By Walter Wasacz

The repeal of an ordinance that protects all Hamtramck residents from discrimination comes under the category of bad news for everyone. And that includes the winners of a ballot question that really belongs on no ballot at all. It’s not surprising that if you ask for a majority to determine the fate of a minority — in this case effectively painted as a sinful, anti-religious minority — that you would get the votes to overturn the city’s human rights ordinance enacted by a divided city council earlier this year.      

The campaign leading up to the election was as ugly as it gets. Opponents of the human rights ordinance shamelessly revealed their best, and only, card from the onset: gay rights are not welcome in Hamtramck. The attacks came early and often, and were scurrilously well-produced, too — not surprising, given that veteran culture warriors like the Thomas More Law Center and the American Family Association were behind the production.

The results of the elections are no doubt to their liking, so don’t expect to see them around here too soon. In fact, if you liked their act in Hamtramck you can catch it next in Gainesville, Florida, where nearly the same rhetoric is being tossed around to help defeat that town’s human rights ordinance in a March election.

Thomas More’s chief counsel Richard Henderson says the Gainesville ordinance city was “fashioned by radical homosexual organizations … with a national agenda … protecting bizarre sexual behavior” and so on. Sound familiar? If you think that language is over the top, here’s more. Henderson recently said “Hamtramck’s Orwellian doublespeak and draconian provisions for investigation, prosecution and civil actions … to force businesses, schools and religions to accept this bizarre behavior would make any totalitarian regime envious.” Read further and you’ll see a few more attacks, this time on our benign liberal cousins in Canada, where same-sex marriage and gay rights has been a matter of legal fact since 2005. Thomas More’s press flacks allege “radical homosexual activists are now importing Canadian-type laws to persecute religious leaders who speak out against homosexuality and transgenderism.” Somebody have a problem with Canada, other than it’s cold and little boring? We never knew.

But give it up for Thomas More and AFA. They skillfully used human resources (their own strategic appearances in the community along with local religious organizations that opposed it on moral grounds) and evidently a bit of money to paint the ordinance as a very, very trashy lifestyles initiative being driven by a national gay agenda. Along the way, they ripped into Ferndale (Hamtramck doesn’t want to be like that, they warned), and “radical groups” like the Triangle Foundation.    

Tying legal rights for gays to moral questions about homosexuality in Christianity and Islam ensured its defeat. It was the main theme of the opposition to this ordinance, regardless of whether it was spoken by Catholics or Muslims, residents of the city or outside interests fighting a culture war across the nation with "sword and shield." The local opponents of the ordinance were resolute in their belief that they were on the right side of this argument, supporting their position with references to the Bible and the Koran. Fair enough, let’s concede the point that a fundamental interpretation of the holy books of both religions says little in support of gay rights.

But campaigners that openly say things like “straight up, I don’t want gay people to live here” go beyond anything you’re likely to find in religious texts. In fact, rest easy, you won’t find it. That is precisely the opposite of what enlightened civic leaders and new economy theorists are saying every vital town and city needs: more gays. More culturally sensitive and tolerant neighborhoods energized by smart people regardless of ethnic origin, religious belief or sexual orientation is on the serious national agenda, not obsessive and petty culture wars. In Detroit, where a human rights ordinance was beefed up earlier this year to protect workers, residents and visitors against discrimination based on gender and identity, a recent tour was held by gay homeowners to help bring more gay investors into the city. That’s a nice idea, one that could be replicated in Hamtramck without resolution by city council or a popular vote. There are other strategies out there that veer away from the coldly political and bring it down to a warmer social level. Maybe, absent the cultural battleground and played out on a human scale, we will find common ground.  

Hamtramck is a special place. It is only a few heartbeats away from welcoming and cultivating a community of real diversity to its doorstep. That is a good thing for business, not bad, as some are naively suggesting, good for building a better society at a neighborhood level. There's a lot of work to be done on this issue here and on a national level. Suddenly, we are living in a transformational era, a renewed America based on principles of community restoration and participation in civic life.

This human rights initiative needs to be revisited, retooled and reinvigorated. Consensus among intelligent people who disagree must be reached, coalitions and media projects developed to reject the rhetoric and deliver the message that fair treatment of everyone in Hamtramck is a good message to send to the community and the rest of the world.

By Walter Wasacz – September 19, 2008 

Working from home, which I’ve done for the past four years, has several advantages.

While I write and edit in the morning I can make coffee, toast waffles or, if I’m really ambitious, clean out the kitty’s litter box at my leisure.

I text message, e-mail and twitter whenever and whomever I choose, listen to music I’ve downloaded from my favorite online shop in Manchester, England (that’s http://www.boomkat.com/ for all the curious few who might want to know), exercise on a purple yoga mat or with purple 5-pound balls, and watch the world go by from my window. Or, should I say windows, since I have many in my apartment that overlooks a rather busy intersection in Hamtramck.

From my perch two stories up (three, if you count occasional visits to my attic, which I mostly use for storage), I see motorists buzzing by, usually too fast, bicyclists riding against traffic and without helmets, and now, a dangerous new element added to our vibrant, no, let’s call it “stimulated” street scene, pedestrians neglecting sidewalks to walk down the middle of the road to get to their destination.

I’m seeing it more and more. Apparently others are too. There’s a thread devoted to it on the message board DetroitYes http://detroityes.com/ where people are speculating on its origins.  

Once, while out for an early evening walk this summer, I was nearly bumped as I was crossing Evaline at Gallagher by two youths on foot eastbound on Evaline. I stopped to watch them for a bit and they continued in the street as they headed past Zussman Park and City Hall toward Conant.

More recently, on another walk I saw a group of young people walking southbound in the street on Gallagher at Belmont, which has one of the trickiest and most dangerous blind spots for both drivers and pedestrians in the city.

Traffic had to swerve out of the way to avoid hitting these kids, who were yelling at drivers as they passed. Now, kids are kids, obviously, so we should cut them some slack for their bad judgment and indiscretion on some things, but this is a trend that’s just plain dumb. Somebody is going to get hurt, guaranteed. It needs some careful scrutiny by city officials, obviously including the police department, and the school district, since many of these bold, new breed “streetwalkers” appear to be teens coming from school or school-related activities.  

Some of the talk on DetroitYes pointed to reasons for this trend. Some of those include a fear on the part of young people to walk on the sidewalk because someone could jump out from between houses and attack them. There’s some question from others about where this aggressive self-defensive response to the perceived dangers of urban life originated. Some guess it comes from the rural south, others from experiencing life in acutely degraded neighborhoods where abandonment, decay and crime are the norms not the exception.

From my perspective, inside my house with eyes on the street or on the ground where I exercise my self-described “Hamtramck Rules” — which means I walk everywhere and don’t drive unless I’m leaving the city — I see reason to be cautious on our city streets.

But let’s not overdo it, please. There are far, far, far more young women strolling with babies, jogging couples, dogwalkers, families walking to the market together, age-appropriate kids headed to the playground or park, artists and college students moving around on the streets than there are creeps and criminals about to pounce from out of the shadows.

C’mon, kids, get back on the sidewalk where you belong. Hamtramck is all right, really it is. No need to get paranoid and send out menacing vibes. Lots of people are watching, just like me, to make sure we keep these neighborhoods safe for you and everyone else.