MOORE -- Dr. Jimmy Lady, the former associate pastor of the Moore's First Baptist Church, was fired from his job for "unacceptable ministerial services, disruptive conduct, interfering with other employees' work and excessive unexcused absences," and not because church officials thought he was bipolar, recently filed court documents charge.
Those documents are the latest filed in a civil lawsuit against the First Baptist Church of Moore.
In his suit, Lady claims he was fired because church officials believed he was bipolar. Additionally, Lady said church leaders spread "false rumors about his mental health through the community."
"Although a man of God, Dr. Lady cannot ignore the dramatic, adverse effects these untrue and unfair accusations have had on him and his family," Lady's attorney, Andrew Hicks said.
And while Lady's suit said the former associate pastor is seeking $10,000 in actual damages and $10,000 in punitive damages, at least one court document puts the figure much higher.
In an Aug. 17th letter from Hicks to church officials, Hicks says settlement in the case "will require the Church to pay Dr. Lady $2 million in compensation for his lost wages, retirement benefits, mental anguish and attorneys' fees."
Church officials continue to deny Lady's allegations.
In a 156-page motion to dismiss filed Nov. 17, the church -- through attorney Steven Lewis of Edmond -- claimed Lady was fired from his job for poor performance.
"During his third year on staff, some church members and employees began complaining about Pastor Lady's ministry," the church's motion said. "The complaints continued to grow and after several months of seeking the Lord's will, church leaders decided that it was necessary for Lady, as well as for the church, that Pastor Lady be directed to seek other employment."
Lady, First Baptist's senior pastor Kevin Clarkson concluded, was "a double minded man and unstable in all his ways."
Lady's accusation that church officials spread "false rumors about his mental health" also was denied by Clarkson.
However, in a sworn statement, Clarkson acknowledges using the word "bipolar" in meetings with Lady and his wife, but claims he was "ministerially reaching out" to the couple.
"I did use the word bipolar in my meeting with both Pastor Jim Lady and his wife," Clarkson said. "But it was in the manner of non-physican, pastor ministerially reaching out to them, asking them in they thought Jim Lady might need help or counseling."
Clarkson said he did not use the word (bipolar) in "a defamatory or derogatory manner" and did not use it with intent to "harm" Lady.
"I used the word as a simple statement of Christian concern to encourage Pastor Lady to consider seeking help."
Clarkson also denied church officials defamed Lady in public.
"All ministers, personnel team members and staff who were aware of the personnel decision were directed to keep the matter confidential," Clarkson said. "There were instructed not to tell anyone about Pastor Lady's departure."
But Clarkson did acknowledge speaking about Lady and using the word "bipolar" in meetings with some church staff members.
"I made a similar comment in a private discussion of the personnel team, but the statement was not made outside of a very small core group of fewer than seven church leaders," Clarkson said. "I also mentioned the term at a staff devotion meeting, since they were the ones who had been experiencing the direct conflicts with Pastor Lady and who had been observing his behavior and performance up close."
In their motion, church officials asked the court to dismiss Lady's suit and quash his efforts of discovery.
"The relationship between the plaintiff as a former ministerial staff member and as a member of the defendant church is a constitutionally protected relationship which is protected from discovery and judicial intrusion as a religious freedom under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution," the motion says.
A hearing on the motion is set for 2 p.m. Dec. 19 in Cleveland County District Court before Judge Bill Hetherington.
Friday, December 7, 2007
Thursday, December 6, 2007
COMMENTARY: About those "anchor babies..."
Maybe it’s because I’ve spent the past several weeks at the hospital, dealing with an infant with a cardiac problem.
Or, it could be because I like being a father.
Or maybe it’s because my wife is a public school teacher.
Whatever the reason, I’m sick and tired of a human child being referred to as an “anchor baby.”
Anchor baby.
The very phrase is a grating, cynical term meant to dehumanize the child of non-resident.
