Oklahoma politician attempting to reinstate Don’t Ask Don’t Tell

State legislator Mike Reynolds is an Air Force veteran. He’s also a Southern Baptist, which shouldn’t matter at all because he is a politician and not a preacher. But invariably the opposition to gay rights comes from a religious motivation.

Not this time though. Apparently Mike Reynolds is motivated because some troops asked him to re-instate the policy.

Tulsa World has the story:

State Rep Mike Reynolds Oklahoma City District 91OKLAHOMA CITY – A bill being proposed by a state lawmaker would reinstitute the controversial “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy in the Oklahoma National Guard.

“That’s exactly what it does,” said Rep. Mike Reynolds, R-Oklahoma City, author of House Bill 2195.

The bill is being proposed in response to requests from members of the Oklahoma National Guard, Reynolds said.

The “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy, implemented by federal law in 1993, barred gays from serving openly in the U.S. military. The policy ended Sept. 20 after President Barack Obama, the secretary of defense and the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff certified that repeal would not harm military readiness.

(more)

Mike Reynolds is on a crusade against discrimination!

I’ve seen this story picked up in a few other markets. But I don’t think any of them have realized one juicy bit of irony. Mike Rep is the author of HB 1001, known as the “Religious Viewpoints Anti-Discrimination Act”.

…They contend the point of their bill, according to news reports, is to prevent religious discrimination in schools,

although it apparently doesn’t matter such discrimination, if it exists, has not surfaced as a major issue. The bill would allow students to express religious views at school and in assignments without penalty. It would allow religious groups the same access to school facilities as secular groups. School speakers could not be discriminated against for expressing religious views…

Cute. He stands up for and ‘against’ discrimination.

That Religious Viewpoints Anti-Discrimination Act passed the first vote, but I don’t think it survived a Governor’s veto (this bill seems to pop up every year). The DADT issue is still a bit of new territory.

The good news is Mike Reynolds is term-limited to 2014. Let’s hope his political career ends there. Perhaps he can go back to work elsewhere. Did I mention that he’s an Ordained Deacon and member of the evangelical Southern Hills Baptist Church?

Print Friendly

About Justin Griffith
  • Aquaria

    The bill is being proposed in response to requests from members of the Oklahoma National Guard, Reynolds said.

    How many?

    Two? Three?

    BTW, Mike, have you heard of this thing called the 14th Amendment? Here, let me introduce you to the relevant parts of it, scumbag:

    Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

    What due process have you followed, mikey, that makes it legal to deny gays the right to serve in the military, when they have already been granted that right (and long overdue it was)? The fee-fees of some homophobic vermin doesn’t qualify as due process, scumbag.

    And this:

    Section 5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

    That means that when the federal government makes something law, you have to follow it, dumbass.

    The law will be struck down in a federal court, soon enough. It’s just ridiculous that a lot of time and money will be wasted to do so.

    I think it’s time for us to look at charging these asswipes when they waste taxpayer dollars this way.

  • Aquaria

    Dammit to hell. Section five is the one sentence, not the whole thing.

  • coragyps

    Though the second sentence actually belongs in there…….

  • felicis

    I believe also that the Oklahoma National Guard, as with other National Guards, must adhere to federal personnel regulations…

  • Steve

    That so-called “Religious Viewpoints Anti-Discrimination Act” sounds very much like the failed “license to bully” bill in Michigan (or was it Minnesota?) that would have allowed bullying as long as it was religiously motivated. In addition of course, it’s a blatant attempt to get around church/state separation.

  • Dino S.

    Now with the repeal of DADT, an openly gay man can technically be a member of the Active Duty Special Forces, a Naval Submariner, Infantryman, Artilleryman or Tanker; but he would be unfit to be a File Clerk, a Cook or a Medic in the Oklahoma State National Guard. Yeah, that makes a lot of sense.

  • Phillip IV

    There was a similar bill under consideration in Virginia, which quickly died after the governor pointed out that deviating from the federal army’s standards, while technically legal, would put federal funding for the Virginia National Guard at risk – which is about 90% of their budget.

    It’s not different for Oklahoma, and I can’t imagine that the outcome in Oklahoma would be any different – and I’m pretty sure Reynolds actually knows that. It’s just grandstanding, nothing more – and, sadly, it’s likely to work for him.

    The bill is being proposed in response to requests from members of the Oklahoma National Guard, Reynolds said.

    Yeah, I’m sure – large numbers of members, complaining about many, many specific instances of problems that have accrued in the few weeks since the policy’s repeal? Or perhaps rather two or three Evangelical chaplains complaining about a contrived threat scenario to a ridiculously broad definition of religious freedom? I have a suspicion the latter one is more likely.

  • http://www.facebook.com/gregm766 gregorymarshall

    Typical right wing nit wit.

    One thing though, it stated

    “The “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy, implemented by federal law in 1993, barred gays from serving openly in the U.S. military.”

    That is not exactly true, before 1993, gays were also not allowed to serve openly in the military. The difference was they actually asked you at enlistment if you were homosexual (they do a whole joke on it in the movie “Stripes”).

    DADT was a compromise by the Clinton administration in hopes that gays could at least serve, it was a terrible compromise, he should have held his ground and allowed all gays to serve openly at that time.

  • Otto

    The funny thing is, that’s one of the most gay-friendly things I’ve ever seen an Oklahoma legislator do. See, he’s still letting the gays into the national guard, they just have to be quiet about it. In Oklahoma, I’d expect attempts to ban the queers outright. I mean, come on, this is the state that gave us Tom “lesbian epidemic in the elementary schools” Coburn.

  • http://timgueguen.blogspot.com timgueguen

    Much as I hate to possibly give someone ideas, I have to wonder why some wingnut hasn’t proposed the “Gay and Lesbian National Service Act.” It would require gays and lesbians to serve a term in the military, no exceptions, and to be assigned to any units serving in an active combat zone, no exceptions. Of course the answer is that the wingnuts think all gay people are exactly like Scott Thompson’s Kids in the Hall character Buddy Cole.

  • crissakentavr

    I’m a bit confused about how you’d enforce HB 1001? Could someone just write religious gibberish and say grading it negatively was punishing it?

    Ugh.

  • JoeBuddha

    Isn’t most of HB 1001 legal now?

  • papango

    @crissakentavr

    I beleive you do understand exactly how this will work. ‘God did it’ will become a valid answer for all and any exams.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X

%d bloggers like this: