North Carolina Newspapers is powered by Chronam.
10The Dally Tar HeelMonday, April 3, 1989
ullj? Iatlg afar jHl
97th year of editorial freedom
Sharon Kebschull, Editor
VILUMAT XGGKRT, ManagingEditor
LOUIS BlSSETTE, Editorial Page Editor MARY Jo DUNNINGTON, Editorial Page Editor
JUSTIN McGuiRE, University Editor JENNY CLONINGER, University Editor
TAMMY BLACKARD, State and National Editor CHARLES BrITTAIN, Q'ty Editor
Erik Dale Flippo, Business Editor Dave Glenn, Sports Editor
CARA BONNETT, Arts and Features Editor JAMES BENTON, Omnibus Editor
JvUaCoON, News Editor DAVID SUROWIECKI, Photography Editor
Kelly Thompson, Design Editor
Make Carolina Inn compete
The recent financial difficulties of
the Carolina Inn have left UNC
administrators and Carolina Inn
employees searching for a solution,
unable to agree on the future of the
inn. While the University may be
unwilling to relinquish control of the
inn, the best way to ensure it continues
to function is to allow private mam
nagement contractors to run the
The Carolina Inn, which made a
profit of $500,000 as recently as 1983
84, is predicted to lose $110,000 this
year. The problem stems from the
relatively high wages the hotel pays
Because the inn is subject to state
salary and purchasing regulations, its
wages are much higher than other
hotels in the Chapel Hill area. In order
to compete, the inn must be free of
state salary regulations.
The average wage at the Carolina
Inn is almost $2 per hour higher than
those of comparable hotels in the area.
Sales have risen in the last few years
and revenues are expected to reach an
all time high of $4 million this year,
but over 60 percent of this revenue will
go towards paying wages. A privately
managed Carolina Inn could be more
competetive because it would be
exempt from state salary standards.
The University currently owns the
Carolina Inn, so all its employees are
state employees, even though the hotel
is self-supporting. This is an unfair
disadvantage to the inn, which is
competing in an area in which hotel
space has doubled in the last six years.
SomS;7of the employees fear that
private management would mean that
the 98 full-time employees would lose
their jobs, but this is preventable. They
would undoubtedly be forced to take
a pay cut, but it is unlikely that they
would all lose their jobs. In addition,
UNC officials have indicated the
employees could be reassigned to other
The Carolina Inn employees are
already among the lowest paid state
employees, and they work very hard
to keep the inn a pleasant place for
visitors to stay. But their salaries must
be compared to other hotel employees,
not all state employees. If the Univer
sity does not take action soon, the inn
could go out of business, forcing its
employees out of their jobs.
The Carolina Inn faces other prob
lems as well. Some of the rooms in
the 65-year-old inn lack modern
amenities, and other areas need
renovating. If a private company does
not take over, UNC would have to
pay for the needed work, which
amounts to $6.5 million. UNC officials
have said they will raise $2 million
through fundraisers. But the Univer
sity would still be forced to pay $4.5
million for something that has nothing
to do with academics.
Opponents of a privately managed
Carolina Inn fear it would take
something away from the charm of the
Chapel Hill landmark. But these
concerns are premature. By keeping
many of the same employees and
providing the needed renovations, a
privately owned inn could maintain
the charm and improve the accomo
dations of the inn. Chris Landgraff
Plotting women in their place
Women are an integral part of this
University, comprising a large major
ity of the student body. Women do
not, however, fill an acceptable
number of professorships or other
faculty positions which promise
advancement, a situation which the
Faculty Council addressed at its
meeting last Friday.
A report presented to the council
showed that women fill only a few of
the high-level administrative and
academic jobs, with little promise that
the situation will be rectified soon. Of
the University's 841 professorships,
only 9 percent are female. Five of the
University's 119 distinguished profes
sorships are women. In 1978, 16.5
percent of the faculty was female; by
last year that number had only grown
to 19.8 percent.
The most disturbing statistic, how
ever, is that women hold a mere 14
percent of the positions which even
tually lead to tenure or advancement.
Most female faculty members serve in
jobs which offer almost no career
advancement: of the University's 301
non-tenure faculty positions, nearly
half of which are filled by women. As
long as UNC continues such hiring and
job placement practices, men will
continue to hold most of the profes
sorships, and the male-female faculty
Everyday at 3:30, the various editors of
The Daily Tar Heel get together to decide
what goes in the paper the next day. Because
we are a student newspaper, most of our
front page articles are University-related,
and the University editors Jenny
Cloningcr and myself help the editor
decide which stories will be on the front
and which will be inside. This is an
important decision which we base on a
number of criteria.
