Texas’ new abortion law, banning abortions after 6 weeks of pregnancy, went into effect on September 1, 2021. There has been a great backlash to this, and as a result, has sent numerous desperate women across state lines searching for abortion clinics. In an article by CBS News, an anonymous patient describes her recent experience trying to get to a Colorado abortion clinic. She had found out about her pregnancy the day before Texas’ law went into effect and due to health reasons, the pregnancy was too risky. In a panic, she had to scramble not only to find the money for the procedure, but she now also had to figure out how to get to another state in order to get the procedure done. This is just one example of the many traumatizing experiences women are forced to face due to the extremely restrictive abortion laws that exist.
There has been great backlash to the Texas law. As a result, the House Democrats quickly took action by developing legislation that would thwart Texas’ efforts to restrict abortion rights. More specifically, it protects a woman’s right to an abortion until fetal viability, which is when a fetus can live outside a womb, generally falling between 21 to 24 weeks of pregnancy. It includes exceptions for post-fetal viability abortions if the healthcare provider believes that the pregnancy poses a health risk to the mother. The legislation also grants easy access to abortions and eliminates the requirements for procedures that are ultimately put in place to delay abortions.
This bill was initially introduced in 2013 by Democratic Rep. Judy Chu of California, and subsequently introduced to Congress for four years. However, it never received a vote in committee. This past Friday the bill passed in Congress by a 218-211 vote, along party lines. This is a victory for reproductive-rights advocates. The bill will most likely die in the Senate, since the Senate is split and a majority will be difficult to reach. Nonetheless, House Democrats felt it was important to develop the legislation in effort to create talking points for 2022 elections and in hopes of gaining support for their pro-choice beliefs. Additionally, President Joe Biden has extended his support for this bill, bringing this issue to the top of the Democratic political agenda.
Public opinion on abortions has fluctuated throughout the past couple of decades, but as of 2021, a slim majority of Americans believe that abortions should be legal in most cases. Further, the Monmouth University Polling Institute states, 54% of the public disagrees with the Supreme Court allowing Texas’ restrictive abortion ban (mostly democrats). It seems that the American public has always been a close fifty-fifty split when it comes to abortion. Fewer Americans believe that abortions should be banned in ALL cases, but still believe in tight restrictions to them. The pro-choice/pro-life debate has been a hot topic since before the Supreme Courts Roe v. Wade decision in 2008, which protects a woman’s right to abortions nationwide.
“Every day women in our country face deeply personal decisions of whether to continue their pregnancies, they should be able to make their own decisions, free from politicians interference. The Women’s Health Protection Act is exactly that,” said Rep. Anna Eshoo. Although disheartening, Texas’ restrictions on abortions may just be the catalyst pro-choice advocates need to gain support in the 2022 elections. Reproductive rights have been on the backburner of the Democratic agenda for many years, but thanks to the ban, it seems to have been revived and brought to the forefront, with the ultimate goal of codifying Roe v. Wade once and for all.
Questions:
Do you think this new bill should be passed? What are the pros and cons?
How do you think the government should attack the issue of women’s reproductive rights?
Sources:
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/texas-abortion-law-pushes-women-to-clinics-in-other-states/
https://www.pewforum.org/fact-sheet/public-opinion-on-abortion/
https://www.monmouth.edu/polling-institute/reports/monmouthpoll_us_092021/
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/house-democrats-pass-new-bill-codify-roe-v-wade-protections-n1280041
11 comments:
I think its fine that the federal government passed this law, I know that the issue is pretty heated but I think if they consider abortion to be a right, than they should pass a law protecting it. If people don't think its a right then they should put more work into proving that it isn't instead of trying to push for a ban. I think that if people don't approve of abortion they should work more towards making it a culturally stigmatized practice instead of trying to ban it out right in a piece of legislation. I always support the idea that people should be free to do what they want as long as it doesn't hurt others and its others people's choice to look down upon it or not partake themselves.
I absolutely think this bill should be passed. Texas's abortion ban has shown that Roe v. Wade is not enough to protect people's rights to have an abortion, and that it needs to be cemented with this bill. I agree with Pascal that if people disapprove of abortions, they shouldn't have one, and shouldn't take away the freedom of others to receive this procedure. However, I think it is very harmful to create a culture where abortions are stigmatized. In Texas, this is done with the abortion ban encouraging people to report others for having an abortion or for assisting others in having an abortion. This turns people against each other and breeds mistrust and betrayal. Stigmatizing abortions also leads to protestors at abortion clinics, which can very be harmful and traumatic for people who get abortions. The Constitution protects personal privacy, which is the basis of the Roe v Wade decision, and this privacy should be upheld. As for how to government should approach reproductive rights, it already decided in 1973 that abortion was a Constitutional right. The federal government needs to protect that right from states like Texas that threaten it. SCOTUS has spoken, the majority of people have spoken, the president has spoken, the House has spoken, all in favor of the right to choose. Texas, and the Senate, should respect that, even though I know they won't.
