Response To The Abortion Debate

1. Carlson gives evidence of the decline in public discourse by summarizing an incident in which a talk radio host crossed the line of decency by failing to respect a person whose ideas differed from his and his listeners’. Why is it important to maintain civility toward those whom you disagree? You

I was reaffirmed that not knowing whether pro-life or pro-choice is the right answer is necessarily a bad thing and it is good to be open to both. My beliefs were challenged when looking at the issues of organ donation and religion. I believe organ donation needs to be less of a problem and was confused about the extremes some people go to, to live their lives

In the article Pro-Choice Catholics Play an Important Role in the Abortion Debate, Patricia Miller asserts that Pro-Choice Catholics has a representation on the abortion debate. Miller implicates the crowning of Pope Patricia McQuillan and her encyclical, stating that “The Catholic Church's stand on abortion is only 100 years old, is strictly political and has nothing do with religion as taught by Jesus”, the starting lineup for the movement of Pro-Choice Catholics. As the movement continue, Miller incorporated the congressional hearings on a constitutional amendment banning abortion to demonstrates the difference viewpoints of the church in March 1974. Eventually leading up to Archbishop John O’Connor criticizing vice-presidential candidate

I have chosen to write about abortion and its role in the third presidential debate of 2016. To begin, we need to understand abortion and how it is received in the United States before we try to understand how the current candidates addressed abortion. Abortion has been a hot button topic in the United States since Roe vs. Wade in 1973 when criminalizing abortion was considered unconstitutional under the Due Process clause of the 14th amendment. This trial created a nationwide debate on not only the legalization of abortion but also the restrictions and regulations.

Abortion is an extremely controversial topic throughout the nation. There are many reasons about why it should be legal, or why it should not be, and it is fairly equal when it comes to what side people are on. Two political officials talk on behalf of the topic and express their viewpoint and opinions on the touchy issue. They discuss whether abortion should be restricted. U.S. Senator Marco Rubio gives a speech at the Susan B. Anthony List Campaign for Life Gala addressing that abortion is moral, economically, and politically wrong and unjustifiable. Then there is always another side to the argument, which Texas Representative Wendy Davis supports and believes that the new abortion bill should not be signed because of the amounts of unnecessary restrictions being put on people and organizations.

Tannen observes how aggression and quarrelsomeness are often considered the standard in American style discourse, with examples in the press such as the “Mommy Wars” and the “Mammography Wars” (Tannen, para. 3). Our culture is prone to handle intellectual discussion and divergent viewpoints like a championship prize boxing match or major sporting event. The rule is to choose a side or else; those who wish to meditate on both sides are labeled as weak minded, cowardly or without character. Unfortunately, in Stableford’s article, our current president also falls victim to the American predilection for binary thinking, choosing a “side” and unleashing a rash and excessive response in his menacing “NO FEDERAL FUNDS?” tweet against UC Berkeley (Stableford, para.

There is a huge controversy in America, and that is abortion. Abortion has been the hot topic in America for several hundred years. No matter the ruling of the government, there will always be firm believers on each side. Therefore, it has been talked about in countless ways like articles,

Politics has always been a “game “ of rise and fall, power gained and power lost. With this, will come heated discussions between political figures in a struggle to gain power. Such an uncivil political event would be in the 1960’s when the Black Panthers came to power. The black panthers used a violent political action to push their claims against racism(Discover the Networks). This is an extremely uncivil way to accomplish politics. There are many examples of political leaders or figures engaging in uncivil or even hostile debates. Another example would be the debate on May 22, 1856 when Senator Charles Sumner as beaten with a cane by representative Preston Brooks until he was unconscious (Senate Historical Office). This example right here is an extreme case of uncivil debate. Clearly there was a lot of

Yet, the Democrats say that it is better to have safer abortions rather than women getting an unsafe abortion. They say the following “Our goal is to make abortion more rare, not more dangerous. We support contraceptive research, family planning, comprehensive family life education...” ("Democrats Party on Abortion."). Here the quote is saying that the political party wants abortion to be more rare, and safe for the women, and to educate them on other alternatives. They belief that the women have their right to choose what they want to do with the unborn child. On the other hand, the Republicans do not support abortion. Their views on this topic is firm and say that they “will not fund any organization that advocates abortion. They take a firm stance against abortion, because they say that adoption or foster care is another option. Republicans think that being

“Is Paul Ryan helping to support the white supremacist movement”? by Contributor, Elliot D. Cohen emerges in August 19, 2017 in along of Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee questioning suspicion of Paul Ryan late tweet. Ryan has been through the ambiguity and deception that may help to advance the causes

The pro-life speaker kept repeating herself talking about how the baby had a choice and it wasn’t the mother's body. Brooke was respectfully come back and she pushed a new topic in there as much as she could but the other girl was set on talking about the baby and how the mother doesn’t have a choice about if it should live or not. Although we did not get to speak about most of what was written down we all felt very confident at that point. We were strong, and stumped the other team we were debating a few times during the cross examination. Speaker one for pro-choice went first. We had a very strong wrap up at this point. Hailey spoke about what we were fighting. We were fighting for safe abortions. Hailey gave examples of what a self-induced abortion was such has swallowing gun powder. She also gave the other side prices of what is actually cost to have a child. With all this new information we were given to the opposite side, we all were getting excited because we really did feel confident about this debate. After both speakers from each side were finished we had a brief break. At this time we all got together again to speak about what I, the conclusion speaker, would talk

Introduction Throughout the world, many contemporary issues occur in the world of Politics. Democracy is also involved with several contemporary issues. According to Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary (merriam-webster.com 2014), the word democracy is defined as a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or

The Abortion Debate It is a common belief that every women should have the right to a safe abortion, this is included in that everyone has the right to the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health, including access to all medical services. Access to safe abortion and legalization

You sent the text somewhere near the end of the meeting. You weren’t looking at the time. You were looking at the positive pregnancy test, lying flat in you palm. You hated the thing. You didn't know whether to hurl it across the room or nestle it close to your heart. Pregnant. A cluster of cells that would one day be a human were growing inside you. You stared down at the stick, fire burning at the back of your mouth. The familiar feeling of nausea thundered up your throat. You turned, emptying the contents of your hollow stomach into the toilet bowl. You hadn’t eaten all day. Everything you ingested was regurgitated by your body moments later. You cast your eyes back to the test, fingernails gripping the toilet seat. An innocent little pee stick that could destroy or complete someone’s life.

US POSITION The US and UNPA The U.S continually supports UN programs and there are many national and international debates about the subject. But the relationship between the U.S. government and UNFPA has followed a path similar what is known as the “gag rule” (Guttmacher, (2015); Jones, (2011). The global gag rule (also known as the Mexico City Policy) is a rule that prevents any organization (including UN agencies) receiving U.S. international family planning funds from providing counseling or referrals for abortion or advocating for access to abortion services in their country even with their own money (PIA, (2015); Guttmacher, (2015); Jones, (2011). Though it has political connotations, I say it is a national policy that keeps changing