So when readers write in to tell us a story
shouldn't have been on the front page or
call and demand that an event they are
sponsoring should be a front page story,
we get a little frustrated. To us, it's like
they're trying to do our jobs for us. If we
tried to tell these people how to run their
groups or events, they probably wouldn't
In the first place, when we talk to people
on the phone we have no way of knowing
what will go on the front page in three days.
Those decisions are made only the day
before. And more importantly, we feel we
are qualified to judge what is important"
enough for the front page on a given day,
because we know the University pretty well.
ratio will improve as little in the next
decade as it has in the one past.
The University could argue in its
defense that one-third of all open
faculty positions in the past four years
were given to women. The University
even ranked second among 19 . peer
institutions in naming women to
assistant professorships. A female
candidate is being considered for dean
of the law school, and, if selected, she
would be the first in the school's
history to serve in that capacity.
UNC also could claim the difficulty
of finding experienced female candi
dates for its top-level jobs. However,
with so few women being groomed for
promotion internally, the University
cannot say it is doing its part to resolve
this problem. The law school, for
example, is breaking tradition to
search for a new dean, looking beyond
its own faculty for candidates.
The committee made several recom
mendations which the University
would be wise to follow. These include
emphasizing the hiring of female
minorities and ensuring that women
serve on committees which consider
hiring and promotions for faculty
positions. More importantly, the
University should be willing to put
women on the fast track, so they can
finally begin to earn the place they
deserve. David Starnes
the last word
It's not that we don't want people to bring
things to our attention we certainly do.
Without people bringing news items to our
attention, we'd be lost. But let me explain
briefly how we decide what is a front page
aNewsworthiness: We decide which
stories are the most relevant and important
to students and to the University commun
ity in general. A story about a proposed
fee increase or a student being brought up
on charges of a Campus Code violation will
almost definitely be on the front page
a Timeliness: If it's a slow news day,
something might make the front page even
if if usually wouldn't. On the other hand,
if there's a lot going on one day, something
that is ordinarily a front page story, might
make page four.
And please don't try to convince us by
telling us what kind of play another
newspaper gave the story we are our
own newspaper and have different prior
ities. If you have a gripe about story
placement, call the editor, because it's
ultimately her decision, but realize that she
gave us our jobs because she trusts our news
. judgment. Justin McGuire
Circumstances critical in making decision
To the editor:
In the past few weeks, during the recent
explosion of abortion debates on the UNC
campus, IVe been reading the lettters to
the editor and any other articles The Daily
Tar Heel has published on the subject, and
IVe been growing more and more dissat
isfied.' I was unable to attend the
Weddington-Schlafly debate last Thursday
night, and while I wish I could have been
there to hear what was said, I imagine that
I probably would have sat there feeling
helplessly frustrated at the important
aspects that were being glossed over or
ignored completely (as is the case in all.
the other panels or debates IVe witnessed).
There have been two distinct sides
presented to us: one that says life begins
at conception, and therefore we have no
right to choose to end it, and one that
says a woman should decide for herself
whether to give birth, and should she
decide not to, then the government should
allow her that choice. Neither of these
opinions say anything about the circum
stances of the pregnancy in their argu
ments, and to me, that seems a key issue.
In Craig Tidwell's letter "Pick adoption,
not abortion" (March 31), he writes "The
pro-abortion movement is selfish! It says
that since it is not convenient, not wanted,
unplanned, kill it!" Craig, that's not all the
movement supports. When a 14-year-old
friend of mine was raped a few years ago
by her father and became pregnant, she
was lucky enough to be able to abort
legally. You call it murder; I call it self
defense. What about the case of a fetus being
diagnosed as having Down's Syndrome?
The most common result of that discovery
is an abortion. We are saving the unborn
child from a brief, miserable life. If
pregnancy is the result of either a rape or
an accident, and the circumstances sur
rounding birth and infancy are obviously
going to be detrimental to the child's health
and well-being, then an abortion in this
case is also saving the unborn child from
a miserable life.
