So much for “pro-choice!”

We recently reported that a bill proposed in the student senate at Texas A&M University in College Station would let students choose not to pay the portion of their student fees that funding the school’s Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender Resource Center.  This was in response to some faith-based objections about the use of the monies.

Now the campus newspaper, the Eagle, indicated that the student body president will veto the measure.

Texas A&M student body president John Claybrook has vetoed legislation from the student senate aimed at letting students opt out of funding the Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgendered Resource Center, or other university services, based on religious grounds.

News this week that some student senators had targeted the center thrust the traditionally conservative university into the national spotlight, and Claybrook said it was time to “stop the bleeding.”

“The damage must stop today,” Claybrook wrote in a letter announcing the veto. “Texas A&M students represent our core value of respect exceptionally and I’m very proud of the family at this university. Now, more than ever, is the time to show great resolve and come together, treating each other like the family that we are.”

Claybrook’s veto means that the legislation passed 35-28 on Wednesday will not represent the official opinion of the student body at Texas A&M.

The center, opened in 2007, is a resource and referral center dedicated to providing a safe and affirming location on campus for all students and puts on annual campus-wide events such as Coming Out Week, GLBT Awareness Week, AIDS Awareness Week and others. University officials say approximately 1,200 Aggies utilize the center each semester.

For weeks, the student-led bill had been aimed at defunding the Texas A&M GLBT center, but approximately 24 hours before the final vote, the “GLBT Funding Opt Out Bill” became “The Religious Funding Exemption Bill.” Its scope was broadened, and it did not specifically mention GLBT services.

“Even without the wording that specified particular groups that would be affected in the final version of this bill, the sentiment towards the bill has not changed and has caused great harm to our reputation as a student body and to the students feeling disenfranchised by this bill,” Claybrook said.

Opponents have argued that the bill was discriminatory, alienating and embarrassing for A&M. Proponents said the bill would ensure religious freedoms for all students. Others have called the efforts of the Aggie senators meaningless, as the measure would have faced many hurdles before implementation.

“As of right now I’ve gotten over 1,300 emails in the past 24 hours,” Claybrook told The Eagle. “There’s been a very large negative response and that’s been made pretty clear.”