In his letter to the editor ("Protecting rights," Nov. 24), Michael Karlik blatantly misrepresents my argument in favor of the Stupak amendment by taking a quote completely out of context. I did not argue that the Stupak amendment "is acceptable because abortion is 'morally wrong.'" I didn't even say that public funding of abortion was wrong. I merely argued that if a woman can't afford an abortion, and the federal government gives her a health care subsidy which allows her to pay for her abortion, then the tax dollars of those who morally object to abortion are funding the procedure. I leave it to your conscience whether pro-life people should be coerced into funding a procedure which they consider morally objectionable. Without addressing my argument, Mr. Karlik's letter makes several questionable points about the abortion debate. He states that the Stupak amendment requires women "to play by a separate set of rules from middle- and upper-class women who can afford private plans that cover the operation." The Stupak amendment requires that everyone, no matter which economic bracket they belong to, must pay for their own abortions. The upper-class plays by the same rules, but their larger incomes give them an advantage at the game. The upper-class enjoys the same advantage in paying for food, clothing, and shelter. That's capitalism. Unless we nationalize all these essential commodities, like the Soviet Union did, the rich will always have these advantages. Finally, Mr. Karlik implies that moral opposition to abortion is a "medieval" notion. On the contrary, the abortion debate has taken place for a long time and different sides have held sway during different periods. While abortion was mostly prohibited in the Middle Ages, it was widespread in Ancient Rome. So if opposing abortion is medieval, then Mr. Karlik's position is ancient.
George Pisano\nCLAS II
Read More
UNIVERSITY GUIDES LEADERSHIP: We stand behind our commitment to sharing history
By Davis Taliaferro , Jack Giese and Ella Sher | 2 hours agoWe are announcing our return to giving historical tours independent of the University administration.
EDITORIAL: Repressive classroom agendas cost students their education
By Editorial Board | YesterdayReligiously-oriented education is one of the most obvious manifestations of this regional specificity and one of the greatest drivers of censorship.
KURTZWEIL: The truth about nuclear power in Northern Virginia
By Paul Kurtzweil | November 24, 2024Youngkin is trying to entice data centers to move to Northern Virginia for his own political gain, and presenting this to the taxpayer as a service to the citizen is deceiving.