I think the government should take a neutral stance on abortion, but it is also great if the law is passed. You mentioned in the article that the American public has always been a close fifty-fifty split when it comes to abortions since it’s a very controversial and complicated issue. If the bill were passed the other half of Americans who don’t support abortion would resist it. I think major federal bills on controversial topics shouldn’t get passed unless a super-majority or ¾ of Americans support it. Because America is a democracy, and because of the it’s complexity there should be careful consideration when passing federal laws on complicated issues. I don’t think Texas should have banned abortion, but I also don’t think the federal government should pass the bill because of Texas. Another way the government can attack the issue of women’s reproductive rights is to educate women so they know about safety measures early on. This way women know how to prevent and avoid having an abortion in most cases.
Like Ella, I believe that the federal government must do more to protect women’s right to abortion, especially in light of the new Texas abortion law. While I see Stephanie’s claim that the bill in response to the Texas law should not go any further because the American people are closely split on abortion and there should be supermajority support to pass a controversial bill, Roe v. Wade already deems abortions Constitutional. This Constitutional right should therefore be protected by the Federal government and Congress needs to step in when states and local governments violate this right. I think that this new bill is not only necessary, but I feel that more action needs to be taken to protect women from any future legislation that could interfere with their right to abortions. Furthermore, while Texas, a state, passed a new law interfering with one’s right to abortion, according to the Supremacy Clause, the Federal government has the right to pass laws that go above the states and local governments. The Federal government must exercise this power and protect the Constitutional right to abortion by passing bills that protect Americans from any state laws that could obstruct a women’s right to abortion.
I do think that this bill needs to be passed. Like Ella said, Roe V. Wade which protects a pregnant woman's liberty to choose to have an abortion without excessive government restriction is no longer enough to ensure that women are getting fair and private chances to get an abortion. I think what Texas is doing is and requiring from women is wrong and unrealistic. 6 weeks is not enough to time (1) know that you are pregnant, especially if a woman's period is irregular (2) think about having an abortion and really battling through all the possibilities and options (3) getting an appointment to receive an abortion. Texas is essentially making abortion impossible by passing this law and it is infringing on women's reproductive rights. I think that it is okay if someone doesn't want to get an abortion if it doesn't align with their morals or religious affiliations. That is their right to choose. However, it is also someone else's right to choose if they wish to receive an abortion. Additionally, making it more difficult to receive an abortion will only push women to have an unsafe abortion, making it unsafe and risky for women's health. Not only that, women being unable to get an abortion if their pregnancy is risking their life is not something that aligns under the "pro-life" argument. I think with this bill, it would protect a woman's right to receive an abortion safely and also allow for more time to know what their options are.
I agree with Stephanie in that the abortion law in Texas was over restrictive (and should not have been passed), but also that the government should not pass the previously dormant bill just because of Texas. In my opinion, a bill should be passed because Americans and the house genuinely want to pass it... the fact that this bill was lying dormant and is now only being used as a reactionary measure against the Texas law is somewhat pathetic. Now, I realize that passing a bill or law to override or counteract another law is done ALL the time, but Judy Chu's bill should have had enough initial momentum on its own to have been passed. As far as the government's "stance" on abortion, there are an array of stances on abortion in government. And it is not just "abortion good" or "abortion bad." But it is impossible for anyone in congress to have a neutral stance on abortion because it is either legal (to some degree or up until birth) or it is illegal (to some degree or up until birth). I also agree with Stephanie that a better education on birth control and abortion in general would benefit everyone... men and women. So, to answer the first question, yes, they should pass the bill. The pros are that it maintains women's right to abort and also to abort when their life is at risk, and the cons are that it really should have been passed years ago and before the Texas law. Now, there is a common argument from pro-choice people that "if you don't want an abortion, nobody is forcing you to get one. You should still give other women the right to an abortion." This is very much true. Nowhere in Chu's bill does it say that all women must be required to get an abortion. However, this argument is the exact reason why the abortion debate will continue on for eternity. This argument does not resonate with the pro-life side, because they believe that abortion is murder. Therefore, they do not think anyone should have the right to it (even if they aren't forced to do it themselves!). Here is a fantastic article on the abortion debate: https://theconversation.com/when-human-life-begins-is-a-question-of-politics-not-biology-165514. It basically asserts that pro-life supporters tend to appeal to the idea that life begins at conception, and claim to be on the side of "science." However, even some biologists disagree on when life begins. Pro-lifers don't believe the abortion debate to be just about women's reproductive rights, but also about the fetus' "rights." It is a touchy subject to say the least, but ultimately, the government should attack the issue of reproductive rights by educating boys and girls (yes, in school!) on abortion, birth control, sex, everything. Not one woman in the world relishes in getting an abortion... it is an absolutely traumatic experience regardless of if one believes people have the right to an abortion or not. Protests for and against the right to abort should be allowed, but women deserve utter privacy regarding their reproductive health and abortions.
