The opponents of Proposition A, Royal Oak’s Human Rights Ordinance on the ballot Tuesday, have decided that the best way to defeat the proposition is to play the bathroom card. Yep, I received their one-issue postcard, which showed pictures of folks that I'm pretty sure we’re from anyplace but Royal Oak and it's fair to say that these pictures were not photo-shopped to improve their appearances.
The message of the postcard piece was fear: Prop A will make your public restrooms scary.
This is best reason why I should vote no for the proposal? You have to be kidding me.
I guess I can't resist a good old-fashioned donnybrook and having the opponents square off on Proposal A, the Human Right’s Ordinance* in Royal Oak certainly qualifies as a bare-knuckle, take-no-prisoners alley fight.
Up until last week, other than my usual vigorous discussions with the lovely Kathy, I haven't joined the fight. Mostly, I have a short attention span for the dirty dozen or so commentators that clutter the debate with vitriolic attacks on each other. I mean guys and gals, do you really think you're going to change each other's minds? Do you really think you're going to win over minds by over-trumping the last commentator’s verbal abuse? C'mon!
But, hey, that’s politics. It’s a nasty game. But for those of us in middle of this fray or any other sludge-slinging election, we have some obligation to say: Hey, you just stepped over the rude line, hop-scotched past the slime marker and have moved into a head-shaking, cringe-inducing no-man's land of my parent's wouldn't be proud of this stuff!.
That line has been crossed in this contest.
I've visited the both sides’ websites and there are a whole lot of reasons to consider voting for or against Proposal A. The rationale presented on both sides range from well-reasoned to hogwash.
But Fear the Bathroom is really laying it on thick. When I put the postcard down I didn't know whether to laugh or cry. I’ve watched a lot of political battles and this waving the public restroom fright flag may be a first!
I know this is going to come out all wrong, but I've been in a lot of public bathrooms is my 60 years! The lovely Kathy and I have four kids and if you have children, when they're young, you know that an emergency bathroom visit is just a matter of an always-very-inconvenient time. Right?
Heck, I don't think my daughters or sons are in therapy over the bathroom visits at Joe Louis Arena or Tiger Stadium, when they were little kids. Whoa, these can be some pretty scary places in the best of times, especially after the second period or the 7th inning!
My point is that the opponents are using an insidious tactic. Did the opposition sit in a room and strategize: What’s the scariest thing we can come up to frighten people into voting against Prop A? I’ve got it, public restrooms!
Trying to drum up panic for an unlikely visit by an unusual visitor to a public restroom and making it the leading reason to vote against an ordinance to make their case….well, it’s a head-shaker and shameful. And that’s not even taking into account that the opponent’s argument is weak or non-existent.
I respect the rights of both those that favor and oppose the ordinance, to make their case. I may disagree, strongly, but I will do my best to be civil and respectful. Clearly passions run high on both sides and there is little middle ground for agreement. But when passions overflow into making a central point of your argument an outrageous point about, in this case, bathrooms….you lose my respect.
I know my parent's would not be proud of me if I took that approach.
Tuesday is Election Day: Let's go!
*This is the proposed Royal Oak Human Rights Ordinance on the ballot: An ordinance to amend the Code of the City of Royal Oak to prohibit discrimination based upon actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, sex, age, height, weight, condition of pregnancy, marital status, physical or mental limitation, source of income, family responsibilities, sexual orientation, gender identity, or HIV status, and to provide penalties for the violation thereof.
