One major contrast between my opponent and I is that while he states that he asks his constituents how to vote for every issue that comes up, I vowed to stand my ground on Constitutional issues and matters of higher law. I have been asked, “What about the issues that don’t directly relate to the 2nd amendment, life, and personal freedoms?” Excellent question. The short answer is yes I absolutely will be listening to my constituents on many matters, while on matters of conscience and the Constitution, I will absolutely listen to God and the supreme law of the land. Now, what does that mean?

     There is a hierarchy of the Law. Beginning at the top you have God’s law, next the law of man. Our man-made law here in America consists of the supreme law of the land, also known as the Constitution. The hierarchy of law then goes all the way down to the local government.

     God’s law trumps all other law. Our nation was founded on God’s law, you see the ten commandments written on courthouses, legislative buildings, monuments, and memorials everywhere you go. Our founding fathers acknowledged God’s law, and condensed it into three unalienable rights, listed in order of importance are: Life, Liberty, and Property. (Or as Thomas worded it in the Declaration of Independence, “the pursuit of happiness”)

     Let’s take a look at Psalm 1 and see what it says about seeking counsel and the law.

How blessed is the man who does not walk in the counsel of the wicked,

Nor stand in the path of sinners,

Nor sit in the seat of scoffers!

But his delight is in the law of the Lord,

And in His law he meditates day and night.

He will be like a tree firmly planted by streams of water,

Which yields its fruit in its season

And its leaf does not wither;

And in whatever he does, he prospers.

The wicked are not so,

But they are like chaff which the wind drives away.

Therefore the wicked will not stand in the judgment,

Nor sinners in the assembly of the righteous.

For the Lord knows the way of the righteous,

But the way of the wicked will perish.

     In matters of God’s law, we MUST comply with Him. When we as a nation comply with God’s law, we become strong like the aforementioned tree by the water. We prosper. That is why we have become such a strong and prosperous nation, because we followed the law of God.

     “You shall not murder” is an example of God’s law. It is legal in the US to have an abortion, but it is not legal under God’s law to murder. (Exodus 20:13) In this instance, I will only listen to God’s law, no matter how many constituents may want to violate it, and tell me to do so. Matthew 10:28 says, “Do not fear those who kill the body but are unable to kill the soul; but rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.” Because I have this belief, you can be confident that I will defend the innocent, no matter what anyone says. And believe me, many say not to. As Mr. Talley himself pointed out at the forum, he believes that, “We have enough pro-life laws”.

     To ask others their opinion on whether or not we should comply with God’s law is not the role of the representative. This is not what the founding fathers believed either, and is a naïve view of civics.

     Although Mr. Talley personally believes that we have enough pro-life laws on the books, he still asked his constituents how to vote on pro-life laws. On February 8th, 2020 he wrote to the Stillwater Newspress:

On Thursday, the House voted to pass our first major bill of the session, House Bill 1182. This bill would direct medical licensure boards to revoke for one year the licenses of Oklahoma physicians who perform abortions. An amendment filed prior to the vote clarified an exception if the life of the mother is at risk.

Earlier this week, I asked for input from my constituents for their opinion on the bill. Your insights on both sides of the issue were helpful in discussing this bill with legislators. Besides your input, I also reached out to local faith-based leaders and healthcare professionals to hear from them.

Representation of the constituents in my district is heavy on my heart and a humbling responsibility. The majority of my constituents requested a vote of yes on this bill.

     He clearly would have voted against the bill if the majority of his constituents would have requested a vote of no. This not only goes against higher law, it is also dishonest as a representative. He ran as a pro-life Republican. People gave him their vote at the ballot believing he is a pro-life Republican, however, if the few who responded would have swayed him the other way it would have been a misrepresentation of his constituents vote at the ballot.

     An example in the Bible of a member of government listening to the people instead of upholding God’s law is when Pilate asked the crowd what to do in Matthew 27:21-26:

“Which of the two do you want me to release to you?” asked the governor.

“Barabbas,” they answered.

“What shall I do, then, with Jesus who is called the Messiah?” Pilate asked.

They all answered, “Crucify him!”

“Why? What crime has he committed?” asked Pilate.

But they shouted all the louder, “Crucify him!”

