Readers write

Questions of candidate’s faith are tainted by hypocrisy
In the article “Faith drives Rick Jackson’s foster care story. How would that inform his policies?” (Oct. 20), I find it concerning that the AJC quotes advocates who worry about the tenets of Rick Jackson’s faith without challenging the validity of those questions.
This article comes just days after several other news outlets used the word “attacks” to describe GOP questions surrounding Michigan U.S. Senate Democratic nominee Abdul El-Sayed’s faith.
To be clear, I think asking El-Sayed if his beliefs as a Muslim would interfere with his ability to follow constitutional law is certainly xenophobic and wrong. But why then would advocates suggest that Rick Jackson’s connection with a private, Christian nonprofit might taint his ability to follow constitutional law in Georgia regarding the LGBTQ+ community?
In the words of El-Sayed, “This is nothing new. This is what they do when they have no message about the real issues in people’s lives.”
TOM KRAUSE, ATLANTA
We need a government that money can’t buy
News reports say Elon Musk ordered a slowdown of the Starlink-StarShield service used by Ukraine to defend against incoming Russian drones, leaving Ukrainian soldiers and civilians at risk. How does a non-elected private citizen interfere on such a scale in a foreign conflict, siding with the Russian aggressor and causing harm to our ally?
This is the same man pumping millions of dollars into Republican coffers to get the government he wants elected and spreading misinformation and invective on his social media platform X against Democratic candidates.
Three days later, Mark Zuckerberg’s Meta suspended the No Kings Instagram account just as nationwide early-voting rallies were starting. The public page went dark, and rally administrators were locked out for several hours. The company claimed a glitch, but No Kings organizers and members of Congress are skeptical.
These two incidents reflect what is at stake in the Nov. 3 election. Do we want these enormously wealthy men to pick the government that will give them access, contracts, and freedom from restriction to do as they want, or do we still want a government of, by and for the people? Our choice.
SUSAN LAUTENBACHER, DUNWOODY