A modern-day version of ‘Pride and Prejudice' surfaces over city's LGBTQ+ recognition
The rainbow flag of the gay pride movement and the flag of the United States. (Photo by Getty Images)
Jane Austen's novel 'Pride and Prejudice' focused on manners and goodness, two virtues sometimes forgotten today.
Shortly before the novel was published, our Founding Fathers settled on the free exchange of ideas as one of the fundamental concepts they wanted to guarantee in the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
But in 2025, there is an uncomfortable tug-of-war occurring over pride and prejudice, expression and oppression.
That tug-of-war was on display during the Ottumwa City Council meeting last week. A similar debate is happening elsewhere around Iowa and across the nation over a variety of civic issues where opinions vary widely.
The subject of the Ottumwa discourse was a proposed proclamation designating June as Pride Month there. The city made similar designations in each of the past five years with nary a peep of protest.
But a couple of residents objected to the new proclamation when it came to a vote last week. What ensued was a refreshing, and polite, discussion among those residents, Mayor Rick Johnson and members of the council.
No one called anyone a moron, lunatic, scum, loser, traitor or crook. Manners AND free expression prevailed.
The Ottumwa discussion comes at a time when American colleges and universities are not so lucky. Whether assailed by the federal or state governments, these schools face pressure, if not coercion, to abandon policies and programs that encourage consideration of a wider cross-section of students, job applicants and voices.
The discussion in Ottumwa came amid continuing controversy over rallies around the United States, where Israel's treatment of law-abiding Palestinians in Gaza has been loudly criticized — with the Trump administration drawing no distinction between peaceful events and events advocating violence toward Israel and Jews.
The Ottumwa discussion also coincided with the decision by the American Civil Liberties Union of Iowa to send warning letters to five cities — Carroll, Harlan, Mount Pleasant, Polk City and Webster City. In those letters, the ACLU said the cities must change their ordinances classifying performances by 'female impersonators' and 'male impersonators' as prohibited forms of adults-only entertainment.
The ACLU said the ordinances are unconstitutional because they try to stop non-obscene forms of free expression that are protected by the First Amendment. That free expression is on display in popular movies like 'Mrs. Doubtfire,' when female comedians with short hair perform while wearing a suit and tie, or when men wear gowns and wigs in a Pride parade.
'These outdated ordinances go far beyond prohibiting objectionable or obscene conduct,' ACLU attorney Shefali Aurora wrote in the letters. 'To be clear, drag is not a synonym for obscenity.'
Back in Ottumwa, Councilman Bill Hoffman Jr. spoke eloquently about retaining the Pride Month proclamation. His reasoning provides important insight for other situations where some disagree with the message espoused by others.
'If you don't like Pride Month, don't celebrate it. If you don't want to go to a Pride event, don't go,' Hoffman said, the Ottumwa Courier reported.
'When I ran for council, I promised to protect 25,579 people and their legal rights, and to take a proclamation off that celebrates people, to me is absolutely appalling.'
Katie Howard, one of the opponents to the proclamation, urged the council to reject Pride Month. She said the council should follow the lead of the federal government's efforts to end diversity, equity and inclusion practices.
'Being gay may not be a choice, but being trans is, and you're celebrating everything,' Howard said. 'I'd also like to point out that mental health is not a choice. Colon cancer is not a choice. Being Black is not a choice. You're equating apples and oranges.'
Councilman Dan Reid, the only person voting against the 2025 Pride proclamation, added: 'It's always my desire to try to treat everybody with respect, kindness and dignity. That's just my policy. That's why I felt like this proclamation is giving a specific select group of people a special month. It's just more honor than average.'
Councilwoman Cara Galloway responded: 'Trying to remove this one after years of support doesn't really feel like a principled stand. It almost looks like discomfort with the LGBTQ+ community and inclusion. We can't ignore that LGBTQ+ youth are among the most at risk for mental health and suicide.'
Mayor Johnson weighed in: 'If we don't continue to recognize and celebrate everybody that's part of the community, we're not living up to the goals and pillars' of the city's mission.
Councilman Hoffman added, 'We're a diverse town and we should be proud of that. And anybody who stands at that podium should be celebrated. That's what we want. Differences of opinion are what make the town great.'
Talk about sense and sensibility: The right to peacefully express one's opinions, whether those are shared by many or by a few, regardless of how government officials stand on an issue, lies at the heart of what makes the United States a nation of rights and freedoms.
Randy Evans is a member of the Iowa Writers' Collaborative and his columns may be found on his blog, Stray Thoughts.
