Discrimination shouldn’t be state-sanctioned
Imagine if House Bill 757 would write into state law that a religious person is not required to perform an interracial marriage. How about if House Bill 757 would write into law that a religious person, code for Christian, is not required to provide restaurant service for a Muslim?
Why is it that discriminatory beliefs fostered by religion should be sanctioned by the state? There are sects of religious beliefs today that would find both concepts above justified within their faith. Let’s just insert any belief that can be held religiously into the underlined part of the sentences. In fact, why not have House bill 757 write into state law that any religious person is not required to do anything that would disregard and disrespect another based on religious belief and get the whole process over with?
After all, people’s beliefs trump all, right?
JEFF CATHRALL, ATLANTA
Classroom racism study seems incomplete
In reference to (“Racial concerns over discipline,” News, Feb. 8), I have a few comments and questions. The gist of the article is there is a “wide” racial disparity in public school suspensions and expulsions where black children are suspended and expelled at higher rates and the only reason is race and implying the teachers are bigots or racists. Were any other factors other than race considered, such as out-of-wedlock births or children raised in single-parent households? With 71 percent of black children born out of wedlock and 67 percent of black children raised by single parents, I would think this would lead to a cause/effect of children misbehaving and being suspended or expelled at higher rates. Is there any data suggesting white teachers suspend or expel black children at higher rates? None was presented. Is there any data on if boys are suspended or expelled at higher rates, suggesting sexism by the teachers?
AL COOPER, ATLANTA