I assure you that I don't support :
abortion as a form of general birth control
pregnancy control makes much more
sense). There will always be women who
abuse their right to choose abortion, and
who carelessly become pregnant then
decide they "don't want to mess with a
child right now," and I see that as a stupid
waste of human potential (especially when
the same women routinely choose abortion
over the much simpler and safer birth
pregnancy control). My opinion used to
be, "if you're responsible enough to have
sex, then you're responsible enough to
either prevent pregnancy or take care of
any resulting child," but since the incident
of the friend I mentioned earlier, IVe had
to modify that opinion. It wasn't that she
was responsible enough to have sex and
get pregnant; her father was irresponsible
enough to rape her. I refuse to support
any group that would try to make it illegal
for her to have an abortion safely. You
can't convince me that her life (emotionally:
as well as nhvsicallvl wouldn't be ruined
by giving birth, or that any child resulting
from such a union would have a worth
while life. ,
In all rape cases I feel the same way.
There is no way, however, of making a
law that says, "abortions will be illegal ,
unless giving birth will endanger the. .
mother's life, or if the pregnancy was
caused by rape." For how is a rapist -
uwiiiiu; n atio-ugw 111a.11 111 a kxcli ev o-iiwjr ;
A boyfriend? A priest? A husband? A,v
father? How can a woman prove she was ,
raped? And a mother's stability and health . ,
are very important who can know better
than she can whether she's prepared
(psychologically or physically) to be a ,
i o ti .-Li., i .1
momcrx now can 11 pussiuiy oc inc tuuii ,
decision for her to give birth or not? . ,
If the law ever declares abortion illegal,
it seems likely that there will be fewer
unborn children killed. It's also unavoid-i ;
able that if this happens, there will be morev
women killed, alone with their unborn. .
14tan inlAn tViAvr t t Vimrfl okrtrtmnc
Vllliuiwu, wiivit inwjr .iy lj nave ouuiuuiw. .
under illegal, unsanitary and unsafe.'
conditions. Legalized abortion is the way ,
our society can protect a larger portion. v
of the population, and though it will always.
be seen by some as murder, I sincerely . .
believe it is the lesser of two evils.
To the editor:
After reading Craig Tidwell's
histrionic cry for "Adoption,
not abortion" (March 3 1), I felt
compelled to respond. Mr.
Tidwell's hysterical, and com
pletely erroneous, attack on the
National Organization of
Women shows a rather fright
ening lack of reason on his part.
The term "pro-choice" is not
synonymous with the term
"pro-abortion." In fact, I don't
know of a single person who
Ljaims to be pro-abortion.
Rather than the pro-choicers
"missing the whole point of the
matter," I believe it is Mr.
Tidwell who has missed the '
point. ; -
I wholeheartedly agree that
the attitude of using abortion
as a solution for one's careless
ness is wrong. However, no
person has the right to tell
another person that they must,
by law, complete an undesired
pregnancy. Mr. Tidwell speaks
of the "abortion industry" that
is "out to make money." He
also suggest that the "brothers
and sisters" of "pro-abortion"
see movies like "Silent Scream"
to graphically see what an
abortion does to a fetus. Per
haps Mr. Tidwell should see a
movie or two about the horrors
of coat-hanger abortions and
what they can do to a women's
body before he canonizes him
self. The billion-dollar "abor
tion industry" will not disap
pear if abortions are made
illegal. It will only go under-
Pro lift .
I1! I'n 1 1
Arti lift, or Afltt choice.? "
ground and become more dan
gerous for the women who
decide, or are forced, to get an
To the editor:
Abortion is a topic that is
extremely controversial and
highly disputed. Many people
have widely varying opinions
concerning the right to life for
unborn babies, a woman's right
to her own body and the actual
justification for abortion on
demand. However, contrary to
popular belief, there are also
many people who haven't yet
decided what they believe
about abortion. Here are some
facts that may be relevant to
Did you know that 4,000
babies are aborted each day in
the United States? Did you
know that each year in North
Carolina 35,000 babies are
aborted? That is equal to the
population of Chapel Hill. Did
you know that Roe. vs. Wade
allowed abortions through the
ninth month of pregnancy? Did
you know that by 14 weeks an
unborn baby's heartbeat and
brainwaves can be measuree
and monitored, through EKGs
and EEGs? Did you know that
A1 XT.i! 1 - r -
vnc rtauonai onierence ore
Abortion concluded (with one1"
dissension) that life begins at-
fertilization? Did you know:
that there are alternatives to '
abortion and assistance for
crisis pregnancies? '
If you were not aware of
uivjv luvijj tuviv liiujr iv iiiuvii '
wkv-A irAii AflV lr,sif nkrtiit VAS-
iiivsiv ;uu vivsu i ivuvw auuui nil .
abortion issue. If you are
interested in the pro-life move
ment, then contact a local pro;
life organization for ways you',
can become involved in saving
lives mothers' and babies'.
