Do you think the sentence of a convicted murderer should have anything to do with the perpetrator's race?

I think most civilized people would answer "NO!"

Do you think the race of the victim in a murder case should have any bearing on the sentence of the convicted murderer?

Again, I think most civilized people would answer unequivocally and absolutely "NO!"

But that's not what the governor of Maryland believes.

Parris N. Glendening is practicing a new form of racism in suspending all executions in the state because, in his eyes, too many of those set to die are black killers of white victims.

I'm not kidding.

And Maryland's governor is the second, preceded by Illinois Gov. George Ryan, to make such an unsound, unwise, racist and unconstitutional decision.

In Glendening's case, he decided to stop all further scheduled executions in his state after reviewing the case of Eugene Baker, 44, who murdered a woman in front of her grandchildren during a purse-snatching in 1991.

Glendening doesn't contend Baker is innocent. He doesn't maintain that there were any unusual or mitigating circumstances involved in the crime that should be considered. In fact, Glendening is not citing any of the facts of the case itself to make his determination about suspending Baker's execution for a decade-old crime. Instead, he is issuing a sweeping challenge to all death-penalty cases based on his misreading and wrong-headed analysis of statistics.

In fact, it's pure politics. Because Glendening feels powerless to use all of his government powers to improve in any meaningful ways the lives of black voters in his state, this shameful decision can only be interpreted as a disgraceful attempt to buy votes with pure political power.

The idea that the race of the victim should have any bearing on the sentence in a capital crime is a new strategy used by anti-death-penalty advocates and the new racists to twist statistics to suit their agenda.

Here are some statistics they will not cite in their propaganda campaign:

• Black-on-white crimes are almost nine times as frequent as white-on-black crimes, according to U.S. government figures.

• In 1994, blacks committed more than 1.1 million violent crimes against whites, while whites committed 135,360 violent crimes against blacks, according to the Justice Department's National Crime Victimization Study.

• Violent white felons choose black victims for fewer than 3 percent of attacks, whereas violent black felons choose white victims about 56 percent of the time.

• Statistically, a black is 56 times more likely to attack a white than vice versa.

• The pool of potential victims for any murderer is between 86 percent and 88 percent white and only 12 to 14 percent black, thus a high discrepancy in the racial breakdown of victims should be expected.

In America, we believe – or are supposed to believe – in equal protection under the law. That constitutional provision applies to every individual in the country. So, it is patently immoral and illegal to decide to factor into a criminal sentence the race of the perpetrator. It's just as racist to factor in the race of the victim.

Judges, juries and governors reviewing capital cases are supposed to examine the facts of the case and base their decisions on the law. There is simply no justification for Glendening's ruling. It's an example of the distinctly un-American concept of the rule of men, not the uniquely American concept of the rule of law.

Glendening and supporters of his reasoning begin with the assumption that America is a hopelessly racist nation – one that would not think twice of putting innocent black men to death for crimes against whites. When they can't find the evidence of these falsely accused blacks, they seek to overthrow the entire system of jurisprudence based on selective use of statistics.

In America, we don't believe in group rights. We believe in individual rights. Either it doesn't matter what someone's skin color is or it does. To non-racists like me, it doesn't matter. To the new racists like Glendening, it not only matters, it matters more than the facts, the law and it matters more than common sense.