Put right to housing for all to a referendum test

Re: Opening of city’s new emergency shelter

location delayed until February, Jan. 5

It is disturbing to read of the manner in which people who lack money are treated in this country. Most people think we are guided by the “Golden Rule” — roughly “Treat others as you yourself would like to be treated,” the basis of ethics proclaimed in most of the world’s religions in some form. The reality is our governments behave according to an alternate Golden Rule: “Them that has the gold makes the rules.”

The article speaks of delay in making “shelter” available to the homeless. Do you live, or want to live, in a shelter? I don’t. I live in a home, with no desire whatsoever to live in a shelter. That is what I want, and am lucky enough to have. According to the usual Golden Rule, that is what I should wish for others to have. I do, and believe that the vast majority of others agree. So why does everyone not have a home of their own?

At this point, we encounter our form of government. We are told that, unlike some others, it is not authoritarian, but democratic. If indeed we live under democracy, why do we not do what it appears that the vast majority want? Why do we not provide everyone, no matter how poor, with a home of their own?

So I suggest, to show the vast majority do not approve of the manner in which people who lack money are treated and, in the process, to demonstrate that we have, at least, a modicum of democracy, we hold a referendum which asks “Do you want everyone to have a home of their own, where they can live with privacy, free from harassment by others?”

Failure to hold such a referendum will support those who contend that our government is authoritarian rather than democratic.

Ken Ranney, Hillcrest Avenue