilities for assembling as is given to other noncurricular groups without discrimination based on the religious content of the students’ expression. If student groups that meet for nonreligious activities are permitted to advertise or announce meetings of the groups, the school district shall not discriminate against groups that meet for prayer or other religious speech. A school district may disclaim school sponsorship of noncurricular groups and events in a manner that neither favors nor disfavors groups that meet to engage in prayer or religious speech.

SECTION 6. NEW LAW A new section of law to be codified in the Oklahoma Statutes as Section 27-106 of Title 70, unless there is created a duplication in numbering, reads as follows:
Each school district in the state shall adopt and implement the model policy as set forth in Section 7 of this act. When a school district adopts, implements and follows the model policy as provided in Section 7 of this act, the district shall be deemed in compliance with the provisions of the Religious Viewpoints Antidiscrimination Act covered by the model policy.

SECTION 7. NEW LAW A new section of law to be codified in the Oklahoma Statutes as Section 27-107 of Title 70, unless there is created a duplication in numbering, reads as follows:
As used in the Religious Viewpoints Antidiscrimination Act, "model policy" means a local policy adopted by a school district in the state that is substantially identical to the following:

MODEL RELIGIOUS VIEWPOINTS ANTIDISCRIMINATION POLICY
ARTICLE I. STUDENT EXPRESSION OF RELIGIOUS VIEWPOINTS

The school district shall treat the voluntary expression by a student of a religious viewpoint, if any, on an otherwise permissible subject in the same manner the district treats the voluntary expression by a student of a secular or other viewpoint on an otherwise permissible subject and may not discriminate against the student based on a religious viewpoint, if any, expressed by the student on an otherwise permissible subject.

ARTICLE II. STUDENT SPEAKERS AT NONGRADUATION EVENTS

A. The State of Oklahoma and the school districts in the state believe that students gain numerous education benefits from public speaking. The school district hereby creates a limited public forum for student speakers at all school events at which a student is to publicly speak. For each speaker, the district shall set a maximum time limit, reasonable and appropriate to the occasion. Student speakers shall introduce:
1. Varsity football games including games played at regional and state playoffs;
2. Opening announcements and greetings for the school day; and
3. Any additional school functions designated by the district, which may include, without limitation, assemblies and pep rallies, school programs open to the public, and any other athletic events designated by the district.
B. The forum shall be limited in the manner provided for in this Article.
C. Only those students in the highest two grade levels of the school and who hold one of the following positions of honor based on neutral criteria are eligible to use the limited public forum:
1. President of the student council;
2. Class President of the senior class or the highest grade level in the school;
3. Captains of the varsity football team; and
4. Any other students the school district may designate who are presidents of specific school organizations.

D. Eligible students shall be notified of their eligibility, and a student who wishes to participate as an introducing speaker shall submit their name to the student council or other designated body during an announced period of not less than three (3) days. No student shall be compelled to accept a speaking position. The announced period may be at the beginning of the school year, at the end of the preceding school year so student speakers are in place for the new year, or, if the selection process will be repeated each semester, at the beginning of each semester or at the end of the preceding semester so speakers are in place for the next semester. The names of the volunteering student speakers shall be randomly drawn until all names have been selected, and the names shall be listed in the order drawn. Each selected student will be matched chronologically to the event for which the student will be giving the introduction. Each student may speak for one (1) week at a time for all introductions of events that week, or rotate after each speaking event, or otherwise as determined by the district. The list of student speakers shall be chronologically repeated as needed, in the same order. Student speakers may mutually agree to trade speaking engagements among themselves as circumstances arise. The district may repeat the selection process each semester rather than once a year.

E. The subject of the student introductions shall be related to the purpose of the event and to the purpose of marking the opening of the event, honoring the occasion, the participants, and those in attendance, bringing the audience to order, and focusing the audience on the purpose of the event. The subject shall be designated, a student shall stay on the subject, and the student shall not engage in obscene, vulgar, offensively lewd, or indecent speech or speech promoting illegal drug use. The school district shall treat the voluntary expression by a student of a religious viewpoint, if any, on an otherwise permissible subject in the same manner the district treats the voluntary expression by a student of a secular or other viewpoint on an otherwise permissible subject and may not discriminate against the student based on a religious viewpoint expressed by the student on an otherwise permissible subject.

F. For as long as there is a need to dispel confusion over the nonsponsorship of the student speech, at each event in which a student will deliver an introduction, a disclaimer shall be stated in written or oral form, or both, such as: "The student giving the introduction for this event is a volunteering student selected on neutral criteria to introduce the event. The content of the introduction is the private expression of the student and does not reflect the endorsement, sponsorship, position, or expression of the school district."

G. Certain students who have attained special positions of honor in the school have traditionally addressed school audiences from time to time as a tangential component of their achieved positions of honor, such as the captains of various sports teams, student council officers, class officers, homecoming kings and queens, prom kings and queens, and the like, and have attained their positions based on neutral criteria. Nothing in this policy eliminates the continuation of the practice of having these students, irrespective of grade level, address school audiences in the normal course of their respective positions. Similarly, certain students who have attained special positions of honor within a school club or organization have addressed their members and guests at meetings, banquets, and other events from time to time as a tangential component of their achieved position of honor within the school club or organization. Nothing in this policy eliminates the continuation of the practice of having those students, irrespective of grade level, address those audiences in the normal course of their respective positions at such school club or organization meetings, banquets, and events. The eligible speakers and selection process stated in this article shall not apply to those school club and organization meetings, banquets, and events. The school district shall create a limited public forum for the speakers and shall treat the voluntary expression by a student of a religious viewpoint, if any, on an otherwise permissible subject in the same manner the district treats the voluntary expression by a student of a secular or other viewpoint on an otherwise permissible subject and shall not discriminate against the student based on a religious viewpoint, if any, expressed by the student on an otherwise permissible subject.

ARTICLE III. STUDENT SPEAKERS AT GRADUATION CEREMONIES

A. The school district hereby creates a limited public forum consisting of an opportunity for a student to speak to begin graduation ceremonies and another student to speak to end graduation ceremonies. For each speaker, the district shall set a maximum time limit reasonable and appropriate to the occasion.
B. The forum shall be limited in the manner provided by this article.
C. Only students who are graduating and who hold one of the following neutral criteria positions of honor shall be eligible to use the limited public forum:
1. President of the student council;
2. Class President of the graduating class of the highest grade level in the school; and
3. Any other student council officers or class officers of the graduating class or the highest grade level in the school as the school district may designate.
D. A student who will otherwise have a speaking role in the graduation ceremonies is ineligible to give the opening and closing remarks. The names of the eligible volunteering students will be randomly drawn. The first name drawn will give the opening and the second name drawn will give the closing.
E. The topic of the opening and closing remarks shall be related to the purpose of the graduation ceremony and to the purpose of marking the opening and closing of the event, honoring the occasion, the participants, and those in attendance, bringing the audience to order, and focusing the audience on the purpose of the event.
F. In addition to the students giving the opening and closing remarks, certain other students who have attained special positions of honor based on neutral criteria, including, without limitation, the valedictorian, shall have speaking roles at graduation ceremonies. For each speaker, the school district shall set a maximum time limit reasonable and appropriate to the occasion and to the position held by the speaker. For this purpose, the district creates a limited public forum for these students to deliver the addresses. The subject of the addresses shall be related to the purpose of the graduation ceremony, marking and honoring the occasion, honoring the participants and those in attendance, and the perspective of the student on purpose, achievement, life, school, graduation, and looking forward to the future.

G. The subject shall be designated for each student speaker, the student shall stay on the subject, and the student shall not engage in obscene, vulgar, offensively lewd, or indecent speech or speech that promotes illegal drug use. The school district shall treat the voluntary expression by a student of a religious viewpoint, if any, on an otherwise permissible subject in the same manner the district treats the voluntary expression by a student of a secular or other viewpoint on an otherwise permissible subject and shall not discriminate against the student based on a religious viewpoint expressed by the student on an otherwise permissible subject.

H. A written disclaimer shall be printed in the graduation program that states: "The students who will be speaking at the graduation ceremony were selected based on neutral criteria to deliver messages of the students’ own choices. The content of the message of each student speaker is the private expression of the individual student and does not reflect any position or expression of the school district, the board of education of the school district, the school district administration, employees of the school district, or the views of any other graduate. The contents of these messages were prepared by the student volunteers, and the district refrained from any interaction with student speakers regarding the student speakers' viewpoints on permissible subjects."
ARTICLE IV. RELIGIOUS EXPRESSION IN CLASS ASSIGNMENTS

Students may express their beliefs about religion in homework, artwork, and other written and oral assignments free from discrimination based on the religious content of the submission by the student. Homework and classroom work shall be judged by ordinary academic standards of substance and relevance and against other legitimate pedagogical concerns identified by the school. Students shall not be penalized or rewarded on account of religious content. If the assignment given by a teacher involves writing a poem, the work of a student who submits a poem in the form of a prayer (for example, a psalm) should be judged on the basis of academic standards, including literary quality, and not penalized or rewarded on account of its religious content.

ARTICLE V. FREEDOM TO ORGANIZE RELIGIOUS GROUPS AND ACTIVITIES
Students may organize prayer groups, religious clubs, "see you at the pole" gatherings, and other religious gatherings before, during, and after school to the same extent that students are permitted to organize other noncurricular student activities and groups. Religious groups shall be given the same access to school facilities for assembling as is given to other noncurricular groups, without discrimination based on the religious content of the expression of the group. If student groups that meet for nonreligious activities are permitted to advertise or announce the group meetings, for example, by advertising in a student newspaper, putting up posters, making announcements on a student activities bulletin board or public address system, or handing out leaflets, school authorities shall not discriminate against groups that meet for prayer or other religious speech. School authorities may disclaim sponsorship of noncurricular groups and events, provided they administer the disclaimer in a manner that does not favor or disfavor groups that meet to engage in prayer or other religious speech.
SECTION 8. NEW LAW A new section of law to be codified in the Oklahoma Statutes as Section 27-108 of Title 70, unless there is created a duplication in numbering, reads as follows:
The Attorney General shall have the authority to enforce the Religious Viewpoints Antidiscrimination Act and to seek all remedies provided by law. Additionally, a person injured by a violation of the act may bring a cause of action for civil relief against a governmental entity or person, including an employee, servant, or agent of a governmental entity, who violated the act. Remedies available in a civil suit include equitable relief and compensatory damages. A plaintiff who prevails in a cause of action under this section shall be entitled to costs, including reasonable attorney fees.
SECTION 9. This act shall become effective July 1, 2011.
SECTION 10. It being immediately necessary for the preservation of the public peace, health and safety, an emergency is hereby declared to exist, by reason whereof this act shall take effect and be in full force from and after its passage and approval.

53-1-5131 KB 11/16/10

Senate Bill 969 --- message from our OK AU chapter president

2011-02-27T21:16:00.002-06:00

Senate Bill 969 --- message from our OK AU chapter president

This bill is scheduled to be heard in the Senate Finance Committee Tuesday morning at 10:30. AU National is planning on sending a formal letter opposing this bill, but I think it'd be great if we could get a lot of our members and supporters to contact the committee members too.

I plan on drafting a letter to each of the committee members tonight and I also plan to attend the committee meeting to see what happens. Names and emails for the committee members as well as talking points from Dana Sher, legislative assistant in the national AU office in DC. If you prefer you can get phone numbers at this link: http://www.oklegislature.gov/
Attached below are the text SB 969 and the financial impact statement.

Thanks.
Mike Fuller, OK AU president

> The Senate Finance Committee will consider SB 969 on Tuesday morning, March 1, at 10:30 am.
>
> SB 969 would create backdoor school vouchers by offering a tax credit to corporations that contribute money for student scholarship organizations—money which the organizations then give as vouchers to pay for students’ private school tuition. This bill would be bad for students, schools, and taxpayers.
>
> This bill will cost rather than save the state money. When the state grants a tax benefit like this one, it forgoes income. The Oklahoma Tax Commission estimates the state will lose $94.9 million in revenue in just one year. Moreover, vouchers do not decrease education costs. First, students who currently attend private schools are eligible to use vouchers. Second, when only a few students leave each public school classroom with vouchers, schools cannot reduce their overall operating costs and have to make do with less money. In these difficult economic times, this is fiscally irresponsible.
>
> This backdoor voucher scheme will not provide the state with a meaningful way to improve student achievement. Study after study has shown that voucher programs, like the one in this bill, do not improve student education. Private and religious schools will receive what are essentially publicly funded vouchers, but are not subject to the same educational standards, accountability measures, and civil rights protections as public schools. This misguided scheme would force the state to forgo money that could be spent on Oklahoma’s public schools—instead sending the funds to private and parochial schools that integrate religion throughout their curriculum. Thus it may violate Article II, Section 5 of the Oklahoma Constitution.
>
> Please contact the committee members to tell them you strongly oppose this bill:
>
> Senator Mike Mazzei – Chair mazzei@oksenate.gov
> Senator Rick Brinkley - Vice Chair brinkley@oksenate.gov
> Senator Tom Adelson adelson@oksenate.gov
> Senator Cliff Aldridge aldridge@oksenate.gov
> Senator Roger Ballenger ballenger@oksenate.gov
> Senator Kim David david@oksenate.gov
> Senator John Ford fordj@oksenate.gov
> Senator Jim Halligan halligan@oksenate.gov
> Senator Tom Ivester ivester@oksenate.gov
> Senator Clark Jolley jolley@oksenate.gov
> Senator Jim Reynolds reynolds@oksenate.gov
> Senator Steve Russell purinton@oksenate.gov
> Senator Frank Simpson simpson@oksenate.gov
> Senator John Sparks sparks@oksenate.gov
> Senator Greg Treat Treat@oksenate.gov
> Senator Jim Wilson wilson@oksenate.gov

Text of SB 969---
STATE OF OKLAHOMA

1st Session of the 53rd Legislature (2011)