Editor's note: Please consider subscribing to the collaborative and the authors' blogs to support their work.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
American Press
an hour ago
- American Press
Columbia protester Mahmoud Khalil freed from immigration detention
Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil was released Friday from federal immigration detention, freed after 104 days by a judge's ruling after becoming a symbol of President Donald Trump 's clampdown on campus protests. The former Columbia University graduate student left a federal facility in Louisiana on Friday. He is expected to head to New York to reunite with his U.S. citizen wife and infant son, born while Khalil was detained. 'Justice prevailed, but it's very long overdue,' he said outside the facility in a remote part of Louisiana. 'This shouldn't have taken three months.' Email newsletter signup The Trump administration is seeking to deport Khalil over his role in pro-Palestinian protests. He was detained on March 8 at his apartment building in Manhattan. Khalil was released after U.S. District Judge Michael Farbiarz said it would be 'highly, highly unusual' for the government to continue detaining a legal U.S. resident who was unlikely to flee and hadn't been accused of any violence. 'Petitioner is not a flight risk, and the evidence presented is that he is not a danger to the community,' he said. 'Period, full stop.' During an hourlong hearing conducted by phone, the New Jersey-based judge said the government had 'clearly not met' the standards for detention. The government filed notice Friday evening that it's appealing Khalil's release. The Department of Homeland Security said in a post on the social platform X that the same day Farbiarz ordered Khalil's release, an immigration judge in Louisiana denied him bond and 'ordered him removed.' The decision was made by Judge Jamee Comans, who is in a court located in the same detention facility from which Khalil was released. 'An immigration judge, not a district judge, has the authority to decide if Mr. Khalil should be released or detained,' the post said. Khalil was the first person arrested under Trump's crackdown on students who joined campus protests against Israel's devastating war in Gaza. U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has said Khalil must be expelled from the country because his continued presence could harm American foreign policy. The Trump administration has argued that noncitizens who participate in such demonstrations should be deported as it considers their views antisemitic. Protesters and civil rights groups say the administration is conflating antisemitism with criticism of Israel in order to silence dissent. Farbiarz has ruled that the government can't deport Khalil on the basis of its claims that his presence could undermine foreign policy. But the judge gave the administration leeway to continue pursuing a potential deportation based on allegations that he lied on his green card application, an accusation Khalil disputes. The international affairs graduate student isn't accused of breaking any laws during the protests at Columbia. He served as a negotiator and spokesperson for student activists and wasn't among the demonstrators arrested, but his prominence in news coverage and willingness to speak publicly made him a target of critics. The judge agreed Friday with Khalil's lawyers that the protester was being prevented from exercising his free speech and due process rights despite no obvious reason for his continued detention. The judge noted that Khalil is now clearly a public figure. Khalil said Friday that no one should be detained for protesting Israel's war in Gaza. He said his time in the Jena, Louisiana, detention facility had shown him 'a different reality about this country that supposedly champions human rights and liberty and justice.' 'Whether you are a U.S. citizen, an immigrant or just a person on this land doesn't mean that you are less of a human,' he said, adding that 'justice will prevail, no matter what this administration may try to portray' about immigrants. Khalil had to surrender his passport and can't travel internationally, but he will get his green card back and be given official documents permitting limited travel within the country, including New York and Michigan to visit family, New Jersey and Louisiana for court appearances and Washington to lobby Congress. In a statement after the judge's ruling, Khalil's wife, Dr. Noor Abdalla, said she can finally 'breathe a sigh of relief' after her husband's three months in detention. 'We know this ruling does not begin to address the injustices the Trump administration has brought upon our family, and so many others,' she said. 'But today we are celebrating Mahmoud coming back to New York to be reunited with our little family.' The judge's decision comes after several other scholars targeted for their activism have been released from custody, including another former Palestinian student at Columbia, Mohsen Mahdawi; a Tufts University student, Rumeysa Ozturk; and a Georgetown University scholar, Badar Khan Suri. ___ Marcelo reported from New York. Jennifer Peltz contributed from New York.
