In many parts of the United States, the government can control a woman’s right to her pregnancy. Now, in Oxford, Alabama, the government can also control a woman’s (or man’s) right to use the bathroom.

An ordinance was recently passed by the Oxford City Council in response to rising concerns over Target’s announcement that they will permit transgender employees and shoppers to use the bathroom they feel most comfortable with. Oxford’s reaction was to enforce the idea that your biological sex supersedes the gender you identify as, practically negating the new rules installed in Oxford’s Target branch.

While “bathroom bills” are not a new addition to this debate, Oxford’s addition of enforced penalties is. Violators of the ordinance could be subjected to a $500 fine or up to six months in jail, excessive punishments when you remember that their only crime, really, is the need to pee.

This also raises the question of how the ordinance will operate – how is someone expected to know when the person in the stall next to them shouldn't be there? This principle relies on the idea that a transgender man or woman is easily identifiable, that we are all born with a radar for detecting when strangers don’t seem to belong.

The strongest arguments in favor of similar legislation appeals to the nation’s sense of fear. Ordinances like the one in Oxford find their basis in the prevention of molestation, pedophilia, and assault and battery, yet, while the defense of the helpless is definitely a noble cause, this promotes the dangerous (and wrong) view that by simply being transgender you should be marked as a criminal. We have to stop relying on the reasoning that says, fundamentally, a transgender woman is no different from a malicious man in a dress.

Another typical pleading phrase might be “think of the children!” A staunch supporter of a “bathroom bill” might ask you if you’d want your daughter to be trapped in a bathroom with a man – disregarding, of course, the fact this is the same treatment you are placing on someone’s transgender daughter.

Even though many of the officials behind the Oxford ordinance claim that their intent was not to discriminate against those who identify as transgender, it is clear that, whether they like it or not, this legislation will become ingrained in the ongoing fight for LGBTQ+ rights in our country. When 80 percent of transgender children and teens are harassed, when the number of transgender homicide victims is at a historic high, they shouldn’t have to worry about something that’s almost thoughtless to everyone else.

It’s impossible, at this stage in the argument, to know whether human rights or uninformed fear will prevail. But it’s our duty as one of the world’s leading nations to not sweat the small stuff. Allowing everyone the right to pee in peace should be a no-brainer, but, instead, we find ourselves asking whether or not respecting someone’s gender identity is the right choice.

Spoiler alert: it always will be.