This bill bans discrimination, not personal beliefs

The anti-discrimination bill before County Council ("Discrimination Bill Draws Large Crowd," Jan. 16) has nothing to do with personal beliefs on homosexuality, gay marriage, morality or religion. Unfortunately, many people opposed to the bill have made these the issues.

The man who claimed that homosexuality is a "lifestyle that is condemned by God" can still cling to his belief with the passage of the bill. The bill is about discrimination and will not force any church or person to change views.

You may disagree with the beliefs or lifestyles of atheists, blacks, Muslims or many other minorities, but they should not be denied jobs or housing. The same applies to gays. Pittsburgh currently extends these protections to gender orientations and expressions. The county bill would do the same. It is time to stop using discrimination as a club to beat down minorities with whom we disagree.

RAY McGOGNEY
Shaler

Unbalanced report

The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette or Fox News? Hard to tell in your "news story" of the proposed Allegheny County anti-discrimination bill ("Discrimination Bill Draws Large Crowd," Jan. 16). The article began with three paragraphs devoted to the thoughts of a retired military veteran who "braved" the cold to speak out on his belief that homosexuality is "condemned by God." And one anti-gay interviewee wasn't enough for the PG; in the next paragraph, the reporter found a second person who said God condemns homosexual behavior.

Only when the article jumped to Page 3 did the PG run comments from a supporter of the lesbian and gay community, the Rev. Janet Edwards. Then, amazingly, without a quote from a single lesbian or gay activist, the article went right back to comments from a third person opposing the anti-discrimination bill -- a former Christian missionary in Ethiopia -- who believes gay people face no discrimination.

As a journalist, I am sick of seeing articles like this touted as "balanced" reporting, when in fact they are deeply biased. I'm surprised the Post-Gazette didn't open its coverage of Barack Obama's historic inauguration with the opinion of the grand wizard of the KKK.

PAULA MARTINAC
Park Place

Column contrasts

Although I normally find myself in disagreement with the views expressed by the Post-Gazette editorial staff, I must compliment them on trying to bring some semblance of balance to their editorial content. A weekly column by Charles Krauthammer is a refreshing offset to the liberal drivel of the likes of Paul Krugman. The Jan. 17 opposing columns by Mr. Krauthammer ("Even Obama Seems to Understand How Much Bush Got Right") and Mr. Krugman ("Forgive and Forget? Obama Is Obliged to Investigate the Bush Administration") quite clearly illustrate this point.

Mr. Krauthammer rightly points out that now that Mr. Obama must get down to the job of governing, as opposed to campaigning, he will benefit from a number of the Bush administration's tough decisions that have been so maligned by the liberal media.

In contrast Mr. Krugman continues his mean-spirited attack on Mr. Bush and advocates wasting time and money to pursue the prosecution of well-meaning public servants. This is just another example of a leftist academic pursuing a totally irrelevant agenda out of touch with the real world. It's too bad he has never had the opportunity to hold a real job like the rest of us.

GARY ZENTNER
Mt. Lebanon

Richer for all

When I cook a meal and invite family, most are polite enough to thank me and praise my "good cooking." But more often than not, many will mention the gravy. I might believe those remarks, for the gravy is hearty and rich in flavor and deep in color.

And now, with the inauguration of Barack Obama, I believe that our dark-skinned Americans have fully thrown themselves into our American "melting pot" to finally make it the truly rich and hearty gravy that we never had before this time. I am now ready to invite the whole world to any feast we offer.

If you do not like "gravy" (and you know who you are) come anyway. You will only be missing the best part of the meal. God bless us all and God bless America.

JAMES BUTLER
Whitehall

The primary force

The inauguration of Barack Obama has been hailed as a new addition to the great history of the United States. Yet, the racial implication of his presidency seems to be the primary force driving this enormous enthusiasm that has swept our nation during this election. Everyone, black and white, is expected to rejoice the day that a black man is sworn in as president, but only truly as a consideration of the color of his skin.

Furthermore, the distinction of his white ancestry is so easily overlooked as the glory of electing a black president becomes an irresistible triumph for civil rights, the black community and apparently the entire country. It proves that in this nation, it is both noteworthy and advantageous to be black, and if you are white, your interests take a backseat to the "priority of the minority."

ANTHONY CATANIA
Penn Hills

Not so different

In her Jan. 19 letter "In Name Only," Diane Guiliano says female genital cutting is not comparable to male circumcision because more tissue is taken from the female, because the child is old enough to understand and because it is done by family members with common instruments and infection and death can result. What if we could change all that?

Imagine if we could go to areas of the world where female genital cutting is practiced and build clean clinics staffed with professionals. Imagine if we could convince the parents to bring their girls in when they are babies instead of doing the procedure on older children. And if we could get them to agree to cut off only a bit of tissue, nothing important to sexual function, maybe just the labia and/or clitoral hood. And if we could get them to abandon infibulation. Problem solved! Baby girls, operated on by professionals in a sterile setting, having only a little bit of their genitals cut away, and very few of them suffering infection or death. This should be perfectly acceptable!

What's that? It isn't? You mean it is wrong to cut off any part of the genitals of a girl, even in a clinical setting, even if she is very young? Oh, I know, we just need to change one more thing in this scenario. Make the baby a boy. Ah, there we go. Now the genital cutting is perfectly acceptable -- because boys don't have human rights.

JENNIFER PETRUS
Regent Square

We welcome your letters. Please include your name, address and phone number, and send to Letters to the Editor, 34 Blvd. of the Allies, Pittsburgh 15222. E-mail letters to letters@post-gazette.com or fax to 412-263-2014. Letters should be 250 words or less, original and exclusive to the Post-Gazette. All letters are subject to editing for length, clarity and accuracy and will be verified before being published.