What I actually find the most surprising is that Women's and Men's opinions on abortion rights have generally been the same over time, and the general lack of swaying of opinion nationwide. https://news.gallup.com/poll/245618/abortion-trends-gender.aspx I strongly believe (and hope) that once a proper, full case is presented to the supreme court on the Texas bill they will have no choice but to deem it unconstitutional. It is a darn shame that they did not decide to extend the brief deliberation on the original presentation of the case, however, they were very clear in saying they are allowing the Texas law to take effect not because it is constitutional but because they were not given a full case. This Texas bill is very dangerous because like the voting restrictions bills, this may become a movement in the South - so it absolutely needs to get shut down quickly.
I agree with Nicky’s explanation of the issue, but I would also like to point out that whether there’s legislation outlawing abortion or not, women will still pursue abortions. Self-induced abortions or “coat-hanger” abortions are incredibly dangerous and can result in death of the pregnant mother herself. According to Guttmacher Institute, abortion rates in countries where abortion is illegal is about the same in countries where it is legal. (https://www.guttmacher.org/news-release/2018/new-report-highlights-worldwide-variations-abortion-incidence-and-safety).
And if women are taken to hospital to treat the complications of a self-induced abortion, they could be incarcerated. Ultimately, like Nicky said, there needs to be more comprehensive sex education in schools so the general population is educated enough on the topic of abortion rather than completely write off abortion as murder or not murder -- whether a fetus is alive or not is a question even biologists are unsure of how to answer. Whatever the outcome of this debate maybe -- if there will ever be an outcome -- the fact is restricting personal rights on this issue will result in more death than life. The government cannot force women to not pursue abortions, and it's clear that Texas is trying to pull some political move to force the abortion debate to come to a climax in the near future.
As mentioned in previous comments, I believe that the new bill should be passed. In either case, there will always be the con that ultimately a decision on such a controversial subject will not appeal to everyone. I believe that women’s reproductive rights stems from the issue of women’s rights in general. As we have learned in school, women have fought for their rights throughout a series of years, and for the most part, have been pushed on the “back-burner.” Just like the issue of racism, sexist beliefs will still persist as it’s almost as if a mindset. Thus, completely finding a “solution” on how to persuade all of America to believe on one side is absolutely impossible. However, I do believe that Stephanie’s suggestion to educate both sides of the issue in order for individuals to form their own decisions is the best way to go about it. An article from a Conservative, pro-life blogger (https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/losing-another-argument-for-abortion/) draws out the fallacies of calling abortion a “women’s rights” argument I would not have thought about. Desanctis recognizes the common pro-choice argument that only “women” should have the ability to vote on the issue as it is their bodies. However, she argues that there are still individuals whose biological birth-sex is female, but do not identify as such. Thus, she criticizes pro-choice advocates, who are suggested to accept these individuals’ opinions, as they are ultimately “nit-picking” over who has a right to voice their opinion: individuals who support their belief. Interestingly, this brings about a common question in politics to light: who has the right to vote? As a democratic country, we often want to voice the majority public opinion, but if we were to only allow women to vote on abortion rights, then wouldn’t we have to apply this concept of selectiveness in voters for all voting decisions?
I do think that the bill should be passed, but don't think that it shows great initiative for the government to only want to do so in response to a Texas abortion ban. Having been introduced in 2013, I don't think it will now suddenly find success, especially as we have learned with the polarization of each party further towards the left or right respectively, and less effort placed on working towards compromises or openly respecting and considering opinions of members of opposing parties. Different media sources will surely display this issue as the bill is considered and debated in Congress, some with bias towards the conservative viewpoint and others with a liberal bias, and it will be people's personal selection of their sources along with pre-existing beliefs and biases that will shape their opinions most, as opposed to the nuanced debate regarding the bill and open consideration of its flaws and merits. As mentioned, the Senate being split will most surely see the bill defeated, returning the proposed policy to square one, so in being able to predict this reality, efforts might want to be made to draft new legislation or approach this issue in a different way. I think that there needs to be more bipartisanship and true discourse, so that policy can maintain inputs from a wide array of representatives in government and so that the main goal can be to pass policy as opposed to first focus on striking it down. I wish this bill could gain the support it needs to pass in order to better protect women's reproductive rights against new encroachments on this right such as the Texas abortion ban, but it seems like there will need to be different approaches to this issue.
Post a Comment