SENATE BILL 969 By: Newberry

AS INTRODUCED

An Act relating to income tax; creating the Oklahoma Equal Opportunity Education Scholarship Act; providing short title; providing for specified credit against income tax liability; specifying amount of credit for certain contribution by specified taxpayer type and limiting credit; providing conditions under which credit shall not be allowed; limiting total amount of credits allowed annually; defining terms; requiring Oklahoma Tax Commission to maintain certain list for purposes of allocating credit; establishing criteria for reserving credit; requiring Tax Commission to notify certain entities under certain circumstances; providing for carryover of unused credit; requiring Tax Commission to promulgate rules in consultation with State Department of Education; amending 68 O.S. 2001, Section 2358, as last amended by Section 1, Chapter 421, O.S.L. 2010 (68 O.S. Supp. 2010, Section 2358), which relates to adjustments of taxable income; requiring certain amounts to be added to Oklahoma taxable income under specified circumstances; providing for codification; and providing an effective date.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA:
SECTION 1. NEW LAW A new section of law to be codified in the Oklahoma Statutes as Section 2357.206 of Title 68, unless there is created a duplication in numbering, reads as follows:
A. This act shall be known and may be cited as the “Oklahoma Equal Opportunity Education Scholarship Act”.
B. 1. For tax years beginning after December 31, 2011, there shall be allowed a credit for any taxpayer who makes a contribution to an eligible scholarship-granting organization, as follows:
a. the credit against the tax imposed by subsections B, C and F of Section 2355 of Title 68 of the Oklahoma Statutes shall be equal to one hundred percent (100%) of the total amount of contributions made during a taxable year, not to exceed One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00) for each taxpayer or Two Thousand Dollars ($2,000.00) for married individuals filing jointly for the taxable year in which the credit provided in this section is claimed, or
b. the credit against the tax imposed by subsections D and E of Section 2355 of Title 68 of the Oklahoma Statutes shall be equal to sixty-five percent (65%) of the total contributions made during a taxable year; provided, no credit authorized by this subparagraph shall exceed an amount which is equal to One Hundred Thousand Dollars ($100,000.00) for the taxable year in which the credit provided in this section is claimed.
2. A credit shall not be allowed by the Oklahoma Tax Commission for contributions made to a scholarship-granting organization if that organization’s percentage of funds actually awarded is less than ninety percent (90%). For purposes of this section, the “percentage of funds actually awarded” shall be determined by dividing the total amount of funds actually awarded as educational scholarships over the most recent twenty-four (24) months by the total amount available to award as educational scholarships over the most recent twenty-four (24) months.
3. The total credits authorized by subparagraph b of paragraph 1 of this subsection against the taxes imposed by subsections D and E of Section 2355 of Title 68 of the Oklahoma Statutes shall not exceed Ten Million Dollars ($10,000,000.00) annually, to be allocated by the Oklahoma Tax Commission as provided in subsection D of this section.
4. Any taxpayer who claims a credit for a contribution pursuant to this section and also deducts the same contribution from federal taxable net income as a charitable contribution shall be required to add the amount of the federal deduction to Oklahoma taxable income for the tax year during which the contribution was made pursuant to paragraph 11 of subsection A of Section 2358 of the Oklahoma Statutes.
C. As used in this section:
1. “Eligible student” means a child of school age who is lawfully present in the United States and who is a member of a household in which the total annual income during the preceding tax year does not exceed an amount equal to three hundred percent (300%) of the income standard used to qualify for a free or reduced school lunch or who, during the immediately preceding school year, attended or, by virtue of the location of such student’s place of residence, was eligible to attend a public school in this state which has been identified for school improvement as determined by the State Board of Education pursuant to the requirements of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, P.L. No. 107-110. Once a student has received an educational scholarship, as defined in paragraph 3 of this subsection, the student and any siblings who are members of the same household shall remain eligible until they graduate from high school or reach twenty-one (21) years of age, whichever occurs first;
2. “Eligible special needs student” means a child of school age who has attended public school in our state with an individualized education program pursuant to the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C.A., Section 1400 et seq.;
3. “Educational scholarships” means:
a. grants to an eligible student of up to Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000.00) or eighty percent (80%) of the average per-pupil expenditure in the school district where the recipient student resides, whichever is greater, to cover all or part of the tuition, fees and transportation costs of a qualified private school which is accredited by the State Board of Education or an accrediting association approved by the Board pursuant to Section 3-104 of Title 70 of the Oklahoma Statutes, or
b. grants to an eligible special needs student of up to Twenty-five Thousand Dollars ($25,000.00) to cover all or part of the tuition, fees and transportation costs of a qualified private school for eligible special needs students which is accredited by the State Board of Education or an accrediting association approved by the Board pursuant to Section 3-104 of Title 70 of the Oklahoma Statutes;
4. “Low-income eligible student” means an eligible student or eligible special needs student who qualifies for a free or reduced-price lunch;
5. “Qualified school” means an elementary or secondary private school in this state, including schools which provide pre-kindergarten educational programs for four-year-olds, which is:
a. accredited by the State Board of Education or an accrediting association approved by the Board pursuant to Section 3-104 of Title 70 of the Oklahoma Statutes,
b. in compliance with all applicable health and safety laws and codes,
c. has a stated policy against discrimination in admissions on the basis of race, color, national origin or disability, and
d. ensures academic accountability to parents and guardians of students through regular progress reports;
6. "Qualified school for eligible special needs students" means an elementary or secondary private school in a county in this state;
7. “Scholarship-granting organization” means an organization which:
a. is a nonprofit entity exempt from taxation pursuant to the provisions of the Internal Revenue Code, 26 U.S.C., Section 501(c)(3),
b. distributes periodic scholarship payments as checks made out to an eligible student’s or eligible special needs student's parent or guardian and mailed to the qualified school where the student is enrolled,
c. spends no more than ten percent (10%) of its annual revenue on expenditures other than educational scholarships as defined in paragraph 3 of this subsection,
d. spends each year a portion of its expenditures on educational scholarships for low-income eligible students, as defined in paragraph 4 of this subsection, in an amount equal to or greater than the percentage of low-income eligible students in the state,
e. ensures that scholarships are portable during the school year and can be used at any qualified school that accepts the eligible student or at any qualified school for special needs students that accepts the eligible special needs student,
f. registers with the Oklahoma Tax Commission as a scholarship-granting organization, and
g. has policies in place to:
(1) carry out criminal background checks on all employees and board members to ensure that no individual is involved with the organization who might reasonably pose a risk to the appropriate use of contributed funds, and
(2) maintain full and accurate records with respect to the receipt of contributions and expenditures of those contributions and supply such records and any other documentation required by the Tax Commission to demonstrate financial accountability; and
8. “Annual revenue” means the total amount or value of contributions received by an organization from taxpayers awarded credits during the organization’s fiscal year and all amounts earned from interest or investments.
D. 1. In order to allocate the total credits authorized by this section against the taxes imposed by subsections D and E of Section 2355 of Title 68 of the Oklahoma Statutes, the Tax Commission shall maintain a list of the total credits reserved during any taxable year. Credits shall be considered reserved only when:
a. a scholarship-granting organization has received a pledge from a taxpayer to make a specified donation, and
b. the scholarship-granting organization has deposited the funds pledged within seven (7) business days from the date the pledge was received.
2. When the amount of total credits reserved during the tax year has reached Ten Million Dollars ($10,000,000.00), the Tax Commission shall notify all registered scholarship-granting organizations that no additional credit is available for the tax year.
E. The credit authorized by this section shall not be used to reduce the tax liability of the taxpayer to less than zero (0).
F. Any credits allowed but not used in any tax year may be carried over, in order, to each of the three (3) years following the year of qualification.
G. In consultation with the State Department of Education, the Tax Commission shall promulgate rules necessary to implement this act. Such rules shall include procedures for the registration of a scholarship-granting organization for purposes of determining if the organization meets the requirements of this act and for notice as required in paragraph 2 of Subsection D of this section.
SECTION 2. AMENDATORY 68 O.S. 2001, Section 2358, as last amended by Section 1, Chapter 421, O.S.L. 2010 (68 O.S. Supp. 2010, Section 2358), is amended to read as follows:
Section 2358. For all tax years beginning after December 31, 1981, taxable income and adjusted gross income shall be adjusted to arrive at Oklahoma taxable income and Oklahoma adjusted gross income as required by this section.
A. The taxable income of any taxpayer shall be adjusted to arrive at Oklahoma taxable income for corporations and Oklahoma adjusted gross income for individuals, as follows:
1. There shall be added interest income on obligations of any state or political subdivision thereto which is not otherwise exempted pursuant to other laws of this state, to the extent that such interest is not included in taxable income and adjusted gross income.
2. There shall be deducted amounts included in such income that the state is prohibited from taxing because of the provisions of the Federal Constitution, the State Constitution, federal laws or laws of Oklahoma.
3. The amount of any federal net operating loss deduction shall be adjusted as follows:
a. For carryovers and carrybacks to taxable years beginning before January 1, 1981, the amount of any net operating loss deduction allowed to a taxpayer for federal income tax purposes shall be reduced to an amount which is the same portion thereof as the loss from sources within this state, as determined pursuant to this section and Section 2362 of this title, for the taxable year in which such loss is sustained is of the total loss for such year;
b. For carryovers and carrybacks to taxable years beginning after December 31, 1980, the amount of any net operating loss deduction allowed for the taxable year shall be an amount equal to the aggregate of the Oklahoma net operating loss carryovers and carrybacks to such year. Oklahoma net operating losses shall be separately determined by reference to Section 172 of the Internal Revenue Code, 26 U.S.C., Section 172, as modified by the Oklahoma Income Tax Act, Section 2351 et seq. of this title, and shall be allowed without regard to the existence of a federal net operating loss. For tax years beginning after December 31, 2000, and ending before January 1, 2008, the years to which such losses may be carried shall be determined solely by reference to Section 172 of the Internal Revenue Code, 26 U.S.C., Section 172, with the exception that the terms "net operating loss" and "taxable income" shall be replaced with "Oklahoma net operating loss" and "Oklahoma taxable income". For tax years beginning after December 31, 2007, and ending before January 1, 2009, years to which such losses may be carried back shall be limited to two (2) years. For tax years beginning after December 31, 2008, the years to which such losses may be carried back shall be determined solely by reference to Section 172 of the Internal Revenue Code, 26 U.S.C., Section 172, with the exception that the terms “net operating loss” and “taxable income” shall be replaced with “Oklahoma net operating loss” and “Oklahoma taxable income”.
4. Items of the following nature shall be allocated as indicated. Allowable deductions attributable to items separately allocable in subparagraphs a, b and c of this paragraph, whether or not such items of income were actually received, shall be allocated on the same basis as those items:
a. Income from real and tangible personal property, such as rents, oil and mining production or royalties, and gains or losses from sales of such property, shall be allocated in accordance with the situs of such property;
b. Income from intangible personal property, such as interest, dividends, patent or copyright royalties, and gains or losses from sales of such property, shall be allocated in accordance with the domiciliary situs of the taxpayer, except that:
(1) where such property has acquired a nonunitary business or commercial situs apart from the domicile of the taxpayer such income shall be allocated in accordance with such business or commercial situs; interest income from investments held to generate working capital for a unitary business enterprise shall be included in apportionable income; a resident trust or resident estate shall be treated as having a separate commercial or business situs insofar as undistributed income is concerned, but shall not be treated as having a separate commercial or business situs insofar as distributed income is concerned,
(2) for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2003, capital or ordinary gains or losses from the sale of an ownership interest in a publicly traded partnership, as defined by Section 7704(b) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, shall be allocated to this state in the ratio of the original cost of such partnership’s tangible property in this state to the original cost of such partnership’s tangible property everywhere, as determined at the time of the sale; if more than fifty percent (50%) of the value of the partnership’s assets consists of intangible assets, capital or ordinary gains or losses from the sale of an ownership interest in the partnership shall be allocated to this state in accordance with the sales factor of the partnership for its first full tax period immediately preceding its tax period during which the ownership interest in the partnership was sold; the provisions of this division shall only apply if the capital or ordinary gains or losses from the sale of an ownership interest in a partnership do not constitute qualifying gain receiving capital treatment as defined in subparagraph a of paragraph 2 of subsection F of this section,
(3) income from such property which is required to be allocated pursuant to the provisions of paragraph 5 of this subsection shall be allocated as herein provided;
c. Net income or loss from a business activity which is not a part of business carried on within or without the state of a unitary character shall be separately allocated to the state in which such activity is conducted;
d. In the case of a manufacturing or processing enterprise the business of which in Oklahoma consists solely of marketing its products by:
(1) sales having a situs without this state, shipped directly to a point from without the state to a purchaser within the state, commonly known as interstate sales,
(2) sales of the product stored in public warehouses within the state pursuant to "in transit" tariffs, as prescribed and allowed by the Interstate Commerce Commission, to a purchaser within the state,
(3) sales of the product stored in public warehouses within the state where the shipment to such warehouses is not covered by "in transit" tariffs, as prescribed and allowed by the Interstate Commerce Commission, to a purchaser within or without the state,
the Oklahoma net income shall, at the option of the taxpayer, be that portion of the total net income of the taxpayer for federal income tax purposes derived from the manufacture and/or processing and sales everywhere as determined by the ratio of the sales defined in this section made to the purchaser within the state to the total sales everywhere. The term "public warehouse" as used in this subparagraph means a licensed public warehouse, the principal business of which is warehousing merchandise for the public;
e. In the case of insurance companies, Oklahoma taxable income shall be taxable income of the taxpayer for federal tax purposes, as adjusted for the adjustments provided pursuant to the provisions of paragraphs 1 and 2 of this subsection, apportioned as follows:
(1) except as otherwise provided by division (2) of this subparagraph, taxable income of an insurance company for a taxable year shall be apportioned to this state by multiplying such income by a fraction, the numerator of which is the direct premiums written for insurance on property or risks in this state, and the denominator of which is the direct premiums written for insurance on property or risks everywhere. For purposes of this subsection, the term "direct premiums written" means the total amount of direct premiums written, assessments and annuity considerations as reported for the taxable year on the annual statement filed by the company with the Insurance Commissioner in the form approved by the National Association of Insurance Commissioners, or such other form as may be prescribed in lieu thereof,
(2) if the principal source of premiums written by an insurance company consists of premiums for reinsurance accepted by it, the taxable income of such company shall be apportioned to this state by multiplying such income by a fraction, the numerator of which is the sum of (a) direct premiums written for insurance on property or risks in this state, plus (b) premiums written for reinsurance accepted in respect of property or risks in this state, and the denominator of which is the sum of (c) direct premiums written for insurance on property or risks everywhere, plus (d) premiums written for reinsurance accepted in respect of property or risks everywhere. For purposes of this paragraph, premiums written for reinsurance accepted in respect of property or risks in this state, whether or not otherwise determinable, may at the election of the company be determined on the basis of the proportion which premiums written for insurance accepted from companies commercially domiciled in Oklahoma bears to premiums written for reinsurance accepted from all sources, or alternatively in the proportion which the sum of the direct premiums written for insurance on property or risks in this state by each ceding company from which reinsurance is accepted bears to the sum of the total direct premiums written by each such ceding company for the taxable year.
5. The net income or loss remaining after the separate allocation in paragraph 4 of this subsection, being that which is derived from a unitary business enterprise, shall be apportioned to this state on the basis of the arithmetical average of three factors consisting of property, payroll and sales or gross revenue enumerated as subparagraphs a, b and c of this paragraph. Net income or loss as used in this paragraph includes that derived from patent or copyright royalties, purchase discounts, and interest on accounts receivable relating to or arising from a business activity, the income from which is apportioned pursuant to this subsection, including the sale or other disposition of such property and any other property used in the unitary enterprise. Deductions used in computing such net income or loss shall not include taxes based on or measured by income. Provided, for corporations whose property for purposes of the tax imposed by Section 2355 of this title has an initial investment cost equaling or exceeding Two Hundred Million Dollars ($200,000,000.00) and such investment is made on or after July 1, 1997, or for corporations which expand their property or facilities in this state and such expansion has an investment cost equaling or exceeding Two Hundred Million Dollars ($200,000,000.00) over a period not to exceed three (3) years, and such expansion is commenced on or after January 1, 2000, the three factors shall be apportioned with property and payroll, each comprising twenty-five percent (25%) of the apportionment factor and sales comprising fifty percent (50%) of the apportionment factor. The apportionment factors shall be computed as follows:
a. The property factor is a fraction, the numerator of which is the average value of the taxpayer's real and tangible personal property owned or rented and used in this state during the tax period and the denominator of which is the average value of all the taxpayer's real and tangible personal property everywhere owned or rented and used during the tax period.
(1) Property, the income from which is separately allocated in paragraph 4 of this subsection, shall not be included in determining this fraction. The numerator of the fraction shall include a portion of the investment in transportation and other equipment having no fixed situs, such as rolling stock, buses, trucks and trailers, including machinery and equipment carried thereon, airplanes, salespersons' automobiles and other similar equipment, in the proportion that miles traveled in Oklahoma by such equipment bears to total miles traveled,
(2) Property owned by the taxpayer is valued at its original cost. Property rented by the taxpayer is valued at eight times the net annual rental rate. Net annual rental rate is the annual rental rate paid by the taxpayer, less any annual rental rate received by the taxpayer from subrentals,
(3) The average value of property shall be determined by averaging the values at the beginning and ending of the tax period but the Oklahoma Tax Commission may require the averaging of monthly values during the tax period if reasonably required to reflect properly the average value of the taxpayer's property;
b. The payroll factor is a fraction, the numerator of which is the total compensation for services rendered in the state during the tax period, and the denominator of which is the total compensation for services rendered everywhere during the tax period. "Compensation", as used in this subsection means those paid-for services to the extent related to the unitary business but does not include officers' salaries, wages and other compensation.
(1) In the case of a transportation enterprise, the numerator of the fraction shall include a portion of such expenditure in connection with employees operating equipment over a fixed route, such as railroad employees, airline pilots, or bus drivers, in this state only a part of the time, in the proportion that mileage traveled in Oklahoma bears to total mileage traveled by such employees,
(2) In any case the numerator of the fraction shall include a portion of such expenditures in connection with itinerant employees, such as traveling salespersons, in this state only a part of the time, in the proportion that time spent in Oklahoma bears to total time spent in furtherance of the enterprise by such employees;
c. The sales factor is a fraction, the numerator of which is the total sales or gross revenue of the taxpayer in this state during the tax period, and the denominator of which is the total sales or gross revenue of the taxpayer everywhere during the tax period. "Sales", as used in this subsection does not include sales or gross revenue which are separately allocated in paragraph 4 of this subsection.
(1) Sales of tangible personal property have a situs in this state if the property is delivered or shipped to a purchaser other than the United States government, within this state regardless of the FOB point or other conditions of the sale; or the property is shipped from an office, store, warehouse, factory or other place of storage in this state and (a) the purchaser is the United States government or (b) the taxpayer is not doing business in the state of the destination of the shipment.
(2) In the case of a railroad or interurban railway enterprise, the numerator of the fraction shall not be less than the allocation of revenues to this state as shown in its annual report to the Corporation Commission.
(3) In the case of an airline, truck or bus enterprise or freight car, tank car, refrigerator car or other railroad equipment enterprise, the numerator of the fraction shall include a portion of revenue from interstate transportation in the proportion that interstate mileage traveled in Oklahoma bears to total interstate mileage traveled.
(4) In the case of an oil, gasoline or gas pipeline enterprise, the numerator of the fraction shall be either the total of traffic units of the enterprise within Oklahoma or the revenue allocated to Oklahoma based upon miles moved, at the option of the taxpayer, and the denominator of which shall be the total of traffic units of the enterprise or the revenue of the enterprise everywhere as appropriate to the numerator. A "traffic unit" is hereby defined as the transportation for a distance of one (1) mile of one (1) barrel of oil, one (1) gallon of gasoline or one thousand (1,000) cubic feet of natural or casinghead gas, as the case may be.
(5) In the case of a telephone or telegraph or other communication enterprise, the numerator of the fraction shall include that portion of the interstate revenue as is allocated pursuant to the accounting procedures prescribed by the Federal Communications Commission; provided that in respect to each corporation or business entity required by the Federal Communications Commission to keep its books and records in accordance with a uniform system of accounts prescribed by such Commission, the intrastate net income shall be determined separately in the manner provided by such uniform system of accounts and only the interstate income shall be subject to allocation pursuant to the provisions of this subsection. Provided further, that the gross revenue factors shall be those as are determined pursuant to the accounting procedures prescribed by the Federal Communications Commission.
In any case where the apportionment of the three factors prescribed in this paragraph attributes to Oklahoma a portion of net income of the enterprise out of all appropriate proportion to the property owned and/or business transacted within this state, because of the fact that one or more of the factors so prescribed are not employed to any appreciable extent in furtherance of the enterprise; or because one or more factors not so prescribed are employed to a considerable extent in furtherance of the enterprise; or because of other reasons, the Tax Commission is empowered to permit, after a showing by taxpayer that an excessive portion of net income has been attributed to Oklahoma, or require, when in its judgment an insufficient portion of net income has been attributed to Oklahoma, the elimination, substitution, or use of additional factors, or reduction or increase in the weight of such prescribed factors. Provided, however, that any such variance from such prescribed factors which has the effect of increasing the portion of net income attributable to Oklahoma must not be inherently arbitrary, and application of the recomputed final apportionment to the net income of the enterprise must attribute to Oklahoma only a reasonable portion thereof.
6. For calendar years 1997 and 1998, the owner of a new or expanded agricultural commodity processing facility in this state may exclude from Oklahoma taxable income, or in the case of an individual, the Oklahoma adjusted gross income, fifteen percent (15%) of the investment by the owner in the new or expanded agricultural commodity processing facility. For calendar year 1999, and all subsequent years, the percentage, not to exceed fifteen percent (15%), available to the owner of a new or expanded agricultural commodity processing facility in this state claiming the exemption shall be adjusted annually so that the total estimated reduction in tax liability does not exceed One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) annually. The Tax Commission shall promulgate rules for determining the percentage of the investment which each eligible taxpayer may exclude. The exclusion provided by this paragraph shall be taken in the taxable year when the investment is made. In the event the total reduction in tax liability authorized by this paragraph exceeds One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) in any calendar year, the Tax Commission shall permit any excess over One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) and shall factor such excess into the percentage for subsequent years. Any amount of the exemption permitted to be excluded pursuant to the provisions of this paragraph but not used in any year may be carried forward as an exemption from income pursuant to the provisions of this paragraph for a period not exceeding six (6) years following the year in which the investment was originally made.
For purposes of this paragraph:
a. "Agricultural commodity processing facility" means building, structures, fixtures and improvements used or operated primarily for the processing or production of marketable products from agricultural commodities. The term shall also mean a dairy operation that requires a depreciable investment of at least Two Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($250,000.00) and which produces milk from dairy cows. The term does not include a facility that provides only, and nothing more than, storage, cleaning, drying or transportation of agricultural commodities, and
b. "Facility" means each part of the facility which is used in a process primarily for:
(1) the processing of agricultural commodities, including receiving or storing agricultural commodities, or the production of milk at a dairy operation,
(2) transporting the agricultural commodities or product before, during or after the processing, or
(3) packaging or otherwise preparing the product for sale or shipment.
7. Despite any provision to the contrary in paragraph 3 of this subsection, for taxable years beginning after December 31, 1999, in the case of a taxpayer which has a farming loss, such farming loss shall be considered a net operating loss carryback in accordance with and to the extent of the Internal Revenue Code, 26 U.S.C., Section 172(b)(G). However, the amount of the net operating loss carryback shall not exceed the lesser of:
a. Sixty Thousand Dollars ($60,000.00), or
b. the loss properly shown on Schedule F of the Internal Revenue Service Form 1040 reduced by one-half (1/2) of the income from all other sources other than reflected on Schedule F.
8. In taxable years beginning after December 31, 1995, all qualified wages equal to the federal income tax credit set forth in 26 U.S.C.A., Section 45A, shall be deducted from taxable income. The deduction allowed pursuant to this paragraph shall only be permitted for the tax years in which the federal tax credit pursuant to 26 U.S.C.A., Section 45A, is allowed. For purposes of this paragraph, "qualified wages" means those wages used to calculate the federal credit pursuant to 26 U.S.C.A., Section 45A.
9. In taxable years beginning after December 31, 2005, an employer that is eligible for and utilizes the Safety Pays OSHA Consultation Service provided by the Oklahoma Department of Labor shall receive an exemption from taxable income in the amount of One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00) for the tax year that the service is utilized.
10. For taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2010, there shall be added to Oklahoma taxable income an amount equal to the amount of deferred income not included in such taxable income pursuant to Section 108(i)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 as amended by Section 1231 of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (P.L. No. 111-5). There shall be subtracted from Oklahoma taxable income an amount equal to the amount of deferred income included in such taxable income pursuant to Section 108(i)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended by Section 1231 of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (P.L. No. 111-5).
11. For taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2012, there shall be added to Oklahoma taxable income an amount equal to the amount of a contribution to a scholarship-granting organization claimed as a credit pursuant to Section 1 of this act if such contribution amount was also deducted from federal taxable income as a charitable donation to a charitable organization qualified under Section 501 (c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code.
B. 1. The taxable income of any corporation shall be further adjusted to arrive at Oklahoma taxable income, except those corporations electing treatment as provided in subchapter S of the Internal Revenue Code, 26 U.S.C., Section 1361 et seq., and Section 2365 of this title, deductions pursuant to the provisions of the Accelerated Cost Recovery System as defined and allowed in the Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981, Public Law 97-34, 26 U.S.C., Section 168, for depreciation of assets placed into service after December 31, 1981, shall not be allowed in calculating Oklahoma taxable income. Such corporations shall be allowed a deduction for depreciation of assets placed into service after December 31, 1981, in accordance with provisions of the Internal Revenue Code, 26 U.S.C., Section 1 et seq., in effect immediately prior to the enactment of the Accelerated Cost Recovery System. The Oklahoma tax basis for all such assets placed into service after December 31, 1981, calculated in this section shall be retained and utilized for all Oklahoma income tax purposes through the final disposition of such assets.
Notwithstanding any other provisions of the Oklahoma Income Tax Act, Section 2351 et seq. of this title, or of the Internal Revenue Code to the contrary, this subsection shall control calculation of depreciation of assets placed into service after December 31, 1981, and before January 1, 1983.
For assets placed in service and held by a corporation in which accelerated cost recovery system was previously disallowed, an adjustment to taxable income is required in the first taxable year beginning after December 31, 1982, to reconcile the basis of such assets to the basis allowed in the Internal Revenue Code. The purpose of this adjustment is to equalize the basis and allowance for depreciation accounts between that reported to the Internal Revenue Service and that reported to Oklahoma.
2. For tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2009, and ending on or before December 31, 2009, there shall be added to Oklahoma taxable income any amount in excess of One Hundred Seventy-five Thousand Dollars ($175,000.00) which has been deducted as a small business expense under Internal Revenue Code, Section 179 as provided in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.
C. 1. For taxable years beginning after December 31, 1987, the taxable income of any corporation shall be further adjusted to arrive at Oklahoma taxable income for transfers of technology to qualified small businesses located in Oklahoma. Such transferor corporation shall be allowed an exemption from taxable income of an amount equal to the amount of royalty payment received as a result of such transfer; provided, however, such amount shall not exceed ten percent (10%) of the amount of gross proceeds received by such transferor corporation as a result of the technology transfer. Such exemption shall be allowed for a period not to exceed ten (10) years from the date of receipt of the first royalty payment accruing from such transfer. No exemption may be claimed for transfers of technology to qualified small businesses made prior to January 1, 1988.
2. For purposes of this subsection:
a. "Qualified small business" means an entity, whether organized as a corporation, partnership, or proprietorship, organized for profit with its principal place of business located within this state and which meets the following criteria:
(1) Capitalization of not more than Two Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($250,000.00),
(2) Having at least fifty percent (50%) of its employees and assets located in Oklahoma at the time of the transfer, and
(3) Not a subsidiary or affiliate of the transferor corporation;
b. "Technology" means a proprietary process, formula, pattern, device or compilation of scientific or technical information which is not in the public domain;
c. "Transferor corporation" means a corporation which is the exclusive and undisputed owner of the technology at the time the transfer is made; and
d. "Gross proceeds" means the total amount of consideration for the transfer of technology, whether the consideration is in money or otherwise.
D. 1. For taxable years beginning after December 31, 2005, the taxable income of any corporation, estate or trust, shall be further adjusted for qualifying gains receiving capital treatment. Such corporations, estates or trusts shall be allowed a deduction from Oklahoma taxable income for the amount of qualifying gains receiving capital treatment earned by the corporation, estate or trust during the taxable year and included in the federal taxable income of such corporation, estate or trust.
2. As used in this subsection:
a. "qualifying gains receiving capital treatment" means the amount of net capital gains, as defined in Section 1222(11) of the Internal Revenue Code, included in the federal income tax return of the corporation, estate or trust that result from:
(1) the sale of real property or tangible personal property located within Oklahoma that has been directly or indirectly owned by the corporation, estate or trust for a holding period of at least five (5) years prior to the date of the transaction from which such net capital gains arise,
(2) the sale of stock or on the sale of an ownership interest in an Oklahoma company, limited liability company, or partnership where such stock or ownership interest has been directly or indirectly owned by the corporation, estate or trust for a holding period of at least three (3) years prior to the date of the transaction from which the net capital gains arise, or
(3) the sale of real property, tangible personal property or intangible personal property located within Oklahoma as part of the sale of all or substantially all of the assets of an Oklahoma company, limited liability company, or partnership where such property has been directly or indirectly owned by such entity owned by the owners of such entity, and used in or derived from such entity for a period of at least three (3) years prior to the date of the transaction from which the net capital gains arise,
b. "holding period" means an uninterrupted period of time. The holding period shall include any additional period when the property was held by another individual or entity, if such additional period is included in the taxpayer’s holding period for the asset pursuant to the Internal Revenue Code,
c. "Oklahoma company", "limited liability company", or "partnership" means an entity whose primary headquarters have been located in Oklahoma for at least three (3) uninterrupted years prior to the date of the transaction from which the net capital gains arise,
d. “direct” means the taxpayer directly owns the asset, and
e. “indirect” means the taxpayer owns an interest in a pass-through entity (or chain of pass-through entities) that sells the asset that gives rise to the qualifying gains receiving capital treatment.
(1) With respect to sales of real property or tangible personal property located within Oklahoma, the deduction described in this subsection shall not apply unless the pass-through entity that makes the sale has held the property for not less than five (5) uninterrupted years prior to the date of the transaction that created the capital gain, and each pass-through entity included in the chain of ownership has been a member, partner, or shareholder of the pass-through entity in the tier immediately below it for an uninterrupted period of not less than five (5) years.
(2) With respect to sales of stock or ownership interest in or sales of all or substantially all of the assets of an Oklahoma company, limited liability company, or partnership, the deduction described in this subsection shall not apply unless the pass-through entity that makes the sale has held the stock or ownership interest or the assets for not less than three (3) uninterrupted years prior to the date of the transaction that created the capital gain, and each pass-through entity included in the chain of ownership has been a member, partner or shareholder of the pass-through entity in the tier immediately below it for an uninterrupted period of not less than three (3) years.