I ntorH iccinltnon; Vturltc
Dictating morals removes rightful choice
To the editor:
I am writing this in response to the letter
to the editor from Craig Tidwell ("Pick
adoption, not abortion," March 31). In
that letter he spoke out in favor of adoption
over abortion. I realize that the abortion
issue is a very emotional one. At first
glance, his is a very reasonable thought.
However, while "pro-life" advocates' claim
is that there are two lives to be considered,
and that is true, they always seem to ignore
the mother. Let me offer several points.
The first point has to be the question
of choice. When Ronald Reagan initially
ran for office, he claimed that he would
"take government out of the back pocket
of the American citizen." But, if anything,
what he did during the eight years he was
in office was impose his morals (or those
of the religious right) on everyone. This
nation was founded on the right of freedom
of choice; humans seek options. Neither
Mr. Reagan nor Mr. Bush has ever offered
any choice on the question of abortion.
If given the opportunity, they would dictate
your morals for you on this case; they
would protect us from ourselves. I person
ally believe that American women are
intelligent enough to make their own
Adoptions may be part of the answer,
but certainly it is not the answer. There
are approximately 1 million couples
seeking to adopt a child. There are an
estimated 1.6 million abortions a year. If
there were suddenly no abortions, and
every child were put up for adoption, there
would still be 600,000 children left over.
What happens to those children? Do you
ask people to "take two they're small?"
And the next year, after all of these couples
have adopted their two children, there will
be another 1.6 million children offered for
adoption. Will there be another million
couples ready to adopt them? It does not
look that way.
Statistics show that most couples seeking
adoptions are requesting white males. That
says several things. It says that most people
seeking adoption are white, and the
implication is that they are part of the
middle class. But what happens to the child
born with severe mental retardation or
other birth defects? What happens to the
black child that does not get adopted?
Then, you are right back to the initial
problem which is unwanted children. And
there will be no one, and nothing, there
to help these unwanted children.
Making something illegal has never
stopped a human being from wanting or
getting that thing. Prohibition did not
work. The war on drugs is not working.
Making abortions illegal will not stop
women from getting abortions. The only
difference is that abortionists will be forced
to the dirty "back room" abortion clinics
with staff that may be less than competent,
and conditions that are less than sanitary,
which would place the woman at risk for
infection, disease or worse.
However, I am not saying that abortion
should remain legal because women (and
men) will seek abortions regardless. What
I am suggesting is that lawmakers and the
American people should consider the
woman in this as well, since abortions are
traumatic enough by themselves. Is it fair
or just to force a woman to carry a child
to term that she knows she cannot care
for or support? Is it fair or just to force
a family of four to deal with the financial
and psychological pain when the mother
is told that her child will be born deformed
or retarded and will not live? That is the
The third point is one of an even greater
reality: This country, this planet, will
ultimately support only so many people.
As farmland disappears with shopping
centers and office buildings taking its place,
the thought that technology can continue
to produce an infinite amount of food
Decomes a very naive one. ooiisning
abortion may indeed secure the rights of
unborn children, but it does not by any
means ensure them, or those who cohab-
. . .1 t . "xl I If. TL.
naie on me pianei, wun a goou me. inc
basic problem becomes who takes care '
of these children?
The Reagan administration, and the
Bush administration in its wake, time and
time again, has cut all programs which were
intended to provide this care, programs
which operated on budgets less than the'
cum ui uue D-i uuiiiuci. uii9 au limns na
tion has reduced funding to Planned
Parenthood clinics, has cut funding for
contraception programs, has cut funding'
for nutntion programs tor poor mothersr
on1 trootc fnA ctomnc nrt iAlfai-A oc if '
U11U il VOIO JkUlll J? Ul 1U TV W UJ 11
every person on those rolls is stealing froriT
the government. Further, Mr. Bush has
placed those same restrictions as contin-'
gencies for aid to foreign countries.
It is easy to look down at this from an "
ivory tower and pontificate on what is '
"right and moral, it is especially easy wnen
UlUaC UUlllg lilt lVJUimcnii ai. iiiaika,
who have never had to deal with the trauma '
of carrying a child. If you are an anti:
abortionist, how would you react if you
were put in another person's situation, like
that of a single, pregnant woman with no
job, no family and no support from the
father? What if the pregnant woman were
your sister? You might be glad that a choice
exists. You might be glad that this decision
was not dictated to you by someone sitting
in Washington who does not even know
you or understand why you would make
the decision you did. Given all this, you
might wonder what is truly right and fair.
Research technician '
School of Medicine"