When Pilate saw that he was getting nowhere, but that instead an uproar was starting, he took water and washed his hands in front of the crowd. “I am innocent of this man’s blood,” he said. “It is your responsibility!”

All the people answered, “His blood is on us and on our children!”

Then he released Barabbas to them. But he had Jesus flogged, and handed him over to be crucified.”

     Pilate should not have listened to the people, he allowed the murder of an innocent man. I am grateful for God’s provision, however through God’s provision Pilate participated in a grave injustice. He crucified the Son of God. This principle is valid for any of the God-given rights protected in the Constitution. God’s law is higher than man’s law, and must be upheld regardless of how loud the crowd becomes.

     Let’s look at the second of the three basic rights, Liberty. Mr. Talley voted “NO” on SB361. This bill protects free speech on university campuses by prohibiting universities from confining free speech to “free speech zones” Without this law, universities can contain free speech to zones instead of allowing it campus-wide. He said he asked the university how to vote. Again, I will contend that one must not listen to people who tell you to vote contrary to God’s law and our Constitution. Ironically, the very people he asked on how to vote, were the people the bill was meant to protect us from.

     Let’s look at the third basic right, property. I will not vote for any bills that take money, wealth, or property away from one Oklahoman, and give it to another, unless it is a genuine service of the government, ie. taxes for roads, bridges, military, etc. I don’t believe in using other people’s money for charity. Charity has its place for the individual, but we shall not dictate how much other people must give to charity, or for what. I do not believe in welfare. It is the responsibility of the church and individual men and women with a personal conviction to care for the poor, not Uncle Sam. (Or in our case, Uncle Stitt) I will not take from the pockets of some, to give charity to others, no matter what people say. Even when some people may say they want their taxes to go toward this end, there will always be people who don’t want to be taxed so their money goes to the poor. Their money should not be extorted against their will, even for a good cause. The right to keep their own property, (wages earned, and wealth acquired) is a God-given right. We have been indoctrinated with the Marxist idea that the poor deserve the wealth of the rich, and this goes against the third basic tenant of our God-given rights. The bible says that we as Christians must take care of the poor. This is the obligation of the believer, not of the taxpayer. II Corinthians 9:7 says,

“Each of you should give what you have decided in your heart to give, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.”

     Care of the poor is an important tenet of our faith, but it should be a result of our changed heart in Christ, not a government requirement.

     All of the rights listed in our Constitution’s Bill of Rights fall under these three basic rights, Life, Liberty, and Property. I will staunchly protect these areas.

     Now, there are many matters where I DO need the input of my constituents. Matters that either are not a violation of God’s law, and our basic rights, or matters on how to handle the laws dealing with those rights. These matters are far more prolific than the ones of our basic rights. For instance, Broadband internet in rural areas is a major issue right now. It has come even more to the forefront with COVID-19 and school closures. Many families need internet to school their children while the brick and mortar schools are boarded up. But how do we promote the expansion of the internet network? Earlier this week I approached the VP of Business Development and Operations at ProValue on how best to help companies like his grow and increase their coverage and infrastructure. We had a good conversation, but I understand that there must be more communication because it is a complicated issue.

     Last week I talked to a man who lives in the western part of the county about road maintenance. He is 81 years old, and the bridge that emergency personnel would take to get to his house is out, and has been out for a while now. The bridge being out could quite possibly be a matter of life and death if the time comes for emergency assistance. We need to find ways to budget more money towards our decaying roads. I am very open to suggestions for how to do that.

     I also talked to a man in Cushing, who brought up the fact that many of our small towns have no source of income. Coyle and Ripley for example have little to no business from which the city can draw sales taxes to pay for its government and services. They are small enough that if a new business were to be opened, it can just be opened on the outskirts of town to avoid the sales tax. How do we fund these small dying towns in Oklahoma? A conversation with constituents is the only way to solve problems such as these.

     In conclusion, there is a hierarchy of law. You have God’s law, and the Constitution, and then you have all the lower laws that fall under their umbrella. I am very open and encourage dialogue on how to handle all of the lower laws. At the same time, I will not budge on matters of God’s law, the Constitution, and our basic rights. I hope this clears up some things for you. It is imperative that you know exactly how I would vote on any given issue before you cast your vote at the ballot. This is real representation, that you have confidence that I will uphold the Constitution no matter what, and listen to you on all other matters.