E. The Oklahoma adjusted gross income of any individual taxpayer shall be further adjusted as follows to arrive at Oklahoma taxable income:
1. a. In the case of individuals, there shall be added or deducted, as the case may be, the difference necessary to allow personal exemptions of One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00) in lieu of the personal exemptions allowed by the Internal Revenue Code.
b. There shall be allowed an additional exemption of One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00) for each taxpayer or spouse who is blind at the close of the tax year. For purposes of this subparagraph, an individual is blind only if the central visual acuity of the individual does not exceed 20/200 in the better eye with correcting lenses, or if the visual acuity of the individual is greater than 20/200, but is accompanied by a limitation in the fields of vision such that the widest diameter of the visual field subtends an angle no greater than twenty (20) degrees.
c. There shall be allowed an additional exemption of One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00) for each taxpayer or spouse who is sixty-five (65) years of age or older at the close of the tax year based upon the filing status and federal adjusted gross income of the taxpayer. Taxpayers with the following filing status may claim this exemption if the federal adjusted gross income does not exceed:
(1) Twenty-five Thousand Dollars ($25,000.00) if married and filing jointly;
(2) Twelve Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($12,500.00) if married and filing separately;
(3) Fifteen Thousand Dollars ($15,000.00) if single; and
(4) Nineteen Thousand Dollars ($19,000.00) if a qualifying head of household.
Provided, for taxable years beginning after December 31, 1999, amounts included in the calculation of federal adjusted gross income pursuant to the conversion of a traditional individual retirement account to a Roth individual retirement account shall be excluded from federal adjusted gross income for purposes of the income thresholds provided in this subparagraph.
2. a. For taxable years beginning on or before December 31, 2005, in the case of individuals who use the standard deduction in determining taxable income, there shall be added or deducted, as the case may be, the difference necessary to allow a standard deduction in lieu of the standard deduction allowed by the Internal Revenue Code, in an amount equal to the larger of fifteen percent (15%) of the Oklahoma adjusted gross income or One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00), but not to exceed Two Thousand Dollars ($2,000.00), except that in the case of a married individual filing a separate return such deduction shall be the larger of fifteen percent (15%) of such Oklahoma adjusted gross income or Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00), but not to exceed the maximum amount of One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00),
b. For taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2006, and before January 1, 2007, in the case of individuals who use the standard deduction in determining taxable income, there shall be added or deducted, as the case may be, the difference necessary to allow a standard deduction in lieu of the standard deduction allowed by the Internal Revenue Code, in an amount equal to:
(1) Three Thousand Dollars ($3,000.00), if the filing status is married filing joint, head of household or qualifying widow; or
(2) Two Thousand Dollars ($2,000.00), if the filing status is single or married filing separate.
c. For the taxable year beginning on January 1, 2007, and ending December 31, 2007, in the case of individuals who use the standard deduction in determining taxable income, there shall be added or deducted, as the case may be, the difference necessary to allow a standard deduction in lieu of the standard deduction allowed by the Internal Revenue Code, in an amount equal to:
(1) Five Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($5,500.00), if the filing status is married filing joint or qualifying widow; or
(2) Four Thousand One Hundred Twenty-five Dollars ($4,125.00) for a head of household; or
(3) Two Thousand Seven Hundred Fifty Dollars ($2,750.00), if the filing status is single or married filing separate.
d. For the taxable year beginning on January 1, 2008, and ending December 31, 2008, in the case of individuals who use the standard deduction in determining taxable income, there shall be added or deducted, as the case may be, the difference necessary to allow a standard deduction in lieu of the standard deduction allowed by the Internal Revenue Code, in an amount equal to:
(1) Six Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($6,500.00), if the filing status is married filing joint or qualifying widow, or
(2) Four Thousand Eight Hundred Seventy-five Dollars ($4,875.00) for a head of household, or
(3) Three Thousand Two Hundred Fifty Dollars ($3,250.00), if the filing status is single or married filing separate.
e. For the taxable year beginning on January 1, 2009, and ending December 31, 2009, in the case of individuals who use the standard deduction in determining taxable income, there shall be added or deducted, as the case may be, the difference necessary to allow a standard deduction in lieu of the standard deduction allowed by the Internal Revenue Code, in an amount equal to:
(1) Eight Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($8,500.00), if the filing status is married filing joint or qualifying widow, or
(2) Six Thousand Three Hundred Seventy-five Dollars ($6,375.00) for a head of household, or
(3) Four Thousand Two Hundred Fifty Dollars ($4,250.00), if the filing status is single or married filing separate.
Oklahoma adjusted gross income shall be increased by any amounts paid for motor vehicle excise taxes which were deducted as allowed by the Internal Revenue Code.
f. For taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2010, in the case of individuals who use the standard deduction in determining taxable income, there shall be added or deducted, as the case may be, the difference necessary to allow a standard deduction equal to the standard deduction allowed by the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, based upon the amount and filing status prescribed by such Code for purposes of filing federal individual income tax returns.
3. In the case of resident and part-year resident individuals having adjusted gross income from sources both within and without the state, the itemized or standard deductions and personal exemptions shall be reduced to an amount which is the same portion of the total thereof as Oklahoma adjusted gross income is of adjusted gross income. To the extent itemized deductions include allowable moving expense, proration of moving expense shall not be required or permitted but allowable moving expense shall be fully deductible for those taxpayers moving within or into Oklahoma and no part of moving expense shall be deductible for those taxpayers moving without or out of Oklahoma. All other itemized or standard deductions and personal exemptions shall be subject to proration as provided by law.
4. A resident individual with a physical disability constituting a substantial handicap to employment may deduct from Oklahoma adjusted gross income such expenditures to modify a motor vehicle, home or workplace as are necessary to compensate for his or her handicap. A veteran certified by the Department of Veterans Affairs of the federal government as having a service-connected disability shall be conclusively presumed to be an individual with a physical disability constituting a substantial handicap to employment. The Tax Commission shall promulgate rules containing a list of combinations of common disabilities and modifications which may be presumed to qualify for this deduction. The Tax Commission shall prescribe necessary requirements for verification.
5. a. Before July 1, 2010, the first One Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($1,500.00) received by any person from the United States as salary or compensation in any form, other than retirement benefits, as a member of any component of the Armed Forces of the United States shall be deducted from taxable income.
b. On or after July 1, 2010, and ending before January 1, 2015, one hundred percent (100%) of the income received by any person from the United States as salary or compensation in any form, other than retirement benefits, as a member of any component of the Armed Forces of the United States shall be deducted from taxable income.
c. For the taxable year beginning on January 1, 2015, and every year thereafter, if the State Board of Equalization makes a determination pursuant to Section 2355.1D of this title that, for the purposes of this paragraph, revenue collections exceed revenue reductions, the one hundred percent (100%) deduction provided for in subparagraph b of this paragraph may be claimed.
d. For the taxable year beginning on January 1, 2015, and every year thereafter, if the State Board of Equalization makes a determination pursuant to Section 2355.1D of this title that, for the purposes of this paragraph, revenue collections do not exceed revenue reductions, a deduction of the first One Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($1,500.00) received by any person from the United States as salary or compensation in any form, other than retirement benefits, as a member of any component of the Armed Forces of the United States shall be allowed.
e. Whenever the filing of a timely income tax return by a member of the Armed Forces of the United States is made impracticable or impossible of accomplishment by reason of:
(1) absence from the United States, which term includes only the states and the District of Columbia;
(2) absence from the State of Oklahoma while on active duty; or
(3) confinement in a hospital within the United States for treatment of wounds, injuries or disease,
the time for filing a return and paying an income tax shall be and is hereby extended without incurring liability for interest or penalties, to the fifteenth day of the third month following the month in which:
(a) Such individual shall return to the United States if the extension is granted pursuant to subparagraph a of this paragraph, return to the State of Oklahoma if the extension is granted pursuant to subparagraph b of this paragraph or be discharged from such hospital if the extension is granted pursuant to subparagraph c of this paragraph; or
(b) An executor, administrator, or conservator of the estate of the taxpayer is appointed, whichever event occurs the earliest.
Provided, that the Tax Commission may, in its discretion, grant any member of the Armed Forces of the United States an extension of time for filing of income tax returns and payment of income tax without incurring liabilities for interest or penalties. Such extension may be granted only when in the judgment of the Tax Commission a good cause exists therefor and may be for a period in excess of six (6) months. A record of every such extension granted, and the reason therefor, shall be kept.
6. Before July 1, 2010, the salary or any other form of compensation, received from the United States by a member of any component of the Armed Forces of the United States, shall be deducted from taxable income during the time in which the person is detained by the enemy in a conflict, is a prisoner of war or is missing in action and not deceased; provided, after July 1, 2010, all such salary or compensation shall be subject to the deduction as provided pursuant to paragraph 5 of this subsection.
7. Notwithstanding anything in the Internal Revenue Code or in the Oklahoma Income Tax Act to the contrary, it is expressly provided that, in the case of resident individuals, amounts received as dividends or distributions of earnings from savings and loan associations or credit unions located in Oklahoma, and interest received on savings accounts and time deposits from such sources or from state and national banks or trust companies located in Oklahoma, shall qualify as dividends for the purpose of the dividend exclusion, and taxable income shall be adjusted accordingly to arrive at Oklahoma taxable income; provided, however, that the dividend, distribution of earnings and/or interest exclusion provided for hereinabove shall not be cumulative to the maximum dividend exclusion allowed by the Internal Revenue Code. Any dividend exclusion already allowed by the Internal Revenue Code and reflected in the taxpayer's Oklahoma taxable income together with exclusion allowed herein shall not exceed the total of One Hundred Dollars ($100.00) per individual or Two Hundred Dollars ($200.00) per couple filing a joint return.
8. a. An individual taxpayer, whether resident or nonresident, may deduct an amount equal to the federal income taxes paid by the taxpayer during the taxable year.
b. Federal taxes as described in subparagraph a of this paragraph shall be deductible by any individual taxpayer, whether resident or nonresident, only to the extent they relate to income subject to taxation pursuant to the provisions of the Oklahoma Income Tax Act. The maximum amount allowable in the preceding paragraph shall be prorated on the ratio of the Oklahoma adjusted gross income to federal adjusted gross income.
c. For the purpose of this paragraph, "federal income taxes paid" shall mean federal income taxes, surtaxes imposed on incomes or excess profits taxes, as though the taxpayer was on the accrual basis. In determining the amount of deduction for federal income taxes for tax year 2001, the amount of the deduction shall not be adjusted by the amount of any accelerated ten percent (10%) tax rate bracket credit or advanced refund of the credit received during the tax year provided pursuant to the federal Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001, P.L. No. 107-16, and the advanced refund of such credit shall not be subject to taxation.
d. The provisions of this paragraph shall apply to all taxable years ending after December 31, 1978, and beginning before January 1, 2006.
9. Retirement benefits not to exceed Five Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($5,500.00) for the 2004 tax year, Seven Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($7,500.00) for the 2005 tax year and Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000.00) for the 2006 tax year and all subsequent tax years, which are received by an individual from the civil service of the United States, the Oklahoma Public Employees Retirement System, the Teachers' Retirement System of Oklahoma, the Oklahoma Law Enforcement Retirement System, the Oklahoma Firefighters Pension and Retirement System, the Oklahoma Police Pension and Retirement System, the employee retirement systems created by counties pursuant to Section 951 et seq. of Title 19 of the Oklahoma Statutes, the Uniform Retirement System for Justices and Judges, the Oklahoma Wildlife Conservation Department Retirement Fund, the Oklahoma Employment Security Commission Retirement Plan, or the employee retirement systems created by municipalities pursuant to Section 48-101 et seq. of Title 11 of the Oklahoma Statutes shall be exempt from taxable income.
10. In taxable years beginning after December 3l, 1984, Social Security benefits received by an individual shall be exempt from taxable income, to the extent such benefits are included in the federal adjusted gross income pursuant to the provisions of Section 86 of the Internal Revenue Code, 26 U.S.C., Section 86.
11. For taxable years beginning after December 31, 1994, lump-sum distributions from employer plans of deferred compensation, which are not qualified plans within the meaning of Section 401(a) of the Internal Revenue Code, 26 U.S.C., Section 401(a), and which are deposited in and accounted for within a separate bank account or brokerage account in a financial institution within this state, shall be excluded from taxable income in the same manner as a qualifying rollover contribution to an individual retirement account within the meaning of Section 408 of the Internal Revenue Code, 26 U.S.C., Section 408. Amounts withdrawn from such bank or brokerage account, including any earnings thereon, shall be included in taxable income when withdrawn in the same manner as withdrawals from individual retirement accounts within the meaning of Section 408 of the Internal Revenue Code.
12. In taxable years beginning after December 31, 1995, contributions made to and interest received from a medical savings account established pursuant to Sections 2621 through 2623 of Title 63 of the Oklahoma Statutes shall be exempt from taxable income.
13. For taxable years beginning after December 31, 1996, the Oklahoma adjusted gross income of any individual taxpayer who is a swine or poultry producer may be further adjusted for the deduction for depreciation allowed for new construction or expansion costs which may be computed using the same depreciation method elected for federal income tax purposes except that the useful life shall be seven (7) years for purposes of this paragraph. If depreciation is allowed as a deduction in determining the adjusted gross income of an individual, any depreciation calculated and claimed pursuant to this section shall in no event be a duplication of any depreciation allowed or permitted on the federal income tax return of the individual.
14. a. In taxable years beginning after December 31, 2002, nonrecurring adoption expenses paid by a resident individual taxpayer in connection with:
(1) the adoption of a minor, or
(2) a proposed adoption of a minor which did not result in a decreed adoption,
may be deducted from the Oklahoma adjusted gross income.
b. The deductions for adoptions and proposed adoptions authorized by this paragraph shall not exceed Twenty Thousand Dollars ($20,000.00) per calendar year.
c. The Tax Commission shall promulgate rules to implement the provisions of this paragraph which shall contain a specific list of nonrecurring adoption expenses which may be presumed to qualify for the deduction. The Tax Commission shall prescribe necessary requirements for verification.
d. "Nonrecurring adoption expenses" means adoption fees, court costs, medical expenses, attorney fees and expenses which are directly related to the legal process of adoption of a child including, but not limited to, costs relating to the adoption study, health and psychological examinations, transportation and reasonable costs of lodging and food for the child or adoptive parents which are incurred to complete the adoption process and are not reimbursed by other sources. The term "nonrecurring adoption expenses" shall not include attorney fees incurred for the purpose of litigating a contested adoption, from and after the point of the initiation of the contest, costs associated with physical remodeling, renovation and alteration of the adoptive parents' home or property, except for a special needs child as authorized by the court.
15. a. In taxable years beginning before January 1, 2005, retirement benefits not to exceed the amounts specified in this paragraph, which are received by an individual sixty-five (65) years of age or older and whose Oklahoma adjusted gross income is Twenty-five Thousand Dollars ($25,000.00) or less if the filing status is single, head of household, or married filing separate, or Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000.00) or less if the filing status is married filing joint or qualifying widow, shall be exempt from taxable income. In taxable years beginning after December 31, 2004, retirement benefits not to exceed the amounts specified in this paragraph, which are received by an individual whose Oklahoma adjusted gross income is less than the qualifying amount specified in this paragraph, shall be exempt from taxable income.
b. For purposes of this paragraph, the qualifying amount shall be as follows:
(1) in taxable years beginning after December 31, 2004, and prior to January 1, 2007, the qualifying amount shall be Thirty-seven Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($37,500.00) or less if the filing status is single, head of household, or married filing separate, or Seventy-Five Thousand Dollars ($75,000.00) or less if the filing status is married filing jointly or qualifying widow,
(2) in the taxable year beginning January 1, 2007, the qualifying amount shall be Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000.00) or less if the filing status is single, head of household, or married filing separate, or One Hundred Thousand Dollars ($100,000.00) or less if the filing status is married filing jointly or qualifying widow,
(3) in the taxable year beginning January 1, 2008, the qualifying amount shall be Sixty-two Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($62,500.00) or less if the filing status is single, head of household, or married filing separate, or One Hundred Twenty-five Thousand Dollars ($125,000.00) or less if the filing status is married filing jointly or qualifying widow,
(4) in the taxable year beginning January 1, 2009, the qualifying amount shall be One Hundred Thousand Dollars ($100,000.00) or less if the filing status is single, head of household, or married filing separate, or Two Hundred Thousand Dollars ($200,000.00) or less if the filing status is married filing jointly or qualifying widow, and
(5) in the taxable year beginning January 1, 2010, and subsequent taxable years, there shall be no limitation upon the qualifying amount.
c. For purposes of this paragraph, "retirement benefits" means the total distributions or withdrawals from the following:
(1) an employee pension benefit plan which satisfies the requirements of Section 401 of the Internal Revenue Code, 26 U.S.C., Section 401,
(2) an eligible deferred compensation plan that satisfies the requirements of Section 457 of the Internal Revenue Code, 26 U.S.C., Section 457,
(3) an individual retirement account, annuity or trust or simplified employee pension that satisfies the requirements of Section 408 of the Internal Revenue Code, 26 U.S.C., Section 408,
(4) an employee annuity subject to the provisions of Section 403(a) or (b) of the Internal Revenue Code, 26 U.S.C., Section 403(a) or (b),
(5) United States Retirement Bonds which satisfy the requirements of Section 86 of the Internal Revenue Code, 26 U.S.C., Section 86, or
(6) lump-sum distributions from a retirement plan which satisfies the requirements of Section 402(e) of the Internal Revenue Code, 26 U.S.C., Section 402(e).
d. The amount of the exemption provided by this paragraph shall be limited to Five Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($5,500.00) for the 2004 tax year, Seven Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($7,500.00) for the 2005 tax year and Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000.00) for the tax year 2006 and for all subsequent tax years. Any individual who claims the exemption provided for in paragraph 9 of this subsection shall not be permitted to claim a combined total exemption pursuant to this paragraph and paragraph 9 of this subsection in an amount exceeding Five Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($5,500.00) for the 2004 tax year, Seven Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($7,500.00) for the 2005 tax year and Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000.00) for the 2006 tax year and all subsequent tax years.
16. In taxable years beginning after December 31, 1999, for an individual engaged in production agriculture who has filed a Schedule F form with the taxpayer’s federal income tax return for such taxable year, there shall be excluded from taxable income any amount which was included as federal taxable income or federal adjusted gross income and which consists of the discharge of an obligation by a creditor of the taxpayer incurred to finance the production of agricultural products.
17. In taxable years beginning December 31, 2000, an amount equal to one hundred percent (100%) of the amount of any scholarship or stipend received from participation in the Oklahoma Police Corps Program, as established in Section 2-140.3 of Title 47 of the Oklahoma Statutes shall be exempt from taxable income.
18. a. In taxable years beginning after December 31, 2001, and before January 1, 2005, there shall be allowed a deduction in the amount of contributions to accounts established pursuant to the Oklahoma College Savings Plan Act. The deduction shall equal the amount of contributions to accounts, but in no event shall the deduction for each contributor exceed Two Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($2,500.00) each taxable year for each account.
b. In taxable years beginning after December 31, 2004, each taxpayer shall be allowed a deduction for contributions to accounts established pursuant to the Oklahoma College Savings Plan Act. The maximum annual deduction shall equal the amount of contributions to all such accounts plus any contributions to such accounts by the taxpayer for prior taxable years after December 31, 2004, which were not deducted, but in no event shall the deduction for each tax year exceed Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000.00) for each individual taxpayer or Twenty Thousand Dollars ($20,000.00) for taxpayers filing a joint return. Any amount of a contribution that is not deducted by the taxpayer in the year for which the contribution is made may be carried forward as a deduction from income for the succeeding five (5) years. For taxable years beginning after December 31, 2005, deductions may be taken for contributions and rollovers made during a taxable year and up to April 15 of the succeeding year, or the due date of a taxpayer’s state income tax return, excluding extensions, whichever is later. Provided, a deduction for the same contribution may not be taken for two (2) different taxable years.
c. In taxable years beginning after December 31, 2006, deductions for contributions made pursuant to subparagraph b of this paragraph shall be limited as follows:
(1) for a taxpayer who qualified for the five-year carryforward election and who takes a rollover or nonqualified withdrawal during that period, the tax deduction otherwise available pursuant to subparagraph b of this paragraph shall be reduced by the amount which is equal to the rollover or nonqualified withdrawal, and
(2) for a taxpayer who elects to take a rollover or nonqualified withdrawal within the same tax year in which a contribution was made to the taxpayer’s account, the tax deduction otherwise available pursuant to subparagraph b of this paragraph shall be reduced by the amount of the contribution which is equal to the rollover or nonqualified withdrawal.
d. If a taxpayer elects to take a rollover on a contribution for which a deduction has been taken pursuant to subparagraph b of this paragraph within one year of the date of contribution, the amount of such rollover shall be included in the adjusted gross income of the taxpayer in the taxable year of the rollover.
e. If a taxpayer makes a nonqualified withdrawal of contributions for which a deduction was taken pursuant to subparagraph b of this paragraph, such nonqualified withdrawal and any earnings thereon shall be included in the adjusted gross income of the taxpayer in the taxable year of the nonqualified withdrawal.
f. As used in this paragraph:
(1) “non-qualified withdrawal” means a withdrawal from an Oklahoma College Savings Plan account other than one of the following:
(a) a qualified withdrawal,
(b) a withdrawal made as a result of the death or disability of the designated beneficiary of an account,
(c) a withdrawal that is made on the account of a scholarship or the allowance or payment described in Section 135(d)(1)(B) or (C) or by the Internal Revenue Code, received by the designated beneficiary to the extent the amount of the refund does not exceed the amount of the scholarship, allowance, or payment, or
(d) a rollover or change of designated beneficiary as permitted by subsection F of Section 3970.7 of Title 70 of Oklahoma Statutes, and
(2) “rollover” means the transfer of funds from the Oklahoma College Savings Plan to any other plan under Section 529 of the Internal Revenue Code.
19. For taxable years beginning after December 31, 2005, retirement benefits received by an individual from any component of the Armed Forces of the United States in an amount not to exceed the greater of seventy-five percent (75%) of such benefits or Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000.00) shall be exempt from taxable income but in no case less than the amount of the exemption provided by paragraph 15 of this subsection.
20. For taxable years beginning after December 31, 2006, retirement benefits received by federal civil service retirees, including survivor annuities, paid in lieu of Social Security benefits shall be exempt from taxable income to the extent such benefits are included in the federal adjusted gross income pursuant to the provisions of Section 86 of the Internal Revenue Code, 26 U.S.C., Section 86, according to the following schedule:
a. in the taxable year beginning January 1, 2007, twenty percent (20%) of such benefits shall be exempt,
b. in the taxable year beginning January 1, 2008, forty percent (40%) of such benefits shall be exempt,
c. in the taxable year beginning January 1, 2009, sixty percent (60%) of such benefits shall be exempt,
d. in the taxable year beginning January 1, 2010, eighty percent (80%) of such benefits shall be exempt, and
e. in the taxable year beginning January 1, 2011, and subsequent taxable years, one hundred percent (100%) of such benefits shall be exempt.
21. a. For taxable years beginning after December 31, 2007, a resident individual may deduct up to Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000.00) from Oklahoma adjusted gross income if the individual, or the dependent of the individual, while living, donates one or more human organs of the individual to another human being for human organ transplantation. As used in this paragraph, "human organ" means all or part of a liver, pancreas, kidney, intestine, lung, or bone marrow. A deduction that is claimed under this paragraph may be claimed in the taxable year in which the human organ transplantation occurs.
b. An individual may claim this deduction only once, and the deduction may be claimed only for unreimbursed expenses that are incurred by the individual and related to the organ donation of the individual.
c. The Oklahoma Tax Commission shall promulgate rules to implement the provisions of this paragraph which shall contain a specific list of expenses which may be presumed to qualify for the deduction. The Tax Commission shall prescribe necessary requirements for verification.
22. For taxable years beginning after December 31, 2009, there shall be exempt from taxable income any amount received by the beneficiary of the death benefit for an emergency medical technician or a registered emergency medical responder provided by Section 1-2505.1 of Title 63 of the Oklahoma Statutes.
23. For taxable years beginning after December 31, 2008, taxable income shall be increased by any unemployment compensation exempted under Section 85 (c) of the Internal Revenue Code, 26 U.S.C., Section 85(c)(2009).
24. For taxable years beginning after December 31, 2008, there shall be exempt from taxable income any payment in an amount less than Six Hundred Dollars ($600.00) received by a person as an award for participation in a competitive livestock show event. For purposes of this paragraph, the payment shall be treated as a scholarship amount paid by the entity sponsoring the event and the sponsoring entity shall cause the payment to be categorized as a scholarship in its books and records.
F. 1. For taxable years beginning after December 31, 2004, a deduction from the Oklahoma adjusted gross income of any individual taxpayer shall be allowed for qualifying gains receiving capital treatment that are included in the federal adjusted gross income of such individual taxpayer during the taxable year.
2. As used in this subsection:
a. "qualifying gains receiving capital treatment" means the amount of net capital gains, as defined in Section 1222(11) of the Internal Revenue Code, included in an individual taxpayer’s federal income tax return that result from:
(1) the sale of real property or tangible personal property located within Oklahoma that has been directly or indirectly owned by the individual taxpayer for a holding period of at least five (5) years prior to the date of the transaction from which such net capital gains arise,
(2) the sale of stock or the sale of a direct or indirect ownership interest in an Oklahoma company, limited liability company, or partnership where such stock or ownership interest has been directly or indirectly owned by the individual taxpayer for a holding period of at least two (2) years prior to the date of the transaction from which the net capital gains arise, or
(3) the sale of real property, tangible personal property or intangible personal property located within Oklahoma as part of the sale of all or substantially all of the assets of an Oklahoma company, limited liability company, or partnership or an Oklahoma proprietorship business enterprise where such property has been directly or indirectly owned by such entity or business enterprise or owned by the owners of such entity or business enterprise for a period of at least two (2) years prior to the date of the transaction from which the net capital gains arise,
b. "holding period" means an uninterrupted period of time. The holding period shall include any additional period when the property was held by another individual or entity, if such additional period is included in the taxpayer’s holding period for the asset pursuant to the Internal Revenue Code,
c. "Oklahoma company," "limited liability company," or "partnership" means an entity whose primary headquarters have been located in Oklahoma for at least three (3) uninterrupted years prior to the date of the transaction from which the net capital gains arise,
d. “direct” means the individual taxpayer directly owns the asset,
e. “indirect” means the individual taxpayer owns an interest in a pass-through entity (or chain of pass-through entities) that sells the asset that gives rise to the qualifying gains receiving capital treatment.
(1) With respect to sales of real property or tangible personal property located within Oklahoma, the deduction described in this subsection shall not apply unless the pass-through entity that makes the sale has held the property for not less than five (5) uninterrupted years prior to the date of the transaction that created the capital gain, and each pass-through entity included in the chain of ownership has been a member, partner, or shareholder of the pass-through entity in the tier immediately below it for an uninterrupted period of not less than five (5) years.
(2) With respect to sales of stock or ownership interest in or sales of all or substantially all of the assets of an Oklahoma company, limited liability company, partnership or Oklahoma proprietorship business enterprise, the deduction described in this subsection shall not apply unless the pass-through entity that makes the sale has held the stock or ownership interest for not less than two (2) uninterrupted years prior to the date of the transaction that created the capital gain, and each pass-through entity included in the chain of ownership has been a member, partner or shareholder of the pass-through entity in the tier immediately below it for an uninterrupted period of not less than two (2) years. For purposes of this division, uninterrupted ownership prior to the effective date of this act shall be included in the determination of the required holding period prescribed by this division, and
f. “Oklahoma proprietorship business enterprise” means a business enterprise whose income and expenses have been reported on Schedule C or F of an individual taxpayer’s federal income tax return, or any similar successor schedule published by the Internal Revenue Service and whose primary headquarters have been located in Oklahoma for at least three (3) uninterrupted years prior to the date of the transaction from which the net capital gains arise.
G. 1. For purposes of computing its Oklahoma taxable income under this section, the dividends-paid deduction otherwise allowed by federal law in computing net income of a real estate investment trust that is subject to federal income tax shall be added back in computing the tax imposed by this state under this title if the real estate investment trust is a captive real estate investment trust.
2. For purposes of computing its Oklahoma taxable income under this section, a taxpayer shall add back otherwise deductible rents and interest expenses paid to a captive real estate investment trust that is not subject to the provisions of paragraph 1 of this subsection. As used in this subsection:
a. the term "real estate investment trust" or "REIT" means the meaning ascribed to such term in Section 856 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended,
b. the term “captive real estate investment trust” means a real estate investment trust, the shares or beneficial interests of which are not regularly traded on an established securities market and more than fifty percent (50%) of the voting power or value of the beneficial interests or shares of which are owned or controlled, directly or indirectly, or constructively, by a single entity that is:
(1) treated as an association taxable as a corporation under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, and
(2) not exempt from federal income tax pursuant to the provisions of Section 501(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended.
The term shall not include a real estate investment trust that is intended to be regularly traded on an established securities market, and that satisfies the requirements of Section 856(a)(5) and (6) of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code by reason of Section 856(h)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code,
c. the term “association taxable as a corporation” shall not include the following entities:
(1) any real estate investment trust as defined in paragraph a of this subsection other than a “captive real estate investment trust”, or
(2) any qualified real estate investment trust subsidiary under Section 856(i) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, other than a qualified REIT subsidiary of a “captive real estate investment trust”, or
(3) any Listed Australian Property Trust (meaning an Australian unit trust registered as a “Managed Investment Scheme” under the Australian Corporations Act in which the principal class of units is listed on a recognized stock exchange in Australia and is regularly traded on an established securities market), or an entity organized as a trust, provided that a Listed Australian Property Trust owns or controls, directly or indirectly, seventy-five percent (75%) or more of the voting power or value of the beneficial interests or shares of such trust, or
(4) any Qualified Foreign Entity, meaning a corporation, trust, association or partnership organized outside the laws of the United States and which satisfies the following criteria:
(a) at least seventy-five percent (75%) of the entity's total asset value at the close of its taxable year is represented by real estate assets, as defined in Section 856(c)(5)(B) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, thereby including shares or certificates of beneficial interest in any real estate investment trust, cash and cash equivalents, and U.S. Government securities,
(b) the entity receives a dividend-paid deduction comparable to Section 561 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or is exempt from entity level tax,
(c) the entity is required to distribute at least eighty-five percent (85%) of its taxable income, as computed in the jurisdiction in which it is organized, to the holders of its shares or certificates of beneficial interest on an annual basis,
(d) not more than ten percent (10%) of the voting power or value in such entity is held directly or indirectly or constructively by a single entity or individual, or the shares or beneficial interests of such entity are regularly traded on an established securities market, and
(e) the entity is organized in a country which has a tax treaty with the United States.
3. For purposes of this subsection, the constructive ownership rules of Section 318(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, as modified by Section 856(d)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, shall apply in determining the ownership of stock, assets, or net profits of any person.
4. A real estate investment trust that does not become regularly traded on an established securities market within one (1) year of the date on which it first becomes a real estate investment trust shall be deemed not to have been regularly traded on an established securities market, retroactive to the date it first became a real estate investment trust, and shall file an amended return reflecting such retroactive designation for any tax year or part year occurring during its initial year of status as a real estate investment trust. For purposes of this subsection, a real estate investment trust becomes a real estate investment trust on the first day it has both met the requirements of Section 856 of the Internal Revenue Code and has elected to be treated as a real estate investment trust pursuant to Section 856(c)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code.
SECTION 3. This act shall become effective January 1, 2012.

