Argumentative Analysis

“Texas’s new strict legislation is already forcing women to leave the state in order to receive medical services in neighboring states more sympathetic to their desires to obtain an abortion (Hagle).” This is causing many problems for expectant mothers, especially those who have preexisting genetic medical conditions. Many time a mother may have some type of illness that can be given to a fetus during pregnancy. Sometimes these issues are seen during a routine ultrasound and sometimes there are not noticed until the time of birth. This is causing woman who live in the state of Texas to have to cross state lines when they find out something is wrong with their baby and choose to terminate the pregnancy.

The topic of reproductive rights surrounding women in Texas has been a hot buttoned issue since the closing of many reproductive centers across the state. Recently damaging abortion restrictions were passed and therefor encroach on women’s reproductive rights even more by decreasing access to abortion care. Texas’ 84th Legislature, both passed HB 3994 as a law and had it Governor Abbott make it effective with his signature on July 8, or this year. This law complicates access to abortion services for mistreated and neglected minors and for those who do not possess specific identification cards in Texas.

have been organizing and lobbying local, state and federal government to restrict abortion. Not only that, but they have also lobbied evangelical voters to gain support. That puts politicians in a tight spot, either work against abortion or leave politics. (1) So far, 18 states require abortion procedures done at hospitals, and Wisconsin requires it done no closer than 30 minutes away from a

Texas has a long history of conflict with the federal government over laws and policies, particularly when dealing with environmental, social, and educational issues. Texas has conservative right-wing views and has been in conflict more often with the federal government since President Obama has been in office. The dilemma generally arises from a clash in opposing political and social views. One major issue that has arisen in over the course of the last two years has been a battle over funding for Planned Parenthood. Although the courts have deemed that this quarrel is not about abortion rights or access to abortion, the truth of the matter is that it really is. Texas leaders are against abortion and are trying to skirt federal law that allows abortion by imposing their personal agenda opposing abortion or anything that seemingly supports abortion on the Texas people. The problem is that in the midst of this chaos, low-income women of Texas are the ones who are suffering through the loss of basic and preventative healthcare.

The section of the law mandates that abortion doctors ought to have registration at a standing hospital in case of an emergency. However, organizations have filed suit against the enactment of the law before it came into action on October 29, 2013, including the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the Center for Reproductive Rights, the American Civil Liberties Union and clinic owners (“American Civil Liberties”). Based on Erik Eckholm’s New York Times article “Judge in Texas Partly Rejects Abortion Law,” once the law was taken into court, Judge Lee Yeakel of United States District Court in Austin, Texas blocked part of the law based on "the act's admitting-privileges provision is without a rational basis and places a substantial obstacle in the path of a woman seeking an abortion of a nonviable fetus.” Although the majority of Texans stands against abortion they still ought to respect women’s reproductive rights.

While the fight to legalize abortion, for reasons other than a mothers health concerns, was won, states such as Texas are now reconsidering the regulations, which go along with such right. In 2004 the State of Texas introduced the Woman’s Right to Know Act, which “requires that all abortions at or after 16 weeks’ gestation be performed in an ambulatory surgical center (ASC)” (Colman, S., & Joyce, T. (2010), p. 775). Roe V Wade’s Supreme Court decision makes it federal law that abortion be legal, therefore the state of Texas cannot make a law specifically prohibiting abortions around this time. However, they can implement acts such as the one discussed above to hinder a women’s access to such rights. By implementing the Woman’s Right to Know Act, the state of Texas is allowing abortion, however it makes access to it within the state of Texas out of reach for the majority of women. In the time following the effect of this law “not one of Texas’s 54 nonhospital abortion providers met the requirements of a surgical center” (Colman, S., & Joyce, T. (2010), p. 775. Following that, a

In the case of Planned Parenthood of Greater Texas v. Abbott (2014), The American Civil Liberties Union, The Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the Center for Reproductive Rights, and a Texas law firm filed a lawsuit in federal court on behalf of several women’s health-care providers in Texas for seeking to enforce their rights and those of patients for declaratory judgment and pertaining to the regulation of surgical abortions and abortion-inducing drugs by enjoining two provisions of the 2013 Texas House Bill No. 2. (Planned Parent Hood v. Abbott, 2014). To many, Planned Parenthood challenges the state of Texas abortion law as it places an unconstitutional restriction on a woman’s right to obtain an abortion. It also