Anchor baby.
A political catch phrase used by those “round ’em up and ship ’em out” politicians.
Anchor baby.
A racist phrase that needs to go away.
Whether a child is a blond haired, blue eyed Christian, a Muslim, Jew or Hispanic the fact is they are simply, a child.
A human with a soul.
And they, too, have the right to a spot on this earth.
But some would change their status.
State Rep. Randy Terrill’s latest proposal to deny children born on U.S. soil American citizenship is an affront to human dignity and our country’s Constitution.
Now, I’m sure the ink won’t be dry on this paper before I hear from Rep. Terrill and the rest of the American First crowd.
Heck, I get blasted by those guys all the time. Big deal.
Because I stand with Tulsa Catholic Bishop Edward J. Slattery.
Slattery recently issued a pastoral letter — only the second in his tenure — in which he said Mr. Terrill’s anti-immigration legislation, HB 1804, “creates an atmosphere of repression and terror designed to make it impossible for those illegal immigrants who have settled here to find a stable, secure life for themselves and their children, many of whom are native born citizens with civil rights equal to our own.”
Now for the record this isn’t some wild-eyed, tree-hugging liberal (which is what those who have opposed HB 1804 are usually called) writing. This is the Catholic Bishop of Tulsa.
And the good Bishop Slattery is right.
Oklahoma’s new immigration law — and Rep. Terrill’s newly announced changes for the next session — are morally wrong.
I find it ironic that Rep. Terrill and some of his GOP cronies will gladly wave the banner of Christianity when it’s important to one of their pet ideas, then without pausing for a breath, run the other way when Christian leaders dare to disagree.
Further, Terrill’s statements that Oklahoma Catholics were just trying to protect their growing Hispanic base — language only a politician would use — by complaining about HB 1804 are disingenuous and show a deep misunderstanding of the Christian faith, at best.
But, remember, we were talking about anchor babies.
And a baby — whether its parents are here legally or not — born on U.S. soil is an American citizen, end of story.
Sorry, you cannot change that fact.
By dehumanizing the children of immigrants, Rep. Terrill is hoping that he can sell some modern day snake oil to a crowd frightened that another 9/11 type incident will occur here in Oklahoma.
I understand their fear.
But focusing it on babies is, quite possibly, one of the lamest ideas to come down the pike since Jim Crow laws.
By making immigrants the cause of all our problems — they are draining our resources, stealing our jobs, keeping our kids from going to college, responsible for the Seven Deadly Sins, the primary reason for global warming, and the reason there isn’t prayer in school — Rep. Terrill and his buddies are simply exploiting the politics of fear.
Don’t buy it.
All this group has done is to distill fear down into a single, caustic phrase: anchor baby.
Randy Terrill — and here, I include Gov. Brad Henry, because I hold him responsible for signing this stupid immigration law to begin with — should have to spend an afternoon volunteering in the pediatric ward of the OU Children’s Hospital.
Maybe there, after they sat with the parents of an infant struggling to survive, or helped the nurses in the intensive care unit, would they begin to understand.
I wonder if after such a visit we’d see the term “anchor baby” any more.
I wonder if both men would step out of their political skin long enough to understand the human side of the immigration issue.
I hope they would.
But then again, maybe not.
Or, it could be because I like being a father.
Or maybe it’s because my wife is a public school teacher.
Whatever the reason, I’m sick and tired of a human child being referred to as an “anchor baby.”
Anchor baby.
The very phrase is a grating, cynical term meant to dehumanize the child of non-resident.
Anchor baby.
A political catch phrase used by those “round ’em up and ship ’em out” politicians.
Anchor baby.
A racist phrase that needs to go away.
Whether a child is a blond haired, blue eyed Christian, a Muslim, Jew or Hispanic the fact is they are simply, a child.
A human with a soul.
And they, too, have the right to a spot on this earth.
But some would change their status.
