Laws not gender-neutral

Leonard Pitts (June 25) cites drug enforcement as hardly “race-neutral.” Domestic violence laws are hardly “gender-neutral.” Phyllis Schlafly states in “Violence Against Women Act Abuses Rights of Men” (2006) that 1 million women have obtained unconstitutional restraining orders. Alleging “fear, emotional distress, raised voice, or child abuse,” she leaves him homeless in an “ex-parte hearing,” where he cannot tell his side of the story. Robbers, terrorists, and murderers are afforded due process. Should someone without a history of violence, who argues with a spouse, be denied due process?

Restraining order gamesmanship helps her get the house and the kids. The restraint is not reciprocal as she can stalk him in an attempt to jail him. Studies show that in one-half of all spousal abuse cases the woman is just as likely to be violent.

In my opinion, as in the Zehm and Saruwatari cases and in domestic violence cases, the police respond to malicious lies and brutalize the defendants. Bill Morlin, in “Arrest of teacher still churns” (June 27), shows that Saruwatari was an innocent victim of the admit-no-wrong police state. One is “presumed guilty until found innocent,” and the false reports and smears exact a human toll.

Mike Kraft

Spokane