Charlotte Taft once said “Women who have abortions do so because they value life and because they take very seriously the responsibilities that come not just with birth, but with nurturing a human being”. The Editorial Board at The New York Times believes in this statement as well. The Editorial Board published an editorial on June 27, 2016 titled “A major Victory for Abortion Rights”. The article published, is about a change in Texas 's anti-abortion law and is intended for woman who can or will bear children. The editorial was created to persuade these women that if another woman who is pregnant and cannot keep the unborn child or does not want to keep the child, that these women should have the right to abort the embryo or fetus legally. …show more content…
When telling the audience of the anti-abortion law, which got struck down by the Supreme Court, the board says that it is a “significant victory” clearly displaying their view on abortion right away. The word “significant” makes the audience believe that it was a good thing that the law got overturned. Moreover, the board mentions that the law was a “dishonest anti-abortion law.” This makes the audience not trust the state of Texas and their beliefs about pro-life because of the word “dishonest”. Dishonesty brings a bad connotation in which the audience will be persuaded away from Texas’ anti-abortion laws and towards the board’s beliefs on abortion and pro-choice. Lastly, the board speaks of the overturning of the law and how this decision to overturn it was “unquestionably correct.” The board specifically picked “unquestionably” in order to persuade the audience to believe that, with out of a doubt, the decision the Supreme Court made was the right choice. The board is able to sway the audience towards their opinion and away from Texas and other anti-abortion believer’s opinions by using a very vivid word choice that convinces the audience that the boards views are correct and that their oppositions viewpoint is
“it's a woman’s right to control her own destiny, to be able to make choices without the Big Brother state telling her what she and cannot do” (Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg). Women have fought for their entire lives for equal rights which for some apparent reasons have not been acknowledged. Roe vs. Wade had changed the outlook on the United States and on a woman’s rights to her own body. Roe vs. Wade goes back to 1973 which was between a women who had an unplanned surgery in Texas who wanted to make abortions legal. Norma Leah McCorvey, better known as “Jane Roe” was the plaintiff in this case, after her case the U.S Supreme Court had ruled that state laws banning abortion are unconstitutional.
This is the key Supreme Court ruling I have selected to analyze. The law being challenged was about the decision by women to have abortion without the interference from politicians. The case was held on January 22, 1973 by the Supreme Court where it handed down its landmark decision in the case of Roe v. Wade. The court recognized the constitutional rights to a woman’s right to make her own personal medical decision. The government entity that was part of the case was the politicians (Joyce, 2013).
Nearly fifty years later, with a noticeably more conservative Supreme Court, Roe v. Wade was struck down in the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. The political landscape regarding abortion had not changed significantly in those fifty years, the determining factor for why Roe v. Wade was overturned was simply because of the attitudinal model of judicial decision-making held by the justices that swung conservative. Beyond the why behind judicial decision-making, judicial philosophy plays a significant role in determining how a judge rules on a
“On January 22, 1973, the U.S. Supreme Court announced its decision in Roe v. Wade, a challenge to a Texas statute that made it a crime to perform an abortion unless a woman’s life was at stake. The case had been filed by “Jane Roe,” an unmarried woman who wanted to safely and legally end her pregnancy. Siding with Roe, the court struck down the Texas law. In its ruling, the court recognized for the first time that the constitutional right to privacy “is broad enough to encompass a woman’s decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy” (Roe v. Wade, 1973).
It is that woman’s individual right to do whatever she wants with her body. To put a woman through even more years of pain just because she's pregnant makes you selfish because you don't know what got them in that situation in the first place. Women don’t deserve to be put down because of the choices they make. I don't think the issue here is abortion, i think it's
The Right to Abortion On January 22, 1973, in a 7-2 ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down it’s landmark decision in the case of Roe v. Wade, which recognized that the constitutional right to privacy extends to a woman’s right to make her own personal medical decisions — including the decision to have an abortion without interference from politicians (Planned Parenthood). There are many moments in history when Roe v. Wade has been so close to being overturned, yet it is still in place. Abortion should stay legal, or not overturned, for the health of women everywhere. First, this important case took place at the time of abortion being illegal in most states, including Texas, where Roe v. Wade began.
The message that Donald Trump gave about abortion was an ethical message. For the mainstream news sources, those being ABC, CBS, and NBC, Donald Trump’s comments and negative concerns towards abortion. He states on ABC news “ I Could Have ‘Misspoken’ On Abortion Comments. He also states that women who get abortions, should be punished. Quoted, he states “It could be that I misspoke,” he said of the initial comments, adding, “But this was a long, convoluted subject.”
Abortion is not only a fluctuating concept in our society, but an ethical and emotional debate, as well. The image I have chosen presents concepts from a cultural and historical background, as well as presents an ethical, emotional, and logical appeal to the audience. The debate about abortion has simply been overblown and exhausted. The truth of the matter is, abortion is murder. Ending a life, whether innocent or guilty, is murder.
Before Roe v. wade the number of deaths from illegal abortions was around 5000 and in the 50s and 60s the number of illegal abortions ranged from 200,000 to 1.2 million per year. These illegal abortions pose major health risks to the life of the woman including damage to the bladder, intestines as well as rupturing of the uterus. The choice to become a mother must be given to the woman most importantly because it’s her body, her health, and she will be taking on a great responsibility. A woman’s choice to choose abortion should not be restricted by anyone; there are multiple reasons why abortion will be the more sensible decision for the female.
Women’s rights have been a long struggle in America’s legal system, as well as in the religious world, for many decades and women continue to have challenges, concerns, and struggles today. Fighting for what is best for their bodies such as a woman’s right to contraceptives to control whether she will get pregnant or not was not ideal for religious and personal reasons but would find a worthy advocate in a woman who would dedicate her life for women’s reproductive rights. The right for a woman to have an abortion became a legal battle that went all the way to the Supreme Courts in a very well-known case. It has always been a double standard in what was right and wrong, moral or immoral, towards women than men. A man was looked at with respect
Patrick Lee and Robert George assert that abortion is objectively immoral. One of Lee and George’s main reason for coming to this conclusion is that human embryos are living human beings. This essentially validates that abortion is indeed the process of killing a human. Another main point said by the two is a rebuttal to a common argument used in favor of abortion, which states that a potential mother has full parental responsibilities only if she has voluntarily assumed them. The rebuttal to this was that the potential mother does indeed have special responsibilities to raise the child.
Annotated Bibliography "Abortion ProCon.org." ProConorg Headlines. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Apr. 2016.
Doris Gudino Professor Chounlamountry Political Science 1 27 July 2015 Pro-Choice Anyone? A woman has, undoubtedly, the freedom to procreate, but once a woman chooses to retreat from that freedom, a commotion arises. Abortion is a woman’s choice for many reasons. It’s her body, therefore, no one else can decide for said person.
For the last couple of years, americans have been deeply polarized over the issue of abortion. They debate has been cast in terms of “ pro-life” views and “pro-choice” views. The legality of abortion was confirmed in 1973 when the United States Supreme Court struck down a Texas
Janet Harris wrote in her piece, shared by Washington Post, that when she was faced with the decision to get an abortion “it wasn’t “Should I or shouldn’t I?” but “How quickly can I get this over with?””(Harris). Where have a woman 's values and morals gone if she can knowingly make the decision to kill a child that is a part of her own body? Statements like these are prime examples of why abortion shouldn’t just be an option women can chose whether or not to receive . Janet’s reasoning is that when it was time for her to make this “decision” in her life it “was in the mid-1980s, when abortion was about women having control not just over their bodies but over their destinies” (Harris).