In Your Opinion: Don’t Use Offensive Sign To Divide

By Rob Trautmann.

Growing up, I remember learning from an early age then when someone is seeking attention, they’ll take it in any form, positive or negative.  The infamous political sign on Demott Lane is a perfect example.  An attention-starved person is lashing out and, from the looks of the opinion pieces in the Franklin Reporter, he’s getting exactly what he wants.

To be clear, everyone has a Constitutional right to be an @$$hole. But to quote Dr. Ian Malcom from Jurassic Park, this man is so “preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn’t stop to think if they should.” If the owner of the sign really wanted to push political reform, they would not seek to offend and ostracize, but rather befriend and communicate.  

The problem bigger than the sign itself is people using it to divide further. Hardliners from the right have dug in in supporting it citing the 1st Amendment. There are also those on the left who attempt to paint all Republicans with this same brush. Where is the nuance and individualism here? 

Several years ago, when a local Democratic operative proudly proclaimed at a council meeting that he was a “stone cold racist, and a stone cold Democrat,” it would have been easy to paint the entire party as such, but it was received for what it was, the lonely ramblings of a sad individual.  That’s all this sign is really, a sad, twisted cry for attention from someone just looking to rile people up.

Rather than continuing to debate whether this should or should not be on display, perhaps the discussion should turn to what has driven discourse to this level?  The first part of that discussion should actually be self-reflection to ask when the last time you had an open-minded discussion with someone of different beliefs.  You may surprise yourself.

Your Thoughts

comments