53-1-32 JCR 2/28/2011 7:29:47 AM

Finanacial Impact Statement--

Our Chapter President Comments on OKC City Council Cadidates

2011-02-27T11:57:00.002-06:00

Asking the congregation to pray for political campaigns should cost the
church its tax-exempt status, said Mike Fuller, president of the Oklahoma
City chapter of the Americans for Separation of Church and State.

"That's a violation in my opinion of the prohibition on politicking by a
tax-exempt organization," he said. "That strikes me as blatant politicking."

Fuller said the candidates have a right to espouse religious beliefs, but
should be cautious once they enter office.

"We have no quarrel with people professing religion during campaigns," he
said. "I wouldn't want to prevent them from doing that. Once they get into
office and they start pushing for policies based on religion that affect the
public, then that's an encroachment on church-state separation, and we do
want to get involved in trying to prevent that from happening."

http://www.newsok.com/activities-of-council-candidates-church-draw-criticism/article/3544301

Activities of council candidates' church draw criticism
Council candidates' church, its activities criticized. Political commentary,
children's training on weapons cause some to believe radical views will
influence council decisions.

By Michael Baker and John Estus
Published: February 27, 2011

Two Oklahoma City Council candidates attend a church observers have
criticized for flying the Confederate flag, making political commentary from
the pulpit and training children to use automatic weapons at a church camp.

Windsor Hills Baptist Church's activities have been described as radical by
critics who fear it could influence city council decisions if its members
are elected Tuesday.

The church had nothing to do with members Adrian Van Manen and Cliff Hearron
deciding to run for city council, nor will the church force its religion on
Oklahoma City, the two candidates said.

"Some of the people that I've known down there for the last 19 years are
helping me in the campaign, but I'm keeping a pretty strict wall of
separation between me and the church, not that that's required by law,"
Hearron said.

"My decision to run was a personal decision, and it has nothing to do with
the church," Van Manen said.

complete at:

http://www.newsok.com/activities-of-council-candidates-church-draw-criticism/article/3544301

Debate Video now available

2011-02-26T20:13:00.003-06:00

Prescott / Kern Debate from Damion Reinhardt on Vimeo.

The full video of the February 24th Debate sponsored by the OKC chapter of Americans United for Separation of Church and State is now available at
http://vimeo.com/20413733

Thanks, Damion, for getting this together for our Oklahoma chapter of AU. I want readers to know they are welcome to share this link far and wide regardless of your religious viewpoint. We at www.OKAU.org went to great lengths to keep this debate as civil and balanced as possible, giving every opportunity for each side to present their strongest arguments and documentary evidence. I think we succeeded with a packed house of at least 170 people.

Don't be daunted by the length of the debate. Our moderators and timekeeper were very focused on doing a good job to keeping things moving.

On another fork in the road of civil liberties let me add that the Oklahoma legislature will be considering a resolution numbered SJR 23 that if passed in both Houses would place on the Oklahoma November, 2012 ballot a state question that would remove from the Oklahoma constitution Article 2, sec 5 the prohibition of any tax money being used or given to any religious person or establishment whatsoever.
http://law.justia.com/constitution/oklahoma/II-5.html

This undoubtedly would pass with the voters of Oklahoma and turn the civil liberty of freedom of and from religion as outlined in the Federal First Amendment into a raffle prize awarded to the majority. Civil liberties are inherent as a birthright and can not be subject to majority whim or ignorance.

This bill has been referred to the House Judiciary Committee The text of SJR 23 is here:

STATE OF OKLAHOMA

1st Session of the 53rd Legislature (2011)
SENATE JOINT RESOLUTION 23 By: Anderson

AS INTRODUCED

A Joint Resolution directing the Secretary of State to refer to the people for their approval or rejection the repeal of Section 5 of Article II of the Oklahoma Constitution, which relates to use of public money or property for sectarian purposes; providing ballot title; and directing filing.

BE IT RESOLVED BY THE SENATE AND THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE 1ST SESSION OF THE 53RD OKLAHOMA LEGISLATURE:

SECTION 1. The Secretary of State shall refer to the people for their approval or rejection, as and in the manner provided by law, the repeal of Section 5 of Article II of the Oklahoma Constitution which prohibits the use of public money or property for sectarian purposes.

SECTION 2. The Ballot Title for the proposed Constitutional amendment as set forth in SECTION 1 of this resolution shall be in the following form:

BALLOT TITLE

Legislative Referendum No. ____ State Question No. ____

THE GIST OF THE PROPOSITION IS AS FOLLOWS:

This measure would amend Article II of the State Constitution. It would repeal Section 5 of this article. This section prohibits the use of public money or property for certain purposes. This use is banned for sectarian purposes.

SHALL THE PROPOSAL BE APPROVED?

FOR THE PROPOSAL — YES _____________

AGAINST THE PROPOSAL — NO _____________

SECTION 3. The President Pro Tempore of the Senate shall, immediately after the passage of this resolution, prepare and file one copy thereof, including the Ballot Title set forth in SECTION 2 hereof, with the Secretary of State and one copy with the Attorney General.

53-1-121 CD 2/26/2011 8:10:36 PM

Prescott / Kern Debate Recap

2011-02-25T08:26:00.009-06:00

Thanks to everyone who attended last night's debate and especially those who worked so hard to make it happen, most especially Drs. Kern and Prescott. The lo-fi abridged audio file is available here. Full video will be posted sometime next week. The issue under debate was whether the U.S. Constitution founded a Christian Nation.

After listening to the debate, a few questions naturally spring to mind. Perhaps most saliently, one must ask what exactly are these uniquely Christian principles upon which Dr. Kern rested so many of his arguments? Are there any moral principles which one finds in the sayings of Jesus of Nazareth which are not to be found elsewhere in pre-Christian religions (e.g. Animism, Buddhism, Confucianism, Dionysianism, etc.)? If so, where are these uniquely Christian principles to be found in the U.S. Constitution?

Secondly, why should the letters or speeches of individual founders (e.g. Patrick Henry or Gouverneur Morris) be considered final and authoritative as to the interpretation of the U.S. Constitution, especially when said founders were expressing themselves on matters unrelated thereto? If modern church-state integrationists do not consider it acceptable to take Jefferson's "wall of separation" metaphor to be authoritative because it was written in a private letter to a Baptist church, why should Morris' unpublished draft of a Constitution for France carry more weight? At least it may be said of Jefferson that he was reflecting upon the potential of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. By contrast, Morris was proposing a wholly new set of rules for a strikingly different cultural context, even as (back across the pond) the original thirteen States were busily discussing and ratifying the First Amendment.

Finally, it should be noted that Dr. Kern brings up a completely new topic when he moves on from the Constitution and its drafters to the late 20th century, attempting to draw a causal connection between secularism and some of the more unfortunate consequences of the sexual revolution. This is a fascinating topic in and of itself, and while it is irrelevant to the debate last night, might well merit further inquiry in another forum.

For further reading:

Chris Rodda - History of the Northwest Ordinance

Patrick Henry quotes and misquotes (note what he never said)

Gouverneur Morris quote in context (proposed French Constitution)

Kern Just Can't Keep Herself from Distortion and Deception

2011-02-12T19:43:00.008-06:00

HB 1551 by Kern – Scientific Education and Academic Freedom Act
Distortion and Deception Revisited

The wording of HB 1551 is virtually identical to SB 320 introduced by Brogdon in 2009 (failed in Education Committee). Identical bills, apparently written by the creationist Discovery Institute, have been introduced in several other states over the last several years. They are cleverly worded to sound as if not promoting religious views in order to skirt the first amendment establishment clause and recent court rulings. However, the religious motivations of Rep. Kern (and the Discovery Institute) are abundantly clear. The terms “academic freedom”, “strengths and weaknesses”, and “scientific information” are well-known euphemisms used in order to cast doubt on established science and introduce religious counter-arguments in science classrooms.

The bill states:
2A. . . . teaching of some scientific subjects, such as biological evolution, the chemical origins of life, global warming, and human cloning, can cause controversy, and that some teachers may be unsure of the expectations concerning how they should present information on such subjects.

Promoting the notion that there is some scientific controversy is just plain dishonest. There isn't one. Evolution as a process is supported by an enormous and continually growing body of evidence. Evolutionary theory has advanced substantially since Darwin's time and, despite 150 years of direct research, no evidence in conflict with evolution has ever been found. The fact that evolution has occurred is accepted by virtually all scientists around the world and is as well established as the fact that the Earth is round. The controversies are purely religious and political. The reason some teachers may be unsure of how to teach evolution, etc., is due to anti-science interference from from some parents and members of the community.

2B. . . . assist teachers to find more effective ways to present the science curriculum where it addresses scientific controversies. Toward this end, teachers shall be permitted to help students understand, analyze, critique, and review in an objective manner the scientific strengths and scientific weaknesses of existing scientific theories pertinent to the course being taught.

There really are no scientific “weaknesses”. If one looks to the sources of these alleged weaknesses, we find they are phony fabrications, invented and promoted by people who don't like the implications of evolution. One may not like the implications of atomic weapons but that does not mean that there is some controversy over the physics or that one may simply reject the science as flawed. Instead of teaching science, this approach teaches our children that it is acceptable to simply ignore the parts of science they don't happen to like.

2C. . . . shall not prohibit any teacher in a school district in this state from helping students understand, analyze, critique, and review in an objective manner the scientific strengths and scientific weaknesses of existing scientific theories pertinent to the course being taught.

What weaknesses should teachers teach? The National Academy of Sciences and the American Association for the Advancement of Science have not found any legitimate scientific weaknesses to evolution but we expect high school teachers to fabricate and discuss so-called weaknesses in class? This provides an opening for the introduction of supplementary creationist intelligent design materials into the classroom. This is now being attempted in Texas where curriculum standards are based on wording similar to this and other anti-evolution bills.