3 hours ago
The US commemorates 250th anniversary of the 'great American battle,' the Battle of Bunker Hill
NEW YORK -- As the U.S. marks the 250th anniversary of the Battle of Bunker Hill, it might take a moment — or more — to remember why. Start with the very name. 'There's something percussive about it: Battle of Bunker Hill,' says prize-winning historian Nathaniel Philbrick, whose 'Bunker Hill: A City, A Siege, A Revolution' was published in 2013. 'What actually happened probably gets hazy for people outside of the Boston area, but it's part of our collective memory and imagination.' 'Few 'ordinary' Americans could tell you that Freeman's Farm, or Germantown, or Guilford Court House were battles,' says Paul Lockhart, a professor of history at Wright University and author of a Bunker Hill book, 'The Whites of Their Eyes," which came out in 2011. "But they can say that Gettysburg, D-Day, and Bunker Hill were battles.' Bunker Hill, Lockhart adds, 'is the great American battle, if there is such a thing.' Much of the world looks to the Battles of Lexington and Concord, fought in Massachusetts on April 19, 1775, as the start of the American Revolution. But Philbrick, Lockhart and others cite Bunker Hill and June 17 as the real beginning, the first time British and rebel forces faced off in sustained conflict over a specific piece of territory. Bunker Hill was an early showcase for two long-running themes in American history — improvisation and how an inspired band of militias could hold their own against an army of professionals. 'It was a horrific bloodletting, and provided the British high command with proof that the Americans were going to be a lot more difficult to subdue than had been hoped,' says the Pulitzer Prize-winning historian Rick Atkinson, whose second volume of a planned trilogy on the Revolution, 'The Fate of the Day,' was published in April. The battle was born in part out of error; rebels were seeking to hold off a possible British attack by fortifying Bunker Hill, a 110-foot-high (34-meter-high) peak in Charlestown across the Charles River from British-occupied Boston. But for reasons still unclear, they instead armed a smaller and more vulnerable ridge known as Breed's Hill, 'within cannon shot of Boston,' Philbrick says. "The British felt they had no choice but to attack and seize the American fort.' Abigail Adams, wife of future President John Adams, and son John Quincy Adams, also a future president, were among thousands in the Boston area who looked on from rooftops, steeples and trees as the two sides fought with primal rage. A British officer would write home about the 'shocking carnage' left behind, a sight 'that never will be erased out of my mind 'till the day of my death.' The rebels were often undisciplined and disorganized and they were running out of gunpowder. The battle ended with them in retreat, but not before the British had lost more than 200 soldiers and sustained more than 1,000 casualties, compared to some 450 colonial casualties and the destruction of hundreds of homes, businesses and other buildings in Charlestown. Bunker Hill would become characteristic of so much of the Revolutionary War: a technical defeat that was a victory because the British needed to win decisively and the rebels needed only not to lose decisively. 'Nobody now entertains a doubt but that we are able to cope with the whole force of Great Britain, if we are but willing to exert ourselves,' Thomas Jefferson wrote to a friend in early July. 'As our enemies have found we can reason like men, now let us show them we can fight like men also.'
San Francisco Chronicle
3 hours ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
The US commemorates 250th anniversary of the 'great American battle,' the Battle of Bunker Hill
NEW YORK (AP) — As the U.S. marks the 250th anniversary of the Battle of Bunker Hill, it might take a moment — or more — to remember why. Start with the very name. 'There's something percussive about it: Battle of Bunker Hill,' says prize-winning historian Nathaniel Philbrick, whose 'Bunker Hill: A City, A Siege, A Revolution' was published in 2013. 'What actually happened probably gets hazy for people outside of the Boston area, but it's part of our collective memory and imagination.' 'Few 'ordinary' Americans could tell you that Freeman's Farm, or Germantown, or Guilford Court House were battles,' says Paul Lockhart, a professor of history at Wright University and author of a Bunker Hill book, 'The Whites of Their Eyes," which came out in 2011. "But they can say that Gettysburg,D-Day, and Bunker Hill were battles.' Bunker Hill, Lockhart adds, 'is the great American battle, if there is such a thing.' Much of the world looks to the Battles of Lexington and Concord, fought in Massachusetts on April 19, 1775, as the start of the American Revolution. But Philbrick, Lockhart and others cite Bunker Hill and June 17 as the real beginning, the first time British and rebel forces faced off in sustained conflict over a specific piece of territory. Bunker Hill was an early showcase for two long-running themes in American history — improvisation and how an inspired band of militias could hold their own against an army of professionals. 'It was a horrific bloodletting, and provided the British high command with proof that the Americans were going to be a lot more difficult to subdue than had been hoped,' says the Pulitzer Prize-winning historian Rick Atkinson, whose second volume of a planned trilogy on the Revolution, 'The Fate of the Day,' was published in April. The battle was born in part out of error; rebels were seeking to hold off a possible British attack by fortifying Bunker Hill, a 110-foot-high (34-meter-high) peak in Charlestown across the Charles River from British-occupied Boston. But for reasons still unclear, they instead armed a smaller and more vulnerable ridge known as Breed's Hill, 'within cannon shot of Boston,' Philbrick says. "The British felt they had no choice but to attack and seize the American fort.' Abigail Adams, wife of future President John Adams, and son John Quincy Adams, also a future president, were among thousands in the Boston area who looked on from rooftops, steeples and trees as the two sides fought with primal rage. A British officer would write home about the 'shocking carnage' left behind, a sight 'that never will be erased out of my mind 'till the day of my death.' The rebels were often undisciplined and disorganized and they were running out of gunpowder. The battle ended with them in retreat, but not before the British had lost more than 200 soldiers and sustained more than 1,000 casualties, compared to some 450 colonial casualties and the destruction of hundreds of homes, businesses and other buildings in Charlestown. Bunker Hill would become characteristic of so much of the Revolutionary War: a technical defeat that was a victory because the British needed to win decisively and the rebels needed only not to lose decisively. 'Nobody now entertains a doubt but that we are able to cope with the whole force of Great Britain, if we are but willing to exert ourselves,' Thomas Jefferson wrote to a friend in early July. 'As our enemies have found we can reason like men, now let us show them we can fight like men also.'
