Women don’t need Equal Rights Amendment either Re: “Women don’t need federal affirmative action programs,” May 19
Diana Furchtgott-Roth chalked up male-female pay differences primarily to the choices women make, especially on parenting. The research allegedly compared incomes of men and women who were both working and childless, controlling for the effect of parental status.
But her article did get me thinking about how the logical extremes of the Equal Rights Amendment probably prevented its passage. If we applied the same child custody and support standards against women as we now do against men, not only would many divorced women lose custody of the children they gave birth to, but they would have to pay child support on top of that, adding insult to injury.
Divorced mothers have a strong advantage over divorced fathers in matters of custody and retaining the family home. The ERA would have made that advantage illegal. Pay differences are easy to see. The cultural value of children staying with their mother is not.
Christopher Marsh
Alexandria
Newt’s comment exposes nation’s subliminal racism
Re: “Newt’s voting idea poses a danger to democracy,” From Readers, May 19
Upon reading R.G. McFadden’s letter, I couldn’t help but be reminded of the subliminal racism and backhanded stereotyping that still exists today.
My concern is Newt Gingrich’s statement that voting eligibility should depend on learning American history. It is not just that this concept “evokes echoes of excluding black and poor white voters,” it gives the impression that all blacks, but only poor whites, are not educated in American history.
Contrary to popular belief, some of us black folks are capable of earning degrees and other determining factors that let the world know that we can actually do more than sing, dance and run.
Donny Slaughter
Oxon Hill
Supreme Court ended praying in public school
Re: “Thank God for the Mr. Hudaks in our lives,” May 19
Gregory Kane writes that “prayer and Bible reading in public schools hurt no one.” Not so. Protestant hegemony in public schools was why the Catholic Church had to create an extensive parochial school system, of which I am a graduate.
The Supreme Court’s wise and proper 1962 and 1963 rulings on school prayer and Bible reading ended that hegemony and made public schools more acceptable to Catholics and other non-Protestants.
Since those rulings, Catholic school enrollment declined by over 60 percent and the vast majority of Catholics became strong supporters of public schools, most of them voting against efforts to divert public funds to religious private schools.
Edd Doerr
President,
Americans for Religious Liberty
Silver Spring