2D. Students may be evaluated based upon their understanding of course materials, but no student in any public school or institution shall be penalized in any way because the student may subscribe to a particular position on scientific theories.
This is vague. It would seem to allow any position to count on assignments or exams.

2E. . . . shall only protect the teaching of scientific information,
The term scientific information is not defined here. Creation “scientists” and intelligent design proponents claim to be doing science – they are not but their propaganda might be interpreted to be scientific information by some teachers or school administrators.

HB 1551 makes the completely baseless association between academic freedom and freedom to teach pseudoscientific nonsense in science classes. Forcing teachers to present the “strengths and weaknesses” will force them to pretend that we know less than we really do about the natural world and to present ideas based in one specific religion as if they were science. The issue is not about fairness or free inquiry; it is about science vs. nonscience. With academic freedom comes academic responsibility; that is, to teach only science in science classes. This bill does not promote academic freedom, rather academic misconduct.

Oklahomans for Excellence in Science Education –
http://www.oklascience.org/

Here is contact information for the members of the House committee that will hear this bill.

------------------------------

Since time is short, we are asking you to also send letters to the
Republican members of the House Common Ed Committee, except for Chair
Coody and Sally Kern.

The messages should be in your own words, short, and emphasize the
main points - harm to science education, harm to economy, likely
unconstitutional and already killed two years ago in Senate.

Here is the contact info:

GOPers

Gus Blackwell
2300 N. Lincoln Blvd., Room 305-A
557-7384 gusblackwell@okhouse.gov

Dennis Casey
2300 N. Lincoln Blvd., Room 300B
557-7344 dennis.casey@okhouse.gov

Doug Cox
2300 N. Lincoln Blvd., Room 410
557-7415 dougcox@okhouse.gov

Corey Holland
2300 N. Lincoln Blvd., Room 537
557-7405 corey.holland@okhouse.gov

Fred Jordan
2300 N. Lincoln Blvd., Room 333
557-7331 fred.jordan@okhouse.gov

Jason Nelson
2300 N. Lincoln Blvd., Room 301
557-7335 jason.nelson@okhouse.gov

Jadine Nollan
2300 N. Lincoln Blvd., Room 320
557-7390 jadine.nollan@okhouse.gov

Pat Ownbey
2300 N. Lincoln Blvd., Room 301
557-7326 pat.ownbey@okhouse.gov

Dustin Roberts
2300 N. Lincoln Blvd., Room 319
557-7366 dustin.roberts@okhouse.gov

Demos

Jabar Shumate, Vice Chair
2300 N. Lincoln Blvd., Room 510
557-7406
jabarshumate@okhouse.gov

Ed Cannaday
2300 N. Lincoln Blvd., Room 539-B
557-7375
ed.cannaday@okhouse.gov

Donnie Condit
2300 N. Lincoln Blvd., Room 500A
557-7376
donnie.condit@okhouse.gov

Jeannie McDaniel
2300 N. Lincoln Blvd., Room 508
557-7334
jeanniemcdaniel@okhouse.gov

Emily Virgin
2300 N. Lincoln Blvd., Room 539-B
557-7323
emily.virgin@okhouse.gov

--
Oklahomans for Excellence in Science Education
P.O. BOX 721454
NORMAN, OK 73070
oklascience@gmail.com
http://www.oklascience.org/

OKC Chapter in the News

2011-02-08T10:12:00.001-06:00

Discussion of Legislative Preview in January, 2011

Deemed a success

55 in attendance, Oklahoman story by McNutt
Read more:
http://newsok.com/conservative-ideological-bills-concern-group/article/3536708#ixzz1DKG8KCEA

Carla Hinton mention of event in Oklahoman
http://newsok.com/capitol-events-mix-faith-and-government/article/3536285

Evolution alternatives?

2011-02-08T10:04:00.002-06:00

OKC's chapter of Americans United for Separation & State is helping support our federal First Amendment right to freedom of religion and to maintain the Oklahoma Constitution's Article 2, section 5 restriction from allowing tax money to be used for religious purposes.

http://bit.ly/goeSeI

Our chapter president, Mike Fuller, was recently quoted for an Oklahoma Gazette story (linked below) on the attempt by some legislators to equate religious creationism with scientific evolution.

http://okgazette.com/oklahoma/article-10678-evolution-alternatives.html

clip -- According to Mike Fuller, president of the Oklahoma Chapter of Americans United for the Separation of Church and State, there is no valid criticism of the theory of evolution as a comprehensive theory, only with aspects of it. “There is no scientifically credible theory that competes with evolution,” said Fuller, a former junior high science teacher. “This is yet another of the continuing efforts to bring religion, in the form of intelligent design or creationism, into science classes. There simply is no controversy about the truth of evolution in science fields.”

OKAU Legislative Preview --- Conservative ideological bills concern group

2011-02-07T19:15:00.000-06:00

Conservative ideological bills concern group
Measures could harm Oklahoma's economic efforts and violate state and federal constitutional prohibitions against mixing religious doctrine with secular government, say members of the Oklahoma City chapter of Americans United for Separation of Church and State.

Read more: http://newsok.com/conservative-ideological-bills-concern-group/article/3536708#ixzz1DKG8KCEA

AU Applauds Decision Striking Down Ohio Judge’s Ten Commandments Display

2011-02-02T17:10:00.003-06:00

AU Applauds Decision Striking Down Ohio Judge’s Ten Commandments Display

Courts Should Provide Equal Justice For All, Not Promote Religious Law, Says AU’s Lynn

February 2, 2011

A federal appeals court made the right call in requiring a state judge in Ohio to remove a Ten Commandments display from his courtroom, says Americans United for Separation of Church and State.

The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled today that James DeWeese, a judge of the Richland County Court of Common Pleas, ran afoul of the Constitution when he put up a display entitled “Philosophies of Law in Conflict” that contrasted the “Moral Absolutes” of the Ten Commandments with the “Moral Relatives” of humanism.

“Judge DeWeese was improperly promoting his personal religious beliefs in his courtroom, and I’m glad the appeals court put a stop to it,” said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United, which filed a friend-of-the-court brief in the case.

Added Lynn, “Our courts are supposed to provide equal justice for all, not promote religious law. Judges should never send the message that some religious traditions have a preferred place in the courtroom.”

The case goes back to 2000, when DeWeese hung a poster of the Ten Commandments opposite a poster of the Bill of Rights, presenting each as “the rule of law.” The American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio sued and won. In response, DeWeese created the new display. The ACLU sued over that as well.

Ruling in American Civil Liberties Union v. James DeWeese, the appeals court determined that DeWeese sought to endorse religion through his actions.

“[T]he poster in this case is not merely a display of the Ten Commandments in Defendant’s courtroom,” wrote Judge Eric L. Clay for the unanimous three-judge panel. “It sets forth overt religious messages and religious endorsements. It is a display of the Ten Commandments editorialized by Defendant, a judge in an Ohio state court, exhorting a return to ‘moral absolutes’ which Defendant himself defines as the principles of the ‘God of the Bible.’ The poster is an explicit endorsement of religion by Defendant….”

DeWeese was represented in court by TV preacher Pat Robertson’s American Center for Law and Justice.

Last year, Americans United filed a friend-of-the-court brief urging the appeals court to stop DeWeese from promoting religion in his courtroom. (The brief was joined by The Interfaith Alliance, the Anti-Defamation League, the Hindu American Foundation and the Union for Reform Judaism.)

In addition, Americans United pointed out on its website that DeWeese has been affiliated with Christian Reconstructionism, the most extreme manifestation of the Religious Right. Reconstructionists believe in imposing “biblical law” on America based on the legal code of the Old Testament.

Read the full press release at http://www.au.org/media/press-releases/archives/2011/02/au-applauds-decision-striking.html

You can read the Court's opinion here:
http://www.au.org/media/press-releases/archives/2011/02/ohio-10c-appeals-court-ruling.pdf

DEBATE: US Constitution neither established nor advocates for a Christian nation

2011-01-30T19:10:00.005-06:00

THE OKLAHOMA CHAPTER OF
AMERICANS UNITED FOR SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE

THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 24, 2011 - 7:00 pm to 8:30 pm
Oklahoma City Community College - 7777 S. May, OKC
Parking Area “D” - Entrance “CU1” - Rooms CU2,CU3

FREE PUBLIC DEBATE

“Resolved, the United States Constitution neither established
nor advocates for a Christian nation.”

Dr. Bruce Prescott (Mainstream Oklahoma Baptists, Exec. Dir.) will argue the AFFIRMATIVE ( http://mainstreambaptist.blogspot.com/ )

Dr. Steve Kern (Southern Baptist, pastor) will argue the NEGATIVE
http://www.olivetbaptistokc.com/

●Audience members will have the opportunity to express
with which position they tend to agree.

●A brief time of “Questions and Answers”
from the audience will be scheduled.

●For more information contact Jim Huff - jah30@cox.net
or Mike Fuller - mf12@sbcglobal.net or James Nimmo, 405-843-3651

Too Christian or Not? To be or Not to be --Two Events

2011-01-23T10:46:00.004-06:00

And I apologize to Shakespeare and his reading fans

=======================

What: 2011 OK Legislative Bill Preview - Religious vs. Civil Use of Tax Payer Money

When: Saturday, January 29, 2011, 9:30am to 11:30am

Where: OK State Senate Chamber, Capitol Building, 2100 N. Lincoln, OKC, OK

Who: OKC Chapter of Americans United for Church & State and the public!

Americans United for Separation of Church & State,
Oklahoma City Chapter, Announces 2nd Annual Legislative Preview

(Oklahoma City) The Oklahoma City Chapter of Americans United for Separation of Church & State will hold its second annual Oklahoma Legislative Preview on Saturday, January 29, 2011 in the State Senate Chamber, Oklahoma Capitol Building, located in Oklahoma City.

Convening at 9:30 am, this event previews bills submitted by both Houses of the Oklahoma Legislature that involve the use of public tax money to advance religious viewpoints that could violate the state and federal Constitutional prohibitions against mixing religious doctrine with secular government. The event will conclude at 11:30 am.

The language and expenditures of these bills will be reviewed and discussed in an open meeting with all interested citizens invited to participate with questions and comments.

Sponsors of the selected bills will be invited to speak briefly about each topic with questions from the audience encouraged.

Please note that access to the Senate Chamber will be through the west security entrance of the State Capitol. Ample free parking and handicapped facilities are available.

Americans United (AU) is a nonpartisan organization dedicated to preserving the constitutional principle of church-state separation as the only way to ensure religious freedom for all Americans.

For more information about the Oklahoma City Chapter of Americans for Separation of Church and State please visit http://www.au.org or contact Mike Fuller at 405-570-3244, Nick Singer at 405-416-3126 or James Nimmo at 405-843-3651.

2) THE OKLAHOMA CHAPTER OF
AMERICANS UNITED FOR SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE

THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 24, 2011 - 7:00 pm
Oklahoma City Community College - 7777 S. May, OKC
Parking Area “D” - Entrance “CU1” - Rooms CU2,CU3

FREE PUBLIC DEBATE

“Resolved, the United States Constitution neither established
nor advocates for a Christian nation.”

Dr. Bruce Prescott (Mainstream Oklahoma Baptists, ExD) will argue the AFFIRMATIVE
Dr. Steve Kern (Southern Baptist, pastor) will argue the NEGATIVE

●Participants will have the opportunity to express
with which position they tend to agree.

●A brief time of “Questions and Answers”
from the audience will be scheduled.

●For more information contact Jim Huff - jah30@cox.net
or Mike Fuller - mf12@sbcglobal.net

Senate Staff Recommending a "Citizens United" decision for non-profits?

2011-01-08T08:55:00.005-06:00

Jesus's Own Traditional Admonition Being Cast Aside?

The recent US Supreme Court decision allowing corporations to spend unlimited amounts of money for political candidates and elections is wanting to be imitated by several religious non-profits that hold an IRS-granted tax exemption known as a 501 (c) 3.

Ostensibly this is granted because the religious corporation has filed a claim of being engaged in charitable work. Such religious groups are allowed to speak and proselytize on issues but not for specific candidates.

Oklahoma has one church in particular, Fairview Baptist Church in Edmond, OK, whose pastor, Paul Blair, has chosen to make him and his church an example for challenging this current IRS prohibition against religious campaigning for candidates.

You can read here http://www.news9.com/global/story.asp?s=12983523 about the maneuvers Blair is taking to circumvent the First Amendment's prohibition of religious favoritism from government.

You can read here http://tinyurl.com/2ccvnye the report from Senator Grassley's committee reporting the non-cooperation of several prominent religious corporations

Here is the latest press release from Americans United and its executive director, Barry Lynn concerning the Committee report.

------------------

Grassley Investigation of TV Preachers Veers Off Course, Says Americans United

January 7, 2011

Senate Finance Committee Staffers Are Wrong To Recommend Scrapping Federal ‘No-Electioneering’ Rule For Non-Profits, Says Watchdog Group

A Senate Finance Committee investigation into several high-profile TV ministries went badly off track when staffers recommended that Congress repeal a federal ban on partisan politicking by churches and other non-profit groups, says Americans United for Separation of Church and State.

U.S. Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) announced in 2007 that committee staff would investigate six TV ministries that might have been abusing their non-profit status. A staff memo delivered to Grassley yesterday reports on the findings, including lack of cooperation from four of the six ministries being examined.

But the report also includes a recommendation that the Congress do away with the federal tax law ban on partisan political activity by non-profit groups.

“I have to wonder what these Senate staffers could possibly be thinking with this breathtakingly wrong-headed suggestion,” said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, Americans United executive director. “It’s a sign that this investigation has gone seriously off course.”

Lynn noted that the investigation got under way because of allegations that several high-profile TV preachers were abusing non-profit status by living lavishly while raking in millions tax-free every year. Issues of church-based politicking had not been raised during the investigation.

Lynn said if the ministries were abusing non-profit status, then more accountability and oversight might be in order. Yet Grassley’s staffers have recommended doing away with the “no electioneering” rule, which would only turn these same ministries loose in the world of partisan politics to do what they will with little or no oversight.

“If these multi-million-dollar ministries are already misusing their donations for personal gain, imagine how much more dangerous they would be operating in the world of partisan politics,” said Lynn. “I don’t want to see Pat Robertson and other TV preachers using their tax-exempt empires to give backing to favored candidates, and I don’t think most other Americans want that either.”

Under current federal law, all non-profit groups holding a 501(c)(3) tax exemption are forbidden to intervene in partisan elections. This ensures that money donated to these groups is used for charitable purposes, not political ones.

Scrapping this rule, Lynn said, would open the door to the politicization of America’s religious organizations and wreak havoc with campaign-finance reporting laws.

--------------

Americans United is a religious liberty watchdog group based in Washington, D.C. Founded in 1947, the organization educates Americans about the importance of church-state separation in safeguarding religious freedom.

Cross Clarification

2011-01-05T14:24:00.000-06:00

clip --

Serious Christians ought to be the first ones to be alarmed by the notion that their most sacred symbol is on the verge of being co-opted by the government.

from the ruling: Continued McKeown, “The use of such a distinctively Christian symbol to honor all veterans sends a strong message of endorsement and exclusion. It suggests that the government is so connected to a particular religion that it treats that religion’s symbolism as its own, as universal.”

http://blog.au.org/2011/01/05/cross-clarification-appeals-court-rules-that-central-symbol-of-christianity-does-not-represent-all-war-dead/

or http://tinyurl.com/26m7evd

New Poll says 4 in 10 Americans Believe in Strict Creationism

2010-12-29T20:23:00.004-06:00

We no longer can afford to debate the validity of science like evolution that is as commonly accepted as the theory of gravity or heliocentricity.

A new Gallup Poll released last week says that 40% of Americans believe in a strict creationist view of the world in which evolution did not take place and God created humans in their present form about 10,000 years ago. Among those who did not fall into that category, 38% believe that evolution did take place, but was guided by a higher power and 16% believe human life evolved without the involvement of any kind of deity.

click here for the complete report---
http://www.au.org/what-we-do/legislative/legislative-blog/archives/2010/12/new-poll-says-4-in-10-americans-believe-in-strict-creationism.html

Americans United will continue to fight to prevent religious teaching from finding its way into public schools. Help us keep up the fight in the states by visiting our website, http://www.au.org and signing up for alerts!

To see video of Judge John E. Jones, the presiding judge in Kitzmiller v. Dover, in his speech at the November 2010 Americans United board meeting, click here:
Judge John E. Jones: "From Scopes to Kitzmiller and Beyond: Lessons in Judicial Independence."

2011 OK Legislative Bill Preview

2010-12-28T12:02:00.003-06:00

2011 OK Legislative Bill Preview
Okla. Chapter of Americans United for Separation of Church & State announces......
www.okau.org

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For Immediate Release
OKC Chapter of Americans United for Separation of Church and State
Saturday, January 29, 2011 Event
Contact: Mike Fuller, President, 405-570-3244 mf12@sbcglobal.net
Nick Singer, Vice-President, 405-416-3126 nasinger@gmail.com
James Nimmo, Communications Chair, 405-843-3651 james.nimmo@gmail.com

What: 2011 OK Legislative Bill Preview -
Religious vs. Civil Use of Tax Payer Money
When: Saturday, January 29, 2011, 9:30 am to 11:30 am
Where: OK State Senate Chamber, Capitol Building, 2100 N. Lincoln, OKC, OK
Who: OKC Chapter of Americans United for Church & State and the public!

Americans United for Separation of Church & State,
OKC Chapter, Announces Legislative Preview 2011

(Oklahoma City) The Oklahoma City Chapter of Americans United for Separation of Church & State will hold its second annual Oklahoma Legislative Preview on Saturday, January 29, 2011 in the State Senate Chamber, Oklahoma Capitol Building, located in Oklahoma City.

Convening at 9:30 am, this event previews bills submitted by both Houses of the Oklahoma Legislature that involve the use of public tax money or public property to advance religious viewpoints that could violate the state and federal Constitutional prohibitions against mixing religious doctrine with secular government. The event will conclude at 11:30 am.

The language of these bills will be reviewed and discussed in an open meeting with all interested citizens encouraged to participate with questions and comments.

Please note that access to the Senate Chamber will be through the west security entrance of the State Capitol. Ample free parking and handicapped facilities are available.

Americans United (AU) is a nonpartisan organization dedicated to preserving the constitutional principle of church-state separation as the only way to ensure religious freedom for all Americans.

For more information about the Oklahoma City Chapter of Americans for Separation of Church and State please visit http://www.au.org or http://www.okau.org/ or contact Mike Fuller at 405-570-3244, Nick Singer at 405-416-3126 or James Nimmo at 405-843-3651.

Congressional Prayer Caucus Off Base With Attack On Obama, Says Americans United

2010-12-06T20:38:00.001-06:00

December 6, 2010

Church-State Watchdog Group Urges President To Ignore Missive Whining About National Motto

Members of the Congressional Prayer Caucus have criticized President Barack Obama for telling an audience in Indonesia last month that the phrase “E Pluribus Unum” is a good summary of the American experience.

The Prayer Caucus, led by U.S. Rep. Randy Forbes (R-Va.), wrote to Obama today complaining that he called “E Pluribus Unum” the national motto during a Nov. 10 speech at a university in Jakarta. The national motto, the caucus insists, is actually “In God We Trust.”

Americans United for Separation of Church and State says members of the Prayer Caucus should reconsider if they think this is an important issue.

“Given the state of the economy, the unemployment rate and the precarious state of world affairs, the president has a lot to do,” said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United. “Members of the Congressional Prayer Caucus, by contrast, appear to have a lot of time on their hands.”

AU pointed out that “E Pluribus Unum” appears on the Great Seal of the United States, which was codified in 1782, and the phrase is still used on coinage. In citing it, Obama was trying to make the point that even though Americans are of diverse backgrounds, they have joined together as one nation.

The caucus also complained about Obama omitting the word “Creator” when quoting passages from the Declaration of Independence and offered to meet with him about these issues.

“The Prayer Caucus should just admit that it is looking for any opportunity to bash the president,” Lynn remarked. “It’s not very Christian of them, but I expect nothing less from a body that takes its marching orders from the Religious Right.”

Added Lynn, “This is one of the silliest manufactured controversies I’ve ever seen, and I would advise the president to deal with it by tossing the caucus’ letter into the nearest wastebasket.”

Americans United is a religious liberty watchdog group based in Washington, D.C. Founded in 1947, the organization educates Americans about the importance of church-state separation in safeguarding religious freedom.

Intolerance and the Law in Oklahoma

2010-11-30T12:46:00.000-06:00

New York Times Editorial

complete at: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/29/opinion/29mon1.html?_r=1&hp

November 28, 2010

Intolerance and the Law in Oklahoma

For a few days this month, it was illegal in Oklahoma for a state judge to base a court decision on Islamic religious law or consider any form of international law. It was a manufactured problem; the issue has never come up in the state’s courts. But more than 70 percent of voters in Oklahoma still approved a state constitutional amendment to that effect, apparently persuaded by anti-Islamic activists, and a few cynical politicians, that Oklahoma was about to be brought under Islam’s heel.

