Mr. Cox recently wrote an opinion piece to Colorado Community Media about a post that I made on my social media page.

One should note that the introductory paragraph on my page states “I love this county and I love our community, and I am honored to represent Douglas County HD 39!”

I take very seriously my obligations to represent the values of my community while serving on the state legislature. I’ve always been forthcoming about my values as a Christian, which are in alignment with the Judeo Christian values that our country was founded on as stated in the Declaration of Independence: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

My worldview is very much shaped by these values, and as such I question why there’s a push to elevate a particular group of people - those in the LGBTQ community - over others. In particular, why are we choosing to elevate a particular attribute of a group versus the accomplishments of individuals? The former appears to be in direct contradiction to the principles on which our country was founded, which elevates the rights and liberties of individuals, not groups. 

On my social media page, I expressed an opinion that I would prefer that Pride Month be an expression of Pride for our veterans and military. Mr. Cox chose to view that as disrespectful, which is unfortunate.

I can’t control how others interpret my words, nor will I try to deduce Mr. Cox’s motivations for suggesting that I aim to divide our community.

I welcome this opportunity to clarify for our community that I do not hate anyone. That is antithetical to my worldview as a Christian, one in which Jesus teaches us to love everyone.

In my role as a state house representative, I have stood for the rights of all women, parents and children in various bills that I have written and voted on. I certainly don’t require that my constituents on whose behalf I’m representing meet a particular moral code or fit into a specific identity group. That would be unconstitutional and frankly, immoral.

Mr. Cox took offense to me calling out that the rainbow flag is being used by groomers. His ire, however, is seriously misplaced. He should be angry at the naked men prancing in our public places under that flag. Not at me for calling out that it is being done. But more importantly, he missed the point entirely. Something that is all too common these days; if he wants unity, then he should join all of us under the American flag, one that has been a beacon of freedom (not compulsion; not word police; not internet gestapo) for hundreds of years. We should rally under that one flag period.

We should be e pluribus unum provided we all still believe in those basic things that made us great to begin with. That there are certain truths that are self-evident and that from them come rights from our creator that no one can can take. But instead, we’re supposed to pander to various different tribes of flags, an ever growing number.

We must pledge our allegiance, even in violation of our conscience, lest we be derided in public as an ignorant hater; or otherwise shamed and booed back into compliance. Bullying is not how freedom is supposed to work. Mr. Cox may try to claim that it is he who has experienced bullying over the years, and maybe that is so, but all the more reason that he should have known to be careful with his assumptions and mindful of his real enemy.

But moreover, the Herald certainly should have been; the editor should have recognized that the editorial was not simply fair commentary but an unfair and misguided attack, an attack that was lent credence to by printing. If ever given the chance to discuss this respectfully with Mr. Cox, I would imagine that he and I would fundamentally disagree on what is best and what is intended by God for our lives, but both of us should be able to agree on which flag stands for freedom, and you should also be able to agree on who the groomers are that are now openly pushing for our kids. If you could agree on that, then you could agree on who he is really offended by.

Mr. Cox suggests that not choosing to celebrate an identity group is akin to disrespecting said group. This is an incoherent argument. I welcome constructive feedback on my viewpoints, and strive to grow intellectually and emotionally in all interactions with constituents, community members, and fellow legislators. Lying about my intentions is not productive, and I wish Mr. Cox well in his future endeavors to communicate in a convincing, effective manner.

Brandi Bradley is the representatve for House District 39.