Unlike the government in A Brave New World the United States government does not require anybody to take birth control pills or have an abortion. However, it is still offered to a variety of females. “Pro Life Actions” lets us know that 75.4% of females between the ages fifteen and twenty-nine get abortions once finding out that they are pregnant. This percentage would be higher if it wasn’t for the certain restrictions abortions had. Based on “Religious Tolerance’s” website, a female cannot have an abortion after her first trimester. If she does get an abortion after the first trimester, it is considered to be killing an actual human being. Although abortion clinics are available for all females, most of the females do not know who actually funds these clinics.

At the commencement of her piece, Morris discusses TRAP laws in great detail, mentioning how they’re practically unnoticeable to the American public and how they place multitudinous restrictions on abortion providers. Through her explanation, Morris is able to raise awareness of the issue, which is important because her article was written briefly before the 2016 presidential election, where the matter of abortion would be discussed thoroughly. However, to add on to her statement that TRAP laws are inconsiderate and unjust, Morris relies on the professional insight of Greater Ohio’s Planned Parenthood CEO, Stephanie Kight, who argues that Ohio lawmakers have no concern for what women who require abortions will do, and that

One issue that never seems to find a very good compromise and never ceases to stop

In Texas, a large cultural controversy has resurfaced. State lawmakers want to introduce a new set of guidelines which would essentially limit the availability of abortions to Texan women. This debate is very clearly divided into two opposing sides: pro-life and pro-choice. The pro-life side wants to pass this law, which says that clinics must be held to hospital grade standards and doctors must have admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles of where the abortion takes place. According to the pro-choice side and abortion clinicians themselves, “the regulations [are] expensive, unnecessary and intended to put many [offices] out of business” (nytimes). This case has made it to the U.S. Supreme Court, meaning that

Abortion is a controversial topic that has plagued the country for decades. Even after the 7-2 Supreme Court trial (Roe vs. Wade) made it legal for women to choose to get abortions. This decision was based off the right of privacy coupled with the agreement between the woman and the state. Due to this decision abortion rights vary from state to state, in fact, about 85% of United States counties do not provide abortion services. Even though, abortion is ten times safer than the actual process of giving birth and 68,000 women died from resorting to “back-alley abortions.” Knowing all this, there are still two main groups arguing

Texas continues to fight women’s rights groups for the life of the “unborn child” and has won on many levels. According to the Texas Abortion Laws, Texas includes mandatory ultrasound imaging and parental consent for minors, and women must make at least four visits to a doctor and receive an ultrasound. Women may only receive a third trimester abortion if it is necessary to prevent death or substantial risk of serious impairment to a women’s physical or mental health, or if fetus has severe and irreversible abnormality. Texas considers an illegal abortion if it destroys the vitality or life of child in birth or before (which otherwise would have been born alive); operating a facility without a license, failure to meet Board of Health standards, or failure to make reports to Department of Health; act preformed after pregnancy with intent to cause termination of pregnancy other than for purpose of birth of live fetus or removal

The issue of abortion is notoriously controversial. Since the Supreme Court’s 1992 ruling in Casey v. Planned Parenthood, states have enacted different restrictions on the procedure. These restrictions vary from state to state. Nineteen states currently have laws prohibiting partial-birth abortion, and forty-one states strictly prohibit abortions except in cases of life-endangerment. One particularly incendiary area of abortion law is that of public funding. However, as of this year there are only seventeen states that cover abortion procedures through public funding. In this paper we will discuss federal abortion legislation, while describing the laws and political ideologies of the following states: Texas, California, New

Pregnancy clinics across America are helping numerous individuals everyday. But, federally funded pregnancy clinics have begun to fight for right to deny abortion information to their patients. Activists rallied against the California law that requires all clinics to inform patients of low cost abortion options, which is being argued as to violate their First Amendment right; freedom of speech. The executive director of the East County Pregnancy Care Clinic, Josh McClure, “I don’t want to put up a sign where you can go for an abortion.” Another statement was released, talking about how making a sign stating those points, would be unconstitutional. Crisis Pregnancy Centers are run by people who are “anti-abortion.” These centers known to give