After Muslim groups challenged the constitutionality of the “Save Our State Amendment,” a federal district judge issued a temporary restraining order. Last Monday, the judge, Vicki Miles-LaGrange, held a hearing to determine whether to issue a preliminary injunction against the measure, and said she would make a decision by the end of November. A federal injunction is warranted to save Oklahoma from its pernicious folly and to prevent other states from following the same path.

complete at: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/29/opinion/29mon1.html?_r=1&hp

Judge Bars Certification of Okla. Anti-Islam Amendment

2010-11-30T12:36:00.002-06:00

Injunction Temporarily Bars Certification of SQ 755

Plaintiff Likely to Prevail

CAIR: Judge Bars Certification of Okla. Anti-Islam Amendment
Strongly-worded ruling supports Muslim plaintiff's legal arguments

(WASHINGTON, D.C., 11/29/2010) -- The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) today applauded a strongly-worded ruling by a federal judge in Oklahoma granting an injunction that bars certification of an anti-Islam state ballot measure (SQ 755) passed in the November 2 election.

SEE: Judge Rules in Favor of Muslim Man on State Question 755
http://newsok.com/article/3519080

If it had been certified, SQ 755 would have amended that state's constitution to forbid judges from considering Islamic principles or international law when deciding a case.

Today's ruling by Chief Judge Vicki Miles-LaGrange of the United States District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma ordered a preliminary injunction to block the certification of the amendment by the Oklahoma State Board of Elections until a final determination is made based on the merits of a lawsuit against SQ 755 filed by Muneer Awad, executive director of CAIR's Oklahoma chapter (CAIR-OK).

In her ruling in support of Awad's legal arguments, Judge Miles-LaGrange wrote:

"This order addresses issues that go to the very foundation of our country, our (U.S.) Constitution, and particularly, the Bill of Rights. Throughout the course of our country's history, the will of the 'majority' has on occasion conflicted with the constitutional rights of individuals, an occurrence which our founders foresaw and provided for through the Bill of Rights. . . [emphasis added by re-poster]

"Having carefully reviewed the briefs on this issue, and having heard the evidence and arguments presented at the hearing, the Court finds plaintiff has made a strong showing of a substantial likelihood of success on the merits of his claim asserting a violation of the Free Exercise Clause.

"As set forth above, plaintiff has shown that the actual language of the amendment reasonably, and perhaps more reasonably, may be viewed as specifically singling out Sharia Law (plaintiffís faith) and, thus, is not facially neutral.

"Additionally, as set forth above, the Court finds that plaintiff has shown that there is a reasonable probability that the amendment would prevent plaintiffís will from being fully probated by a state court in Oklahoma because it incorporates by reference specific elements of the Islamic prophetic traditions.

"Further, plaintiff has presented evidence that there is a reasonable probability that Muslims, including plaintiff, will be unable to bring actions in Oklahoma state courts for violations of the Oklahoma Religious Freedom Act and for violations of their rights under the United States Constitution if those violations are based upon their religion.

"Finally, the Court finds that defendants have presented no evidence which would show that the amendment is justified by any compelling interest or is narrowly tailored."

SEE: Judge Miles-LaGrange's Ruling
http://www.cair.com/Portals/0/pdf/oklahoma_ruling.pdf

"We applaud today's ruling and welcome the opportunity it offers to demonstrate that Oklahoma's Muslim community simply seeks to enjoy the civil and religious rights guaranteed to all Americans by our Constitution," said Awad.

SEE: Intolerance and the Law in Oklahoma (NY Times)
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/29/opinion/29mon1.html

Awad's lawsuit, based on his own faith-based will, says SQ 755 violates the First Amendment's Establishment Clause that bars government bodies from making laws ìrespecting the establishment of religion.î†

SEE: Full Text of Awad's Lawsuit
http://www.cair.com/Portals/0/pdf/argument.pdf

Oklahoma Surprise: Islam as an Election Issue (NYT)
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/15/us/15oklahoma.html

"Today marks another day in American history in which our courts have defended the Constitution against those who would deny its protections to a minority community," said CAIR National Executive Director Nihad Awad (no relation to Muneer Awad). "We agree with Judge Miles-LaGrange and the U.S. Supreme Court that 'fundamental rights may not be submitted to vote.'"

Awad added that he hopes the ongoing legal process will expose the campaign of misinformation about Islam targeting Oklahoma voters that was used to promote SQ 755.

CAIR Video: SQ 755 Sponsor Explains Purpose of Amendment on MSNBC
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ybvivrs_MH0

He said CAIR plans an education campaign in Oklahoma to offer state residents accurate and balanced information about Islamic beliefs and practices and about the American Muslim community.

CAIR Q&A on Oklahoma Anti-Islam Ballot Measure
http://tinyurl.com/2asddqp

Hate messages have been received by Muslim institutions in Oklahoma following the passage of SQ 755.

Video: Rachel Maddow Details Hate Messages Received by Okla. Muslims
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wYCoXWFghAo

CAIR is America's largest Muslim civil liberties and advocacy organization. Its mission is to enhance the understanding of Islam, encourage dialogue, protect civil liberties, empower American Muslims, and build coalitions that promote justice and mutual understanding.

Become a Fan of CAIR on Facebook
http://www.facebook.com/CAIRNational

Subscribe to CAIR's E-Mail List
http://tinyurl.com/cairsubscribe

Subscribe to CAIR's Twitter Feed
http://twitter.com/cairnational

Subscribe to CAIR's YouTube Channel
http://www.youtube.com/cairtv

- END -

Obama Executive Order On ‘Faith-Based’ Initiative Is Disappointing

2010-11-18T09:21:00.002-06:00

November 17, 2010

Church-State Watchdog Group Says Order Does Some Good Things, But Ignores Religion-Based Job Bias In Federally Funded Programs

Today’s White House executive order on “faith-based” funding fails to correct significant constitutional problems and leaves important civil rights issues unresolved, says Americans United for Separation of Church and State.

Americans United applauded President Barack Obama’s decision to require federal agencies to provide alternatives for people who do not want to receive social services at religious charities and also welcomed a process to create greater transparency in the program by requiring that recipient organizations be listed on government Web sites.

But AU is disappointed that the order allows public funds to go directly to houses of worship, allows publicly funded faith-based charities to display religious signs and scriptures and entirely dodges the issue of religious hiring bias by faith-based charities that receive federal funds.

“I’m disappointed,” said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United. “This leaves much of George W. Bush’s faith-based initiative in place. That’s not the change many Americans hoped for when President Obama took office.

“I am particularly frustrated that President Obama still has done nothing to ban hiring bias by publicly funded religious charities,” continued Lynn. “That’s the 800-pound gorilla in the room. No American should be denied a government-funded job because he or she holds the ‘wrong’ views about religion.”

Lynn noted that Obama, as a candidate, vowed to repeal this policy. Today’s order, however, leaves the Bush-era rules in places. A wide array of religious, civil rights and civil liberties organizations have appealed to the president to take action on the issue, and polls show that Americans overwhelmingly oppose faith-based employment bias.

Lynn said he is still hopeful Obama will see the basic unfairness of publicly funded job discrimination and rescind the Bush policy.

“I don’t believe Barack Obama wants to go down in history as the president who helped George W. Bush roll back civil rights and religious liberty,” Lynn said. “At a time when jobs are scarce, it is especially troubling that qualified applicants can be rejected from government-funded positions because they don’t go to the ‘right’ church.

“Taxpayer money should never be used to underwrite religion or religious bias,” Lynn concluded. ”That’s a fundamental constitutional principle, and it needs to be observed.” Americans United has been wary of the faith-based initiative since the concept was first introduced in the 1990s by then-Sen. John Ashcroft. AU maintains that a special government program that looks for ways to funnel public funds to religious entities is inherently problematic under the First Amendment.

Americans United is a religious liberty watchdog group based in Washington, D.C. Founded in 1947, the organization educates Americans about the importance of church-state separation in safeguarding religious freedom.

A Win In Louisiana: Textbook Council Backs Bona Fide Biology Books

2010-11-15T15:48:00.000-06:00

http://blog.au.org/2010/11/15/a-win-in-louisiana-textbook-council-backs-bona-fide-biology-books/

A Win In Louisiana: Textbook Council Backs Bona Fide Biology Books

November 15th, 2010

By Sandhya Bathija.
Evolution & Creationism, Religion in Public Schools

Could officials in Louisiana finally be ready to listen to the experts, instead of Religious Right zealots?

We have some good news out of Louisiana today – news we can hardly believe.

By a vote of 8-4, the state’s Textbook/Media/Library Advisory Council voted to support biology textbooks that uphold sound science and do not allow fundamentalist religious concepts to interfere.

For once, Louisiana has provided a glimmer of hope that maybe it no longer wants to be a science-education laughing stock.

As I mentioned last week, the Louisiana Family Forum (LFF) opposed proposed new science textbooks, claiming they give too much credibility to Darwin’s theory of evolution.

The LFF, a Religious Right organization that promotes creationism including its current variant “intelligent design,” said the books were not in keeping with the Science Education Act, a measure that allows teachers to introduce into the classroom “supplemental textbooks and other instructional materials” about evolution, the origins of life, global warming and human cloning.

On Friday, in response to the LFF’s complaints, the advisory council met for a hearing to review the issue and make a recommendation to the Board of Elementary and Secondary Education.

AU experts and our allies in the state were concerned that the hearing was simply another chance for the LFF to chip away at evolution and sound science curriculum.

As AU Trustee Barbara Forrest wrote on her blog, “Past experience – which has been utterly and entirely consistent since the introduction and passage of the Louisiana Science Education Act (LSEA) in 2008 – suggested that this meeting would be just another railroad job.”

Forrest, a Southeastern Louisiana University professor and co-founder of the Louisiana Coalition for Science, cited to the state’s previous disregard for science education.

In 2008, the legislature adamantly passed the Science Education Act, after the measure was heavily pushed by the LFF. Then, the state allowed LFF activists to take control of a policy that would implement the Act as well as the review procedure for handling any future complaints over the “supplemental materials” to be used by schools.

That’s why there was little reason to believe Friday’s hearing would be any different. Luckily, we were pleasantly surprised the council shot down the LFF’s complaints.

Instead, teachers, scientists and students who testified in support of the textbooks took home a victory. According to the Associated Press, most of those who testified at the hearing wanted to teach evolution without the interference of religious concepts.

“There is no major research university in this country that teaches intelligent design or anything like that. It is simply not science,” Kevin Carman, dean of the LSU College of Science told the AP. “We need our textbooks to be focused on what is scientifically accurate and not religion.”

Could officials in Louisiana finally be ready to listen to the experts, instead of Religious Right zealots? We really hope so – but it is probably too soon to call.

In any case, we’ll gladly accept this win.

Church-State Watchdog Group Expresses Disappointment With Obama Stance In Arizona Tuition Tax-Credit Case

2010-11-03T19:34:00.003-05:00

Taxpayers Should Have Right To Challenge Aid To Religious Schools, AU Tells High Court

November 2, 2010
Church-State Watchdog Group Expresses Disappointment With Obama Stance In Arizona Tuition Tax-Credit Case

The right of taxpayers to challenge public funding of religious education must be preserved, Americans United for Separation of Church and State has told the U.S. Supreme Court.

The high court tomorrow will hear Arizona Christian School Tuition Organization v. Winn, a case that challenges an Arizona scheme that allows taxpayers to take a 100 percent credit for donations to school tuition organizations that fund religious and other private schools.

Under the controversial program, nearly 92 percent of the funds collected have gone for tuition at religious schools. The set-up is being challenged as a violation of church-state separation, but the case also raises issues of “standing” – the right to sue.

“Americans must have the right to go to court when tax money is diverted to religion,” said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United. “Now, some groups want to slam the courthouse door in our faces.”

The Arizona program is supported by TV preacher Pat Robertson’s American Center for Law and Justice, Jerry Falwell Jr.’s Liberty Counsel, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, the Christian Legal Society and an array of other pro-voucher organizations like the Institute for Justice.

The religious school subsidy is also backed by the Solicitor General’s Office at the U.S. Department of Justice.

Lynn said he was disappointed to see the Obama administration side with right-wing groups in this case. Not only did the Justice Department argue in favor of the Arizona funding scheme, it advocated denying taxpayers’ right to challenge the plan in court. Furthermore, the Solicitor General’s Office requested and was granted 10 minutes to argue in favor of the plan during oral argument before the justices.

“It’s a shame that the Obama administration has taken the wrong side in this case,” Lynn said. “The Arizona scheme diverts scarce tax dollars to religious schools. There is no reason in the world for the administration to support something like that.

“I am even more disappointed that the Justice Department wants to block taxpayers from challenging schemes like this,” Lynn continued. “Conservatives on the Supreme Court have been whittling away at Americans’ right to challenge aid to religion. Now the Obama administration is encouraging them to go even further. It’s inexplicable.”

AU’s brief, filed Sept. 22 in conjunction with the American Jewish Committee, the Anti-Defamation League, the Baptist Joint Committee on Religious Liberty and The Interfaith Alliance Foundation, urges the high court to protect taxpayers’ rights to seek redress in court.

Tax credit plans, the brief asserts, must be subject to proper oversight through taxpayer lawsuits, since they are often open to abuse.

“If anything, contemporary fiscal politics suggest that the support of religion through tax credits is even more prone to abuse than is religious support through cash grants,” asserts the brief. “Like most tax cuts, tax expenditures ‘are subjected to considerably less congressional and popular scrutiny than are direct appropriations.’”

The AU brief was drafted by Americans United Legal Director Ayesha N. Khan along with attorneys Kurt Wimmer, Gregory M. Lipper, Charles Kitcher and Sarah M. Powell of Covington & Burling, LLP in Washington, D.C.

Since 1997, the Arizona program has diverted $349 million in public funds to private schools, with the vast majority of the money going to religious schools.

The program has been plagued with problems. For example, the plan allows parents to earmark donations for specific children. Since the law specifically bars parents from donating to pay for their own child’s tuition, some parents have donated for a friend’s child and vice-versa.

In 2009, two Arizona newspapers reported that much of the largess was going to well-off families – even though the program was pitched as a way to help poor and minority students.

According to the Arizona Republic, two out of every three scholarships in 2007 went to middle- and upper-class students who would have already been able to attend private schools without the tax-credit aid.

Americans United is a religious liberty watchdog group based in Washington, D.C. Founded in 1947, the organization educates Americans about the importance of church-state separation in safeguarding religious freedom.

http://www.au.org/media/press-releases/archives/2010/10/taxpayers-should-have-the.html

2010-11-03T19:34:00.001-05:00

Taxpayers Should Have Right To Challenge Aid To Religious Schools, AU Tells High Court November 2, 2010
Church-State Watchdog Group Expresses Disappointment With Obama Stance In Arizona Tuition Tax-Credit Case
The right of taxpayers to challenge public funding of religious education must be preserved, Americans United for Separation of Church and State has told the U.S. Supreme Court.

The high court tomorrow will hear Arizona Christian School Tuition Organization v. Winn, a case that challenges an Arizona scheme that allows taxpayers to take a 100 percent credit for donations to school tuition organizations that fund religious and other private schools.

Under the controversial program, nearly 92 percent of the funds collected have gone for tuition at religious schools. The set-up is being challenged as a violation of church-state separation, but the case also raises issues of “standing” – the right to sue.

“Americans must have the right to go to court when tax money is diverted to religion,” said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United. “Now, some groups want to slam the courthouse door in our faces.”

The Arizona program is supported by TV preacher Pat Robertson’s American Center for Law and Justice, Jerry Falwell Jr.’s Liberty Counsel, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, the Christian Legal Society and an array of other pro-voucher organizations like the Institute for Justice.

The religious school subsidy is also backed by the Solicitor General’s Office at the U.S. Department of Justice.

Lynn said he was disappointed to see the Obama administration side with right-wing groups in this case. Not only did the Justice Department argue in favor of the Arizona funding scheme, it advocated denying taxpayers’ right to challenge the plan in court. Furthermore, the Solicitor General’s Office requested and was granted 10 minutes to argue in favor of the plan during oral argument before the justices.

“It’s a shame that the Obama administration has taken the wrong side in this case,” Lynn said. “The Arizona scheme diverts scarce tax dollars to religious schools. There is no reason in the world for the administration to support something like that.

“I am even more disappointed that the Justice Department wants to block taxpayers from challenging schemes like this,” Lynn continued. “Conservatives on the Supreme Court have been whittling away at Americans’ right to challenge aid to religion. Now the Obama administration is encouraging them to go even further. It’s inexplicable.”

AU’s brief, filed Sept. 22 in conjunction with the American Jewish Committee, the Anti-Defamation League, the Baptist Joint Committee on Religious Liberty and The Interfaith Alliance Foundation, urges the high court to protect taxpayers’ rights to seek redress in court.

Tax credit plans, the brief asserts, must be subject to proper oversight through taxpayer lawsuits, since they are often open to abuse.

“If anything, contemporary fiscal politics suggest that the support of religion through tax credits is even more prone to abuse than is religious support through cash grants,” asserts the brief. “Like most tax cuts, tax expenditures ‘are subjected to considerably less congressional and popular scrutiny than are direct appropriations.’”

The AU brief was drafted by Americans United Legal Director Ayesha N. Khan along with attorneys Kurt Wimmer, Gregory M. Lipper, Charles Kitcher and Sarah M. Powell of Covington & Burling, LLP in Washington, D.C.

Since 1997, the Arizona program has diverted $349 million in public funds to private schools, with the vast majority of the money going to religious schools.

The program has been plagued with problems. For example, the plan allows parents to earmark donations for specific children. Since the law specifically bars parents from donating to pay for their own child’s tuition, some parents have donated for a friend’s child and vice-versa.

In 2009, two Arizona newspapers reported that much of the largess was going to well-off families – even though the program was pitched as a way to help poor and minority students.

According to the Arizona Republic, two out of every three scholarships in 2007 went to middle- and upper-class students who would have already been able to attend private schools without the tax-credit aid.

Americans United is a religious liberty watchdog group based in Washington, D.C. Founded in 1947, the organization educates Americans about the importance of church-state separation in safeguarding religious freedom.

2010-11-03T19:34:00.000-05:00

Vote NO on SQ 755!

2010-10-29T11:00:00.001-05:00

Dear Oklahoma Members and Supporters of Americans United:

Thank you for all of your efforts, nationally and locally, to support church-state separation. We could not do the work we do without you.

As the election draws near, we'd like to ask you to vote NO on SQ 755, the so-called "Save Our State Amendment."

This measure, placed on the ballot by the legislature, stirs up fear and intolerance rather than doing anything to "save our state."

Banning courts from considering Sharia law is completely unnecessary. The U.S. Constitution already guarantees this--the Establishment Clause prohibits religion being used as the basis of our laws. And the Oklahoma Constitution also clearly bars this. Article I, Sec. 2 states: "Perfect toleration of religious sentiment shall be secured, and no inhabitant of the State shall ever be molested in person or property on account of his or her mode of religious worship; and no religious test shall be required for the exercise of civil or political rights."

So, what's the real purpose of this amendment? Because the amendment doesn't prohibit reliance on all religious law, just Sharia law, it would seem that the intent is to single out one particular religion's teachings as being wrong. Yet the Constitution cannot express preference for one religion or denigrate another--that too is prohibited by the Establishment Clause. The amendment only adds fuel to the anti-Islam rhetoric currently circulating around the country.

We urge you to vote NO on SQ 755. There is no need for this law and it would have no practical effect. What it would do, however, is send a message to Oklahomans about who are insiders and favored members of the political community and who are outsiders and therefore, unwelcome and disfavored.

Reject this amendment of fear and intolerance!

Sincerely,
Americans United
www.au.org

Investigate Florida Church Whose Pastor Endorsed Slate Of Candidates

2010-10-28T19:09:00.002-05:00

Americans United Asks IRS To Investigate Florida Church Whose Pastor Endorsed Slate Of Candidates
October 28, 2010

Sun City Christian Center Violated Federal Law, Says Watchdog Organization

The Internal Revenue Service should investigate a Wimauma, Fla., church whose pastor endorsed a slate of Republican candidates during Sunday services, says Americans United for Separation of Church and State.

In a complaint filed with the IRS today, Americans United noted that Pastor Arlen Beck of Sun City Christian Center told congregants on Oct. 24 that he had prepared a list of candidates that he intends to vote for and placed copies of the list in the back of the church for their use.

Beck’s actions were reported in the St. Petersburg Times, which quoted an attendee who was offended by Beck’s endorsements.

According to the Times, Beck said, “If you’re conservative you might want to pick one of those up. If you’re liberal you might not want to stop by there.”

Beck later told the newspaper that he does not care if the IRS revokes his church’s tax exemption.

Federal law states that all 501(c)(3) organizations, which includes houses of worship, must refrain from intervening in politics by endorsing or opposing candidates for public office as a condition of receiving tax exemption.

“Pastor Beck is dragging his church into a partisan swamp,” said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, Americans United executive director. “He has no right to do this while claiming tax-exempt status.”

In a letter to the IRS delivered today, Lynn requested an investigation of the matter.

Americans United is a religious liberty watchdog group based in Washington, D.C. Founded in 1947, the organization educates Americans about the importance of church-state separation in safeguarding religious freedom.

http://www.au.org/media/press-releases/archives/2010/10/au-asks-irs-to-investigate.html

Sharia Charade: Oklahoma Ballot Measure Reflects Religious Intolerance

2010-10-27T13:16:00.000-05:00

Sharia Charade: Oklahoma Ballot Measure Reflects Religious Intolerance

October 27th, 2010

By Sandhya Bathija.Religious DiscriminationOklahomans who really understand the Constitution should have no reason to fear that sharia law will ever be imposed by the government.

In just six days, Oklahoma voters will decide whether they want to write religious intolerance into their state’s constitution.

That’s what they will be doing if they vote “yes” for a constitutional amendment that would prohibit courts from considering “sharia” – Islamic law – when deciding cases. Since our Constitution already separates religion and government, this proposal has no legitimate purpose.

