TO THE EDITOR:

We were impressed by the editorial requesting an explanation for the allocation of insurance funds (“Explain abortion money,” Aug. 30) and disappointed that UNC has not made this information more readily available.

In response to the letter to the editor, “Abortion coverage needed in student insurance policy” (Aug. 30), we wish to answer their question: “Why should abortion, a legal and common medical procedure, be treated differently?”

“Legal and common” does not define just. Abortion is a serious and contentious issue. We, along with many of our fellow students, believe that abortion is the direct killing of innocent human life and is harmful to women. We do not want our money funding this procedure. Being women ourselves, we do not wish to undermine the rights of women.

However, it is unjust for women’s reproductive rights to trump the inalienable right to life of each human being.

Hopefully, this answers the rhetorical questions in the members of NARAL’s letter (“Abortion coverage should be included in UNC plan,” Sept. 2). The treatments they referenced kill no one. Also, there is no Hyde Amendment banning the use of federal funding for said treatments.

Students should have a voice and the ability to choose to opt out of a policy which directly contradicts their consciences. We are grateful for our university setting, wherein we can organize and protest against policies we object to.

Carrie Faur
Christina Geradts
Carolina Students for Life