State Rep. Randy Terrill’s latest proposal to deny children born on U.S. soil American citizenship is an affront to human dignity and our country’s Constitution.
Now, I’m sure the ink won’t be dry on this paper before I hear from Rep. Terrill and the rest of the American First crowd.
Heck, I get blasted by those guys all the time. Big deal.
Because I stand with Tulsa Catholic Bishop Edward J. Slattery.
Slattery recently issued a pastoral letter — only the second in his tenure — in which he said Mr. Terrill’s anti-immigration legislation, HB 1804, “creates an atmosphere of repression and terror designed to make it impossible for those illegal immigrants who have settled here to find a stable, secure life for themselves and their children, many of whom are native born citizens with civil rights equal to our own.”
Now for the record this isn’t some wild-eyed, tree-hugging liberal (which is what those who have opposed HB 1804 are usually called) writing. This is the Catholic Bishop of Tulsa.
And the good Bishop Slattery is right.
Oklahoma’s new immigration law — and Rep. Terrill’s newly announced changes for the next session — are morally wrong.
I find it ironic that Rep. Terrill and some of his GOP cronies will gladly wave the banner of Christianity when it’s important to one of their pet ideas, then without pausing for a breath, run the other way when Christian leaders dare to disagree.
Further, Terrill’s statements that Oklahoma Catholics were just trying to protect their growing Hispanic base — language only a politician would use — by complaining about HB 1804 are disingenuous and show a deep misunderstanding of the Christian faith, at best.
But, remember, we were talking about anchor babies.
And a baby — whether its parents are here legally or not — born on U.S. soil is an American citizen, end of story.
Sorry, you cannot change that fact.
By dehumanizing the children of immigrants, Rep. Terrill is hoping that he can sell some modern day snake oil to a crowd frightened that another 9/11 type incident will occur here in Oklahoma.
I understand their fear.
But focusing it on babies is, quite possibly, one of the lamest ideas to come down the pike since Jim Crow laws.
By making immigrants the cause of all our problems — they are draining our resources, stealing our jobs, keeping our kids from going to college, responsible for the Seven Deadly Sins, the primary reason for global warming, and the reason there isn’t prayer in school — Rep. Terrill and his buddies are simply exploiting the politics of fear.
Don’t buy it.
All this group has done is to distill fear down into a single, caustic phrase: anchor baby.
Randy Terrill — and here, I include Gov. Brad Henry, because I hold him responsible for signing this stupid immigration law to begin with — should have to spend an afternoon volunteering in the pediatric ward of the OU Children’s Hospital.
Maybe there, after they sat with the parents of an infant struggling to survive, or helped the nurses in the intensive care unit, would they begin to understand.
I wonder if after such a visit we’d see the term “anchor baby” any more.
I wonder if both men would step out of their political skin long enough to understand the human side of the immigration issue.
I hope they would.
But then again, maybe not.
Monday, December 3, 2007
Commissioners create trust to finance, operate new jail
Cleveland County Commissioners recently have created a trust to finance and operate the county’s new jail to be constructed on Franklin Road, east of U.S. Highway 77.
Records indicate a new public trust — the Cleveland County Justice Authority — was created by a unanimous vote on Tuesday, Oct. 9, during a regular commission meeting.
“A resolution...establishing the Cleveland County Justice Authority as an Oklahoma Public trust, accepting the beneficial interest in the Cleveland County Justice Authority created by a trust indenture for and on behalf of Cleveland County, Oklahoma,” county records show.
The justice authority joins at least two other county trusts, including public facilities authority and the home loan authority. The county also has “two or three other trusts” which are inactive, county bond attorney Glenn Floyd, said.
Trustees for the authority are the county’s three commissioners: Rusty Sullivan, George Skinner and Rod Cleveland
Sullivan will serve as chair of the new trust, while Skinner will serve as vice-chairman. Denise Ellison, an administrative assistant in the commissioner’s office, was named as secretary and county employee Brenda Wakeman will serve as assistant secretary.