Supporters are simply fanning the flames of religious discrimination and intolerance. I hope Oklahomans see that.

The ballot initiative – known as State Question 755, or the “Save Our State” amendment – already has received the overwhelming approval of the legislature. The House passed it with an 82-10 vote, and the Senate followed suit by 41-2.

Supporters of the measure claim it’s the only way to protect the state from a takeover by Islamic extremists.

“There is actually a huge pocket of terrorist organizations operating out of Oklahoma,” said Brigitte Gabriel, founder of “Act! For America,” which is backing the measure. “I know this because I work with members of the FBI who are in counter-terrorism and who are paying attention to what’s happening in Oklahoma. What we are seeing right now, not only in Oklahoma, but nationwide [is] where there is a large concentration of Muslim population, [there are] more demands and more push for sharia law.”

Sadly, Gabriel and her allies have fooled a lot of people in Oklahoma into believing that if they don’t vote “yes,” Islamic law will become the basis for American law. A poll by The Tulsa World in July found that 49 percent of voters support the amendment compared to 24 percent who opposed it and 27 percent who were undecided.

It’s really disappointing that the current anti-Islam sentiments circulating in the nation have enabled such fear mongering. Let’s be clear: The U.S. Constitution already states that religion cannot be the basis of our laws. The First Amendment mandates the separation of church and state.

The Oklahoma Constitution is also pretty clear. Article I, Sec. 2 states: “Perfect toleration of religious sentiment shall be secured, and no inhabitant of the State shall ever be molested in person or property on account of his or her mode of religious worship; and no religious test shall be required for the exercise of civil or political rights.”

But considering the past antics of the Oklahoma legislature, we know many legislators must be confused about religious liberty and the constitutional separation of religion and government. Americans United often has trouble explaining this foundational concept to some of the state’s lawmakers who seems to want to make their version of Christianity the basis for laws.

Oklahomans who really understand the Constitution, however, should have no reason to fear that sharia law will ever be imposed by the government.

Even the state’s conservative-leaning newspaper, The Oklahoman, knows that. The newspaper asks its readers to vote “no” on the amendment, rightfully asserting that it has “no practical effect and needn’t be added to the Oklahoma Constitution.”

If you live in Oklahoma, or know someone that does, it’s not too late to spread the word.

http://blog.au.org/2010/10/27/sharia-charade-oklahoma-ballot-measure-reflects-religious-intolerance/

Animus against gays is similar to animus against inter-racial marriage

2010-10-26T12:53:00.001-05:00

Proposition 8 Ban On Same-Sex Marriage Has No Legitimate Basis, Americans United Tells Appeals Court

Like Historic Opposition To Interracial Marriage, California Measure Is Based On Intolerance, Psuedo-Science And Religious Dogma, Says AU Brief

October 26, 2010

Like Historic Opposition To Interracial Marriage, California Measure Is Based On Intolerance, Psuedo-Science And Religious Dogma, Says AU Brief
California’s ban on civil marriage for same-sex couples is based on intolerance, pseudo-science and religious dogma, not legitimate public policy concerns, Americans United for Separation of Church and State has told a federal appeals court.

In a friend-of-the court brief, Americans United advised the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that opposition to marriage equality for gay couples reflects the same baseless and inappropriate considerations that once were used to deny marriage rights to slaves and interracial couples.

The brief was filed in Perry v. Schwarzenegger, a closely watched lawsuit that challenges Proposition 8, a California referendum that revoked the right of same-sex couples to obtain civil marriages. The drive to enact the measure was funded and staffed primarily by fundamentalist Protestant churches, the Roman Catholic hierarchy and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (the Mormons).

Said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, Americans United executive director, “American law should be based on equality and fairness, not the doctrines of aggressive religious groups. Proposition 8 is grounded in intolerance and sectarian dogma, and the appeals court should reject it.”

The brief, filed jointly Oct. 25 with the Howard University School of Law Civil Rights Clinic, notes that historically opponents of marriage rights for slaves and interracial couples argued that such unions were a threat to the social order and the institutions of marriage and family. They also claimed that such marriages violated their interpretation of the Bible.

Observes the brief, “Even though reliance on religious doctrine as the basis for public policy is as improper today as it was in the days of anti-miscegenation laws, today opponents of marriage between two persons of the same sex use (their) Biblical interpretations to suggest that homosexuality is unnatural because it is against God’s will. Indeed, like their anti-miscegenationist counterparts, opponents of marriage for same-sex couples almost always attempt to clothe their arguments in literal and selective interpretations of the Bible.”

Asserts the brief, “Today, while there is no longer any serious claim that marriage rights should be denied on the basis of race, opponents of marriage equality have attacked same-sex couples, using precisely the same flawed arguments that once were used to justify racial slavery and apartheid. We are now long past the time when anyone would seriously claim that race-based marriage equality threatens the moral fabric of our civilization, is contrary to nature, or is harmful to children.

“Therefore,” the brief concludes, “the onus should be on opponents of marriage equality to demonstrate how arguments that time and experience have so thoroughly rejected in the context of race should now be dug up, dusted off, and given any consideration, much less credibility, in the context of marriage for same-sex couples.”

In addition to AU and the Howard Civil Rights Clinic, six professors at Howard University School of Law and four law student organizations also expressed support for the brief.

The brief was written by Aderson B. François, Civil Rights Clinic Supervising Attorney at Howard University School of Law, in cooperation with Americans United Legal Director Ayesha N. Khan and attorneys with the firms of Manatt, Phelps & Phillips LLP and Keker & Van Nest LLP.

Americans United is a religious liberty watchdog group based in Washington, D.C. Founded in 1947, the organization educates Americans about the importance of church-state separation in safeguarding religious freedom.

http://www.au.org/media/press-releases/archives/2010/10/proposition-8-ban-on-same-sex.html

Christian Flag Vigil in North Carolina

2010-10-23T17:34:00.001-05:00

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101021/ap_on_re_us/us_christian_flag_defenders

EXCERPT: By TOM BREEN, Associated Press Writer Tom Breen, Associated Press Writer – Thu Oct 21, 6:05 pm ET

KING, N.C. – The Christian flag is everywhere in the small city of King: flying in front of barbecue joints and hair salons, stuck to the bumpers of trucks, hanging in windows and emblazoned on T-shirts.

The city council decided last month to remove the flag from above the monument in Central Park after a resident complained, and after city leaders got letters from the American Civil Liberties Union and Americans United for the Separation of Church and State urging them to remove it.

complete at: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101021/ap_on_re_us/us_christian_flag_defenders

IRS Should Investigate Minnesota Church For Electioneering

2010-10-18T19:49:00.001-05:00

October 18, 2010

Watchdog Group Says Berean Bible Baptist Church Violated Federal Law

A Minnesota church whose pastor endorsed several political candidates during an Oct. 17 sermon should be investigated by the Internal Revenue Service, says Americans United for Separation of Church and State.

Americans United today filed a formal complaint with the IRS over the action of Berean Bible Baptist Church in Hastings. Church pastor Brad Brandon endorsed Republican gubernatorial candidate Tom Emmer and several other candidates from the pulpit yesterday.

“Pastor Brandon has pulled his tax-exempt church into partisan politics in blatant violation of federal law,” said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United. “This a clear-cut case, and the IRS should act.”

A reporter with the Minnesota Independent attended the service and reported that Brandon endorsed Emmer and several other candidates for U.S. Congress and state offices. Brandon also distributed a flier listing the candidates that the church has endorsed.

Brandon concluded the Sunday morning church service by stating, “This has been recorded, taped this morning. We are not shy about what we are doing. In fact we are very, very bold in what we are doing. I am not violating the IRS code 501(c)(3). I don’t consider myself violating that, but I do consider myself exercising my free speech.”

But Americans United says Brandon is wrong. Federal law prohibits 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organizations, including houses of worship, from intervening in elections by endorsing or opposing candidates.
“The leadership of this church knowingly chose to violate the law,” Lynn said. “In my view, the church should lose its tax-exempt status.”

In a letter to the IRS sent today, Lynn wrote, “I urge you to investigate this matter and fully enforce our laws.”

Americans United is a religious liberty watchdog group based in Washington, D.C. Founded in 1947, the organization educates Americans about the importance of church-state separation in safeguarding religious freedom.

http://www.au.org/media/press-releases/archives/2010/10/irs-should-investigate.html

IRS Should Investigate N.Y. Church That Endorsed Gubernatorial Candidate

2010-10-08T11:29:00.002-05:00

Watchdog Group Calls On Tax Agency To Take Action Against Brooklyn Church That Endorsed Cuomo

October 7, 2010

A Brooklyn church that endorsed Democratic gubernatorial candidate Andrew M. Cuomo should be investigated by the Internal Revenue Service, says Americans United for Separation of Church and State.

Americans United today sent a letter to the IRS about recent activities at Brown Memorial Baptist Church. The New York Times reported that Cuomo spoke at the church during services on Oct. 3 and that he “delivered a pitch for support in his bid for governor, citing his record as attorney general and assailing his opponent ‘for trying to divide us.’”

Furthermore, the paper reported, “The church’s pastor, the Rev. Clinton M. Miller, quickly encouraged congregants to vote for Mr. Cuomo.”

In addition, The New York Observer reported that Cuomo was introduced at the church by Carl McCall, former New York comptroller. McCall attacked Cuomo’s opponent, Carl Paladino, calling him “dangerous” and “unfit to be governor.”

http://www.au.org/media/press-releases/archives/2010/10/irs-should-investigate-ny.html

Americans United Urges Appeals Court to Strike Down the National Day of Prayer

2010-10-08T11:23:00.003-05:00

October 8, 2010

Congress Has No Authority To Tell Americans When And How They Should Pray, Watchdog Group Says

Americans United for Separation of Church and State has asked a federal appeals court to find the congressionally mandated National Day of Prayer unconstitutional.

In a friend-of-the-court brief filed with the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, Americans United urged the panel of judges to affirm a lower court decision that held the National Day of Prayer statute unconstitutional.

In April, U.S. District Judge Barbara Crabb of the Western District of Wisconsin ruled that the federal law violates the constitutional separation of church and state. The Obama administration has appealed Crabb’s decision to the 7th Circuit.

“Congress needs to get out of the prayer business,” said the Rev. Barry
W. Lynn, Americans United executive director. “Prayer is an inherently religious practice, and our Constitution makes it clear that promoting it is not part of the government’s job.

“Americans are free to pray whenever they want,” Lynn continued. “It's
obvious this ‘holiday’ is not really about the freedom to worship, but rather another opportunity for certain religious groups to use government to push their narrow viewpoint on the rest of us.

“It’s time to end this misguided tradition,” Lynn added. “The district
court got this right, and I’m hopeful the appeals court will, too.”

Congress created the National Day of Prayer in 1952. In 1988, after pressure from the Religious Right, it was codified as the first Thursday in May. The law directs the president to proclaim on that day that Americans “May turn to God in prayer and meditation at churches, in groups, and as individuals.”

AU’s brief argues that the NDP statute is a “plain endorsement of religion over nonreligion and of certain types of religious beliefs and practices over others.”

The brief also asserts that the statute has no secular purpose and “by its very terms it is not a commemoration or accommodation of our religious heritage but an active encouragement to engage in religious practice.”

The American Civil Liberties Union, the Americans Civil Liberties Union of Wisconsin and the Interfaith Alliance Foundation joined Americans United in filing the brief in Freedom From Religion Foundation v. Obama.

The brief was drafted by Evan M. Tager and Carl J. Summers of the law firm Mayer Brown with assistance from AU’s Legal Director Ayesha N. Khan and two attorneys from the American Civil Liberties Union, Daniel Mach and Heather L. Weaver.

Americans United is a religious liberty watchdog group based in Washington, D.C. Founded in 1947, the organization educates Americans about the importance of church-state separation in safeguarding religious freedom.

http://tinyurl.com/232fbrl

Iowa Church’s Election Campaign Against State Supreme Court Justices Merits IRS Investigation

2010-10-01T14:35:00.001-05:00

September 30, 2010

Church’s Plan To Oust Judges Violates Federal Ban On Electioneering, Says AU's Lynn
Americans United for Separation of Church and State today urged the Internal Revenue Service to investigate an Iowa church that is organizing a church-based campaign to unseat three justices from the Iowa Supreme Court.

Cornerstone World Outreach, a Sioux City congregation, is sponsoring Project Jeremiah, a church-based campaign to encourage voting against the judges in a retention election on the Nov. 2 ballot. Religious Right activists are seeking the defeat of the judges because they ruled in favor of extending civil-marriage rights to same-sex couples.

The Rev. Barry W. Lynn, Americans United executive director, said the church’s campaign is a clear violation of federal tax law.

“I don’t think I have ever seen a more outrageous effort to politicize churches,” said Lynn. “This deplorable scheme seeks to turn houses of worship into dens of inequity and intolerance. I call on the IRS to move swiftly to put a stop to this outrage.

“It’s bad enough that the leaders of this church are using donations from the collection plate to fund a hardball political operation,” Lynn continued. “It’s even more appalling that they are doing so in a bigoted attempt to deny civil rights to a targeted minority. This is downright shameful.”

In a complaint filed with the IRS today, Lynn pointed to a Sept. 3 letter that Cornerstone Church sent to pastors around the state urging them to join a campaign to unseat the judges. The letter, signed by Cornerstone Pastor Cary K. Gordon, concedes that the project raises legal dangers but urges pastors to join it anyway.

link to copy of letter:
http://www.au.org/media/press-releases/archives/2010/09/cornerstone-letter-to-irs.pdf

Project Jeremiah, the church missive says, was “organized by the pastoral staff of Cornerstone Church (aka Cornerstone World Outreach), in conjunction with PeaceMakers Institute, Liberty Institute, and the Iowa Family Policy Center, to call for the removal of activist Judges from the Iowa Supreme Court, backed by a pledge of legal protection for pastors from the lawyers of Liberty Institute. Pastors who join this effort are asked to commit to confront the injustice and ungodly decisions of the Iowa Supreme Court by boldly calling upon their flocks to ‘vote no on judicial retention’ for the three consecutive Sundays prior to Election Day.”

Wrote AU’s Lynn, in his complaint to the IRS, “I believe this is a clear violation of the Internal Revenue Code. Federal tax law forbids 501(c)(3) organizations, including churches, from intervening in elections in support of or opposition to any candidate. I urge you to investigate this matter promptly and apply appropriate penalties under the law.”

Americans United is a religious liberty watchdog group based in Washington, D.C. Founded in 1947, the organization educates Americans about the importance of church-state separation in safeguarding religious freedom.

http://www.au.org/media/press-releases/archives/2010/09/iowa-churchs-election.html

IRS Should Investigate Oklahoma Church That Endorsed Gubernatorial Candidate

2010-09-28T19:18:00.001-05:00

September 28, 2010

Church-State Watchdog Group Calls On Tax Agency To Investigate Fairview Baptist Church For Illegal Electioneering

The Internal Revenue Service should investigate an Edmond, Okla., church whose pastor endorsed a gubernatorial candidate from the pulpit, says Americans United for Separation of Church and State.

Pastor Paul Blair of Fairview Baptist Church endorsed Republican hopeful Mary Fallin from the pulpit during services Sept. 26.

Federal law prohibits all 501(c)(3) non-profit groups, which includes houses of worship, from intervening in elections by endorsing or opposing candidates for public office.

“When churches become cogs in any candidate’s political machine, they ought to lose their tax exemption,” said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United. “I urge the IRS to investigate this matter and apply the law.”

In a complaint filed with the IRS today, Lynn said the facts are clear.

“Blair is a top official and paid staff member of Fairview Baptist Church,” wrote Lynn in the letter. “He was speaking to the congregation in his official capacity and during a church meeting. As such, his candidate endorsement from the pulpit constitutes an official endorsement by the nonprofit religious organization itself.”

Lynn noted that this is the second time Blair has flouted federal law. In 2008, Blair endorsed U.S. Sen. John McCain for president from the pulpit.

Blair issued the endorsements as part of “Pulpit Freedom Sunday,” an annual event sponsored by the Alliance Defense Fund (ADF). The ADF, a Religious Right legal group founded by TV preachers, prods pastors to openly defy the law by endorsing or opposing candidates from the pulpit.

To counter the ADF’s church electioneering scheme, Americans United maintains a Web site called Project Fair Play (www.projectfairplay.org) that educates religious leaders and the American public about what houses of worship may and may not do in the political arena. As part of the project, Americans United reports pastors who violate the law to the IRS.

Americans United is a religious liberty watchdog group based in Washington, D.C. Founded in 1947, the organization educates Americans about the importance of church-state separation in safeguarding religious freedom.

http://www.au.org/media/press-releases/archives/2010/09/irs-should-investigate.html

Americans United, Allies Urge Federal Appeals Court To Rehear Case Challenging Religiously Based Hiring Bias

2010-09-20T18:59:00.001-05:00

September 20, 2010

Religious Groups That Accept Tax Funding Should Not Be Able To Fire Staff For Being The ‘Wrong’ Religion, Says AU’s Lynn

Americans United for Separation of Church and State and allied groups have asked a federal appellate court to reconsider a decision dealing with religious bias in hiring at publicly funded “faith-based” charities.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled recently that World Vision, an evangelical Christian relief agency, had the right to fire workers who hold views that conflict with the agency’s religious viewpoint.

The case was brought by three former employees in Washington state who are Christian, but do not subscribe to all the doctrinal points in World Vision’s statement of belief.

Americans United is concerned that the court did not give adequate consideration to the fact that World Vision received 29 percent of its 2009 budget of $1.2 billion from government sources.

In a friend-of-the-court brief, AU and allied organizations have asked the judges who decided Spencer v. World Vision, Inc. – or the entire 9th U.S. Circuit – to rehear the case to make it clear that allowing publicly funded groups like World Vision to discriminate in employment on religious grounds raises serious church-state issues.

“Religious groups have the right to impose theological requirements on staff in privately funded positions, but when tax money enters the picture, that must change,” said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, Americans United executive director. “No one should be denied a taxpayer-funded job for being the ‘wrong’ religion. That makes a mockery of our nation’s commitment to eradicating discrimination.”

In addition to Americans United, other groups joining the Sept. 17 friend-of-the-court brief include The Interfaith Alliance Foundation, the Anti-Defamation League and the American Humanist Association.

The brief was drafted by Bradley Meissner of the law firm DLA Piper and by Ayesha N. Khan, Americans United’s legal director.

Americans United is a religious liberty watchdog group based in Washington, D.C. Founded in 1947, the organization educates Americans about the importance of church-state separation in safeguarding religious freedom.

http://www.au.org/media/press-releases/archives/2010/09/au-allies-urge-federal-appeals-court-to-rehear-case-challenging-religiously-based-hiring-bias.html

Celebrate the 50th Anniversary of a Landmark JFK Speech!

2010-09-09T19:38:00.002-05:00

On Sept. 12, 1960, presidential candidate John F. Kennedy gave one of the most important speeches on church and state in American history. Refuting charges that his Catholic religious affiliation would interfere with his presidential duties, Kennedy outlined the proper constitutional relationship between religion and government.

Watch an excerpt from the speech

Read the full speech

Listen to the speech

A special event in Washington, D.C.
Voices of Reason - Rob Boston: Reflections on John F. Kennedy’s Famous Address on Churches & Politics

Ralph Reed -- Will Voters Forget His Casino-Lobbyist Past?

2010-09-09T19:30:00.002-05:00

Ralph Reed Is Betting Evangelical Voters Will Forget His Casino-Lobbyist Past, Says Americans United

Former Christian Coalition Director Seeks To Regain Religious Right Leadership Role With D.C. ‘Strategy Briefing’

Read the full press release at au.org

http://www.au.org/media/press-releases/archives/2010/09/ralph-reed-is-betting.html

September 9, 2010
Former Christian Coalition Director Seeks To Regain Religious Right Leadership Role With D.C. ‘Strategy Briefing’
Hoping to reemerge as a leader of the Religious Right, former Christian Coalition Executive Director Ralph Reed will hold a national meeting in Washington, D.C., Sept. 10-11 under the auspices of his new Faith and Freedom Coalition.

Reed will be successful only if evangelical Christians engage in a case of collective amnesia, says Americans United for Separation of Church and State.

“This is the same Ralph Reed who carried water for the casino industry in the Jack Abramoff scandal,” said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United. “This is the same Ralph Reed who misled his evangelical friends while collecting a lot of dough.”

Added Lynn, “Reed is gambling that evangelicals are willing to forgive his past sins, but I sure wouldn’t bet on that.”

After leaving the Christian Coalition in 1997, Reed followed a checkered career as a lobbyist and political strategist. He became enmeshed in the Abramoff scandal when documents surfaced showing that Reed had been paid more than $5 million by two Indian tribes that owned casinos.

The tribes were Abramoff clients who wanted to fend off attempts by other tribes to establish competing casinos. Reed worked with Abramoff to mobilize conservative Christians to oppose the new casinos – without telling them that the established gambling interests would benefit.

Americans United is a religious liberty watchdog group based in Washington, D.C. Founded in 1947, the organization educates Americans about the importance of church-state separation in safeguarding religious freedom.

Religious Right Ready To Be ‘Born Again’?

2010-09-09T19:22:00.002-05:00

Lazarus Rising: Is The Religious Right Ready To Be ‘Born Again’ In The 2010 Elections?

An Americans United Special Report

Read the full press release at au.org

http://www.au.org/media/press-releases/archives/2010/09/lazarus-rising-is-the.html

September 9, 2010
An Americans United Special Report

The past two years have been difficult for the Religious Right. President Barack Obama opposes the agenda of the religious-political movement, and congressional leaders have generally turned a deaf ear. Some commentators even pronounced the Religious Right dead.

