isn’t that difficult, and it should be done by every candidate for Fairhope City Council. I hope to be among the first of us to make known my opinion of Mrs. Watson.
Her name came to my attention soon after the race began, always in negative terms. Instinctively, my sympathies leaned towards her critics. I am by nature libertarian, anti-authoritarian, and adamantly free-speech. I prepared this film clip as an example of what I thought of whenever I heard her name. I was excited to have a chance to reintroduce the long lost word “comstockery“.
Next I stumbled upon this article written by Mrs. Watson. I was taken aback when I read it, and I still consider that article to be wicked and cruel.
I first began to have second thoughts about her when someone commented on my blog –
K
Mr. Gammon is being endorsed by moms4liberty. Do you believe someone that shares those values should be given a position to make decisions about what is available in our library?
Now this comment from “K” raised my eyebrow. The phrase “shares those values” in particular stood out as a fine example of guilt by association. (Please click on that link just to see wikipedia’s example – “My opponent for office just received an endorsement from the Puppy Haters Association. Is that the sort of person you would want to vote for?”)
Then my wife began to show me other, more vitriolic attacks, directed not just at Mrs. Watson, but against me as well. Among other things, I was accused of being a “flat earth, maga jerk”, or something similar. These bullying tactics only made me more sympathetic to this woman from California.
Finally, I spoke to Rebecca Watson. It was a perfunctory call, to discuss the logistics of the upcoming forum at the First Baptist Church. As we were about to hang up, she asked me, “Do you know who I am?” This was asked, not in an entitled, Reese Witherspoony way, but rather as a curious “How is it possible that you are running for City Council and you’ve never heard of me”. I told her that I had some understanding that she was associated with a group called “Moms For Liberty“, about whom I knew very little. She said that she had left that group and had joined (or founded) a new group called “Faith something-or-other“. (I pause here to note that I did check out Moms For Liberty’s website today for the first time, and they do show a woman named “Rebecca” as the head of the Baldwin County Chapter, so she ought to get that fixed). If I sound like I don’t care about these groups, it’s because I really don’t care about these groups. They are all the Puppy Haters Association to me and I am vehemently opposed to guilt by association.
Mrs. Watson and I continued to talk for another 45 minutes and she explained her positions regarding not just the availability to children of books which she considers inappropriate, but the larger issue of the indoctrination of children. As I listened, I thought that her remarks were not that different from comments I hear every time I go out knocking on doors or talk to my own neighbors. Those conversations always seem to go like this –
Me – “What do you think about the library?”
Neighbor – “I think that everyone should have access to as much information as possible. I am opposed to censorship of any kind… but… children are a special case.”
The next day I pulled down from our own bookshelf this book –
It is an interesting book, written in 1875. This was a generation before the Single Tax Colonists, but the ideas were similar – various Utopian theories were being tested at the time all over the country. Charles Nordhoff, the author of my book, visited several of these communitarian societies and described, with a sympathetic eye, what he saw there. I searched for “children” in the index, and on page 281, I read this (the underlining is from the previous owner) –
“…though I should grieve to see in the eyes of my own little ones an expression which I thought I saw in the Oneida children, difficult to describe – perhaps I might say a lack of buoyancy, or confidence and gladness.”
To me this sounded just like Rebecca Watson on the phone the night before, describing the kids she saw in California. It is a real thing, I’ve seen it, and it needs to be discussed. You may find this kind of talk abhorrent, but it’s a stretch to call it hateful. On this point, I agree with Mrs. Watson 100%.
You don’t have to agree with Rebecca Watson, but you do have to respect and defend her right to voice her opinion.
If the only counter arguments you can make against her are guilt by association, ad hominem attacks, mob appeal, argument from authority, ugly cartoons, and name-calling, you will only succeed in driving more people like me away from our natural dislike for her position, and towards defending it.
Leave a Reply