Floyd said the trust was necessary because county officials plan to fund the new jail with revenue bonds.
“Those revenue bonds could be issued over a long period of time, maybe 30 year bonds,” he said.
The county’s current jail — located downtown — was built with ad valorem tax revenue. But that option, Floyd said, probably wouldn’t fly with county voters for the new facility.
“The consensus that I’ve gotten from the commission over the last three or four years is that they feel that there’s too many people against it,” he said.
That feeling apparently extends to members of the commission itself.
Earlier this year, during his campaign for the District 1 seat, commissioner Rod Cleveland’s platform included the statement “no new ad valorem tax increases.”
However, with costs for the jail being estimated in the $20 to $50 million range, county officials say they must have the ability to raise revenue for the facility.
“For a county, without having a general obligation election, the only way to finance a new jail is to have an authority that issues debt,” Floyd said.
By creating the trust, Floyd said, the county had “a mechanism for issuing long term debt that’s payable from a revenue stream other than ad valorem taxes.”
Those funds could come from the county’s general fund or from a sales tax, he said.
A sales tax increase would require a public vote.
“If they decide to finance (the jail) with sales tax backed issue, there would be a vote of people,” Floyd said.
However, the amount needed for the jail and the way those funds will be raised has yet to be decided.
Currently, county officials are working with Norman architect Ben Graves to finalize the jail’s design. Graves and members of his committee said earlier they hoped to have the jail’s design completed by mid-November.
Records indicate a new public trust — the Cleveland County Justice Authority — was created by a unanimous vote on Tuesday, Oct. 9, during a regular commission meeting.
“A resolution...establishing the Cleveland County Justice Authority as an Oklahoma Public trust, accepting the beneficial interest in the Cleveland County Justice Authority created by a trust indenture for and on behalf of Cleveland County, Oklahoma,” county records show.
The justice authority joins at least two other county trusts, including public facilities authority and the home loan authority. The county also has “two or three other trusts” which are inactive, county bond attorney Glenn Floyd, said.
Trustees for the authority are the county’s three commissioners: Rusty Sullivan, George Skinner and Rod Cleveland
Sullivan will serve as chair of the new trust, while Skinner will serve as vice-chairman. Denise Ellison, an administrative assistant in the commissioner’s office, was named as secretary and county employee Brenda Wakeman will serve as assistant secretary.
Floyd said the trust was necessary because county officials plan to fund the new jail with revenue bonds.
“Those revenue bonds could be issued over a long period of time, maybe 30 year bonds,” he said.
The county’s current jail — located downtown — was built with ad valorem tax revenue. But that option, Floyd said, probably wouldn’t fly with county voters for the new facility.
“The consensus that I’ve gotten from the commission over the last three or four years is that they feel that there’s too many people against it,” he said.
That feeling apparently extends to members of the commission itself.
Earlier this year, during his campaign for the District 1 seat, commissioner Rod Cleveland’s platform included the statement “no new ad valorem tax increases.”
However, with costs for the jail being estimated in the $20 to $50 million range, county officials say they must have the ability to raise revenue for the facility.
“For a county, without having a general obligation election, the only way to finance a new jail is to have an authority that issues debt,” Floyd said.
By creating the trust, Floyd said, the county had “a mechanism for issuing long term debt that’s payable from a revenue stream other than ad valorem taxes.”
Those funds could come from the county’s general fund or from a sales tax, he said.
A sales tax increase would require a public vote.
“If they decide to finance (the jail) with sales tax backed issue, there would be a vote of people,” Floyd said.
However, the amount needed for the jail and the way those funds will be raised has yet to be decided.
Currently, county officials are working with Norman architect Ben Graves to finalize the jail’s design. Graves and members of his committee said earlier they hoped to have the jail’s design completed by mid-November.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