But claims of the Religious Right’s demise are often premature. Like Frankenstein’s monster, the Religious Right has proven hard to kill.

Religious Right groups are waging a massive under-the-radar campaign this fall to register church-going voters, drive congregants to the polls and elect favored candidates. These organizations believe their allies in the Republican Party are poised to make significant advances, and they want to make sure that one or both houses of Congress move to GOP control.

Upcoming events include:

Sept. 10-11: Faith and Freedom Coalition Conference & Strategy Briefing, Washington, D.C.

Former Christian Coalition director Ralph Reed is attempting a comeback with a new Religious Right organization. This D.C. event will be the group’s first major public conference, and Reed – a political strategist implicated in the Jack Abramoff lobbying scandals – claims to be raising $32 million to steer conservative Christians to the polls.

Sept. 17-18: Values Voter Summit, Washington, D.C.

This annual event, sponsored by the Family Research Council and its allies, has become the leading Religious Right conference in the nation. A number of GOP congressional candidates will speak to the hundreds of attendees. In addition to the FRC, sponsors include the American Family Association, the Heritage Foundation and Liberty University.

Sept. 19: Pray & A.C.T., Washington, D.C.

This nationwide project, which calls for 40 days of fasting prior to the elections, is endorsed by a broad coalition including evangelist Lou Engle, Newt Gingrich, Chuck Colson, Mike Huckabee and Southern Baptist lobbyist Richard Land, among others. The D.C. kickoff is Sept. 19 and the closeout event is Oct 30 on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial. The coalition aims to “transform the culture” by “voting in all elections only for candidates who affirm the sanctity of life in all stages and conditions, the integrity of marriage as the union of one man and one woman, and religious liberty and respect for conscience.” Pray & A.C.T. organizer Engle depicts politics as a battle between good and evil, between “kingdom power” and “this present darkness.”

Sept. 20: 40/40 Prayer Vigil.

Sponsored by the Southern Baptist Convention, the nation’s largest Protestant denomination, this nationwide 40-day event claims to focus on personal spiritual revival. However, it begins with a prayer for voter registration, includes a prayer for Christians to run for office and ends with a prayer for “discernment of candidates” and for “God’s people to vote.”

Sept. 26: Pulpit Freedom Sunday.

During this event sponsored by the Alliance Defense Fund, evangelical pastors nationwide will be encouraged to violate federal tax law by endorsing or opposing candidates from the pulpit.

The Religious Right And The GOP: BFFs?

Why so many events and projects that feature voter mobilization or other activities tied to electoral politics?

The Religious Right’s fortunes are closely tied to the Republican Party’s. When the GOP lost power in Washington in 2006 and 2008, the Religious Right also took a hit. Its legislative proposals have stalled, and it finds itself unable to counter legislation, court appointments and other actions it opposes.

Eager to regain power in the nation’s capital (and in state legislatures), the Religious Right is going all out to do whatever it can to help its political allies get elected to public office.

Voter registration, mobilization and get-out-the-vote efforts are key to the effort. Polls show that regular churchgoers are much more likely to vote Republican. In addition, a recent poll conducted by the Pew Forum found that 74 percent of evangelicals say they are likely to vote in 2010. Religious Right groups are eager to keep this segment of the GOP fired up until Nov. 2.

A steady string of conferences, voter registration events, voter-guide distribution and other activities will help.

What About The Tea Party?

Some political analysts have speculated that the Religious Right has been overshadowed by the Tea Party movement.

This is an oversimplification. The Tea Party remains a wild card, but there’s no reason why this movement cannot exist alongside or in tandem with the Religious Right. Although they don’t see eye to eye on every issue, the Religious Right and the Tea Party share the same goal: drastically changing the political calculus in Washington.

It is true that the Tea Party – a loosely structured conglomeration of anti-government activists – remains divided over social issues. Some activists want to incorporate these issues into the movement, while others want to keep the focus on matters like low taxes and deregulation. Because the Tea Party is decentralized, there is no reason why the factions that favor adding social issues to the plate can’t pursue that goal and work with the Religious Right.

Religious Right organizations are working to woo the Tea Party – or create their own version of it. The Family Research Council held a special session for Tea Party activists last year and plans to do so again during this year’s “Values Voter Summit.” In a recent e-mail message promoting the event, FRC President Tony Perkins noted that U.S. Sen. Jim DeMint, “a Tea Party favorite,” will be among the speakers.

Some right-wing figures, notably Sarah Palin, straddle both camps and may serve as a bridge between the two. But in the end, it almost doesn’t matter if the two arms formally cooperate or not. Their goal is the same: elect as many ultra-conservatives to public office as possible. They can work together on this or do it on parallel tracks.

Another example of cross-pollination between the two camps is Glenn Beck. Beck, the bombastic Fox News Channel host, held rallies at the Kennedy Center and the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C., Aug. 27 and 28. Although Beck is a Mormon, he often features “Christian nation” rhetoric on his program, and his events took on the trappings of a religious revival. Among the speakers was David Barton, a Texas Religious Right activist (and former GOP state official) who insists that church-state separation is a myth.

Polls show that many voters are unhappy over the state of the economy and high unemployment. If this sentiment creates a political shift that elects more Tea Party-friendly candidates, it’s inevitable that some of those elected will also have a far-right social-issues agenda. In this sense, the Religious Right gets a free ride for its issues.

Americans United Comment
Americans United for Separation of Church and State is the leading national watchdog group of the Religious Right. Americans United Executive Director Barry W. Lynn, who is a Christian minister as well as an attorney, frequently debates Religious Right leaders in the media and the in the court of public opinion. Lynn has tracked the Religious Right and led the opposition to it since the rise of the Moral Majority in the late 1970s.

For expert commentary on the Religious Right, contact Americans United’s Communications Department, communications@au.org.

Americans United is a religious liberty watchdog group based in Washington, D.C. Founded in 1947, the organization educates Americans about the importance of church-state separation in safeguarding religious freedom.

OKC Chapter Annual Meeting -- Americans United for Separation of Church & State

2010-08-30T21:33:00.001-05:00

OKC Chapter Annual Meeting
Americans United for Separation of Church & State

OKC Chapter

SAVE THE DATE!

Thursday, Sept. 30, 2010 6:00 pm

Dutch Treat Dinner

7:00 pm Annual Business Meeting

Speakers:

Jo Davis -- Women's Rights & Religion

James Nimmo -- Gay/Lesbian Equality & Religion

Arnold Hamilton, editor/publisher
Oklahoma Observer, http://www.okobserver.net/

Hometown Buffet, 3900 NW 63rd,

OKCCorner of NW Highway & NW 63rd

Questions call Jim Nimmo, 405-843-3651

Beck Rallies In Washington Undercut Church-State Separation,

2010-08-28T14:30:00.001-05:00

August 27, 2010

Fox Pundit And His Religious Right Allies Are Pushing A Divisive Message Of Extremism, Intolerance, Says AU’s Lynn

Fox News Channel personality Glenn Beck’s rallies in Washington, D.C., are an attack on religious liberty and our nation’s rich religious diversity, says Americans United for Separation of Church and State.

Tonight’s event at the Kennedy Center, “Divine Destiny,” is billed by Beck as a way to “reunite” Americans, “heal your soul” and take a “look at the role faith played in the founding of America and the role it will play again in its destiny.”

Tomorrow’s rally, “Restoring Honor,” will be held near the Lincoln Memorial on the 47th anniversary of Martin Luther King, Jr.’s “I have a dream” speech. It has been advertised as a chance to honor “our heroes, our heritage and our future.”

In reality, a major goal of Beck’s rallies is to undermine the Founding Fathers’ vision of a nation where government and religion are kept separate. Beck propagates a revisionist historical perspective that says America is an officially religious state. Mainline Christians, Muslims, non-believers and other Americans who fail to meet Beck’s religious test are often maligned.

“Our nation’s destiny will be disastrous, not divine, if Glenn Beck has his way,” said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, Americans United executive director.

“The message Beck and his cronies want to send is clear: if you don’t believe in a government based on his religious vision, you should expect to be treated like a second-class citizen. Beck has made it clear that he has no respect for our Constitution’s promise of religious liberty for all.”

Over the past few months, Beck has teamed up with David Barton, a Texas-based Religious Right activist who has no credentials as a historian. Yet Barton peddles books, videos and other materials that spread his misguided belief that church-state separation was never intended by the founders.

Said AU’s Lynn, “Barton has lurked in the dark corners of the Religious Right house of horrors for years. But now he is playing on a national stage, thanks to Beck. That’s a tragedy, not a comedy.”

Barton is the founder of Wallbuilders, a Texas-based organization that exists to attack mainstream history. He served as an adviser to the Texas State Board of Education when the state’s social studies curriculum was revised to downplay Thomas Jefferson and the role of church-state separation.

Since March, Barton has appeared on Beck’s Fox program at least 15 times as part an endeavor called “Beck University.” The purpose of the “university” – which exists only in cyberspace – is to teach Americans about the true “Christian” roots of the country. (Read more in the September issue of AU’s Church & State Magazine.)

Says AU’s Lynn, “I am confident that Americans will reject the Beck-Barton message of extremism and intolerance. Our nation was built on a foundation of diversity and equality, and we must not let strident voices undercut those principles.”

Americans United is a religious liberty watchdog group based in Washington, D.C. Founded in 1947, the organization educates Americans about the importance of church-state separation in safeguarding religious freedom.

http://www.au.org/media/press-releases/beck-rallies-in-washington.html

Americans United is a religious liberty watchdog group based in Washington, D.C. Founded in 1947, the organization educates Americans about the importance of church-state separation in safeguarding religious freedom.

Congress Should Reject Conservative Religious Groups’ Call For Taxpayer-Funded Job Bias

2010-08-25T21:40:00.002-05:00

August 25, 2010

If ‘Faith-Based’ Charities Want To Discriminate In Hiring On Religious Grounds, They Shouldn’t Get Public Funds, Says AU’s Lynn

Americans United for Separation of Church and State today urged Congress to reject an appeal for public funding of “faith-based” charities that discriminate in hiring on religious grounds.

In a letter to every member of Congress today, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, World Vision and other conservative religious organizations demanded that faith-based charities get government subsidies even if they hire only job applicants who meet certain religious criteria.

Said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, “I am appalled that these religious leaders are trying to undermine the civil rights protections that every American counts on. If government pays for a social work position, every qualified applicant should be considered for the job regardless of their views on religion.

“At a time when the economy is hard-hit and a lot of people are out of work, it is disgraceful that some religious leaders want to deny government-funded job opportunities on the basis of religion,” he continued. “Members of Congress must say no to this exercise in discrimination.”

Lynn said the signers of today’s letter represent only one part of the broad spectrum of religion in America. He noted that groups representing the Jewish, Baptist, United Methodist, Presbyterian, Episcopal, United Church of Christ, Disciples of Christ, Unitarian and Quaker communities have strongly opposed government-subsidized job bias.

Leading civil rights and civil liberties groups have also opposed this kind of hiring discrimination.

Lynn noted that public opinion polls show that Americans reject publicly funded faith-based bias by a wide margin. According to a 2008 Pew Research Center poll, 73 percent of Americans say organizations that hire only people who share their religious beliefs should not receive government grants.

Americans United is a religious liberty watchdog group based in Washington, D.C. Founded in 1947, the organization educates Americans about the importance of church-state separation in safeguarding religious freedom.

http://www.au.org/media/press-releases/archives/2010/08/congress-should-reject.html

separation-of-church-and-hate

2010-08-19T17:21:00.000-05:00

Since everyone seems to have an opinion about the mosque near Ground Zero (and President Obama has two), I'd like to ask you all a couple of questions:

http://www.gregpalast.com/separation-of-church-and-hatethe-kate-mosque-solution/

http://tinyurl.com/28ocfn6

California Teacher Has No Right To Push Religion in the Classroom, Americans United Tells Federal Appeals Court

2010-08-19T15:51:00.001-05:00

July 26, 2010

School Officials Were Correct To Remove Math Teacher’s Religious Banners, Watchdog Group Says

Public school officials did not violate a California teacher’s rights when they asked him to remove two religious banners from his classroom, Americans United for Separation of Church and State has told a federal appeals court.

Bradley Johnson, a math teacher at Westview High School in San Diego, filed a lawsuit against school officials in 2007, claiming his free speech rights were infringed when he was ordered to take down his religious signs.

A U.S. district court in March ruled in favor of Johnson and ordered school officials to pay nominal damages.

“The district court got it wrong,” said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, Americans United’s executive director. “A public school teacher has no constitutional right to push personal religious beliefs on students.

“I am confident that the appeals court will reverse this decision,” Lynn continued. “It conflicts with current constitutional law and opens the door for teachers to proselytize students.”

Americans United filed a friend-of-the-court brief with the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in support of the Poway Unified School District, arguing that the school was well within its rights to ask Johnson to remove the religious displays.

Johnson, who is represented by the Michigan-based Religious Right group, the Thomas More Law Center, displayed two 7-foot by 2-foot banners in his classroom. One contained the phrases “In God We Trust,” “One Nation Under God,” “God Bless America” and “God Shed His Grace on Thee” written in red, white and blue stripes. Another banner contained the phrase, “All Men Are Created Equal, They are Endowed By Their Creator.”

“It’s clear that Johnson had a religious purpose in displaying these passages,” said AU Legal Director Ayesha N. Khan. “There is no academic reason for a math teacher to display religious affirmations in his classroom. It just doesn’t add up.”

Americans United’s brief in Johnson v. Poway Unified School District was drafted by Khan and AU Madison Fellow Michael Blank.

Americans United is a religious liberty watchdog group based in Washington, D.C. Founded in 1947, the organization educates Americans about the importance of church-state separation in safeguarding religious freedom.

http://www.au.org/media/press-releases/california-teacher-has-no.html

Use of Government Property to Relocate NYC Mosque Raises Serious Legal Questions, Says Americans United

2010-08-19T15:43:00.002-05:00

Photo from: http://www.zawaj.com/askbilqis/regretting-a-decision/

August 18, 2010

Church-State Watchdog Group Says Government Can’t Subsidize Religion Or Give It Preferential Treatment

New York Gov. David Paterson’s proposal to offer public property to relocate the so-called “Ground Zero mosque” raises serious constitutional issues and could spark litigation, says Americans United for Separation of Church and State.

“I understand that some people are not happy with the prospect of an Islamic center opening in Manhattan, but relocating it to public property raises significant legal issues,” said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United.

“Whether the governor is talking about a gift of public land or a sweetheart deal that gives one religious group a special right to purchase government property, it’s wrong.

“In America,” continued Lynn, “government does not subsidize religion or give religious groups preferential treatment.”

Controversy has flared recently over plans by a Muslim group to build an Islamic center two blocks from the site of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Paterson proposed resolving the matter by offering public land elsewhere for construction of the Islamic facility.

But Paterson’s proposal is legally flawed, AU says.

Lynn pointed out that the Supreme Court has repeatedly held that government may not subsidize religious facilities. Any attempt to use public resources to relocate the Islamic center would undoubtedly lead to a legal challenge.

In addition to the U.S. Constitution, Lynn noted that New York’s constitution contains strong language barring any diversion of public resources for religious purposes. Article XI, for example, bans public support of institutions “wholly or in part under the control or direction of any religious denomination….”

Lynn urged Paterson to drop the proposal. The solution, Lynn said, is to respect the Muslim group’s right to build its center on private property using private funds.

“Local authorities in Manhattan have cleared the way for construction of the Islamic center,” Lynn said. “It’s up to the Islamic group to decide whether they want to proceed. I’m sorry that this situation has become so politicized.”

Americans United is a religious liberty watchdog group based in Washington, D.C. Founded in 1947, the organization educates Americans about the importance of church-state separation in safeguarding religious freedom.

http://www.au.org/media/press-releases/archives/2010/08/use-of-government-property-to.html

Americans United, Allies Commend House Resolution On Texas School Board’s Biased Social Studies Standards

2010-08-12T15:51:00.001-05:00

Public School Curriculum Standards Should Not Be Politicized, Says AU’s Lynn

August 10, 2010

In a joint letter, Americans United and 22 other religious, educational and advocacy groups commended U.S. Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson for introducing a House resolution supporting academically sound curriculum development and criticizing the Texas State Board of Education for politicizing the state’s social studies standards.

Johnson’s measure, H.Res. 1593, charges that the State Board “disregarded many academically based recommendations and approved politically biased standards within the curriculum that are outside of mainstream scholarship.” (The resolution is co-sponsored by U.S. Reps. Solomon P. Ortiz, Ruben Hinojosa, Silvestre Reyes and Gene Green.)

Said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, Americans United executive director, “The Texas School Board’s handling of the social studies standards was a travesty. America’s school children cannot be expected to learn accurate history if ideologues are allowed to manipulate the educational process.

“Teachers and scholars, not politicians, should take the lead in developing curriculum standards,” Lynn said. “The Texas School Board flunked its big test. I hope every member of Congress joins Rep. Johnson’s resolution as a co-sponsor.”

The groups’ joint letter to Johnson asserted, “The politicization of the process by which curriculum standards are adopted in Texas has garnered national attention and has set a dangerous precedent that we fear could be repeated in other places. Therefore, we appreciate your efforts to draw attention to this problem. We agree that it should not be up to any politician to write history; instead teachers and experts in the field should be utilized to determine curriculum standards.”

The letter noted that the State School Board approved curriculum standards that are “academically unsound and politically biased.” The Texas standards, the groups charged, downplayed the struggle surrounding the civil rights movement and undermined the constitutionally mandated separation between religion and government.

“We greatly appreciate your leadership on this important issue,” the letter concluded. “Emphasizing that academic experts, rather than politicians, should develop curriculum standards that are clear, informed, and inclusive will help ensure that our students learn accurate history and acquire the analytical skills needed for success in college and the workforce.”

Groups signing the letter include the American Federation of Teachers, Americans for Religious Liberty, American Association of University Women, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, Anti-Defamation League, Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty, Catholics for Choice, Center for Inquiry, Hindu American Foundation, Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network, Interfaith Alliance, National Alliance of Black School Educators, NAACP, National Association of Secondary School Principals, National Council of La Raza, National Council of Jewish Women, National Education Association, National Women’s Law Center, People For the American Way, Secular Coalition for America, Texas Faith Network, Texas Freedom Network and the United Church of Christ Justice & Witness Ministries.

Americans United is a religious liberty watchdog group based in Washington, D.C. Founded in 1947, the organization educates Americans about the importance of church-state separation in safeguarding religious freedom.

complete here: http://www.au.org/media/press-releases/archives/2010/08/au-allies-commend-house.html

Americans United Applauds Court Ruling Against Proposition 8

2010-08-04T19:01:00.001-05:00

Minority Civil Rights Should Never Be Taken Away By Referendum, Watchdog Group Says

August 4, 2010

Americans United for Separation of Church and State today applauded a federal district court decision striking down California’s Proposition 8, a measure that withdrew the civil marriage rights of same-sex couples in the state.

Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker ruled that the state constitutional amendment imposes a private moral viewpoint without a legitimate governmental interest and tramples on the equal rights of gay and lesbian couples.

Said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, “This is a tremendous step forward for individual freedom and church-state separation. Aggressive and well-funded religious groups conspired to take away the civil marriage rights of same-sex couples in California. That was wrong, and I am delighted that the court has ruled the way it has.”

In a November 2008 referendum, voters narrowly approved Proposition 8, a ballot measure that removed the right of same-sex couples to obtain civil marriages. The referendum was dominated by lavishly funded political front groups representing the Roman Catholic bishops, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (the Mormons) and fundamentalist Protestant churches.

Lynn said powerful religious interest groups should never have been allowed to change civil marriage laws to reflect their doctrinal teachings.

Said Lynn, “A growing number of American denominations and faith groups perform same-sex marriages. Why should the state refuse to recognize those ceremonies while approving of ceremonies by other clergy? A decent respect for church-state separation means the government should not play favorites when it comes to religion.”

Today’s ruling in Perry v. Schwarzenegger is certain to be taken to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, and many expect the case to go to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Americans United is a religious liberty watchdog group based in Washington, D.C. Founded in 1947, the organization educates Americans about the importance of church-state separation in safeguarding religious freedom.

http://www.au.org/media/press-releases/archives/2010/08/au-applauds-court-ruling.html

OKC Chapter Annual Meeting

2010-07-31T15:01:00.001-05:00

Americans United for Separation of Church & State

OKC Chapter

SAVE THE DATE!

Thursday, Sept. 30, 20106:00 pm

Dutch Treat Dinner

7:00 pm Annual Business Meeting

Speakers:Jo Davis -- Women's Rights & Religion

James Nimmo -- Gay/Lesbian Equality & Religion

Keynote Speaker Pending

Hometown Buffet, 3900 NW 63rd,

OKCCorner of NW Highway & NW 63rd

Questions call Jim Nimmo, 405-843-3651

"Undivided Church and State"

2010-07-30T09:53:00.003-05:00

Arnold Hamilton, editor of the Oklahoma Observer, has a thoughtful article in today's Urban Tulsa Weekly that discussed the "Undivided Church and State" in Oklahoma.

After citing some of the seemingly endless examples of the push toward theocracy in Oklahoma, Hamilton focuses on the recent endorsement of a political candidate by Paul Blair's "Reclaiming Oklahoma for Christ" -- a religious non-profit organization receiving tax deductible contributions. Hamilton concludes:

Read the rest at:
http://tinyurl.com/27pgx3l

more background at:
http://tinyurl.com/2dyetg7