The Tribune asked the Weaverville Town Council follow-up questions on the proposed LGBTQ ordinance.
Last week, the Tribune told readers about the first discussion of an LGBTQ ordinance at the Weaverville Town Council’s January monthly meeting. The discussion was lead by Weaverville Councilman Patrick Fitzsimmons.
The discussion was eventually tabled until other counties and municipalities in the area moved forward with their own ordinances. The Tribune put the issue upon our Facebook to see what residents of the area had to say about it. Many had questions that were not answered at the monthly meeting. So the Tribune sent the questions to Fitzsimmons for an answer. Here’s what he had to say: Tribune: What prompted the discussion?
Fitzsimmons: We are aware that several other municipalities and counties in the state have passed or are considering ordinances. The discussion at our meeting was to initiate a conversation about the issue.
Tribune: Who would such an ordinance apply to?
Fitzsimmons: No ordinance has been written or proposed as of yet. We are examining what others in our region are considering.
Tribune: Have you seen a need for such an ordinance in the town?
Fitzsimmons: I am not aware of any specific problems.
Tribune: Do you see such an ordinance infringing on other people’s religious rights?
Fitzsimmons: I think Weavervillians would want all of our neighbors afforded equal rights regardless of religious affiliation.
The Tribune sent three follow-up questions to Fitzsimmons: If you are sure all Weavervillians would want all of their neighbors afforded equal rights regardless of religious affiliation or belief, then why the need for the ordinance? Likewise, if you haven’t seen a need for the ordinance, why have one? Is this an instance of what is called “virtue signaling” for the town?
Fitzsimmons did not respond to the email by press time.