Introduction
The right to abortion is an integral part of civil liberties and fundamental human rights to autonomy. However, in view of recent events, the overturning of Roe v. Wade, the matters that concern abortions have become more acute. While one group of people supports the pro-life concept, emphasizing how abortion is murder, others believe that women have the right to protect their own health. Still, even among pro-life activists and politicians, abortion bans are only a part of a political campaign or a pursuit of personal ambitions. As a result, abortion rights remain an issue that influences the elections and seeks to attract more voters to impact the current circumstances.
News Articles
Smith‘s Article
The first news article, by Smith, gives an overview of the elections and abortion rights, emphasizing how the general public does not find it the most acute problem. The author begins by stating that the Supreme Court overturned the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision in 2022, which previously secured abortion rights across the country (Smith, 2022). Then, Smith (2022) accentuates that voters in a minimum of five additional states would decide the status of abortion-related constitutional amendments on November 8 by approving or rejecting them.
According to the author, the abortion proposal is supported by more than 50% of voters (Smith, 2022). The author concludes by saying that while 56% of people say that abortion is a very significant issue in determining how they will vote, economic and immigrant issues have surpassed abortion as the topic about which people are most frightened (Smith, 2022). Therefore, Smith shows the overall public perception regarding abortion rights and the elections.
The Guardian Article
An anonymous journalist in The Guardian wrote another news article. According to the author, the state’s restriction on abortions after about six weeks of pregnancy was reaffirmed by the Georgia court (The Guardian, 2022). A judge on the Superior Court determined on November 15 that the state’s prohibition was unconstitutional since, at the time it was enacted in 2019, supreme legal precedence from Roe v. Wade and another decision permitted abortions to continue long past six weeks (The Guardian, 2022).
The journalist additionally provided the quote of the judge, Robert McBurney, that “the rights of unborn children justify such a restriction on women’s right to bodily autonomy and privacy” (The Guardian, 2022, para.3). The article then proceeds to show that most abortions were illegal in most states after a heartbeat was found (The Guardian, 2022). That indicates that the majority of abortions in Georgia were essentially outlawed at a time before most women were aware of their pregnancies.
Opinion Articles
Valenti‘s Article
As for the opinion article, one of them is written by Valenti, who supports abortion rights and sees the overturning of Roe v. Wade as a violation of civil liberties. The writer starts by writing that the outcome of the midterm elections will not depend on whether voters support further pain or make an effort to put an end to the agony that abortion restrictions have brought about (Valenti, 2022). Valenti claims that laws prioritize fetuses over the women who carry them, which repeatedly resulted in the rejection of life-saving treatment (Valenti, 2022).
Republicans promised to safeguard the lives and health of women, and Valenti states that they have not. The author provides examples of a woman who was diagnosed with terminal cancer and was rejected for an abortion (Valenti, 2022). Therefore, the author believes that abortion rights have become an issue that many politicians do not emphasize, regarding it as irrelevant.
Olsen‘s Article
In contrast, another writer, Olsen, holds the opposite opinion on abortion rights. Olsen (2022) says that, unfortunately, a large majority of Americans support abortion throughout the first months of pregnancy. The author claims that this has been supported by surveys for a long time and the outcomes of all the ballot initiatives this year that deal with abortion (Olsen, 2022). It was later stated that educating people about basic physiology requires patience and time commitment from activists and group leadership (Olsen, 2022).
On behalf of others, Olsen (2022, para.6) emphasizes that “people instinctively want to protect human life.” The author then mentions that the heartbeat can be seen as early as the first month, and the human heart and brain are stopped and muted when a pregnancy is terminated at these stages (Olsen, 2022). The author concludes that “everything must be directed at winning this contest” (Olsen, 2022, para.9). Therefore, Olsen views this issue from the perspective of unborn lives rather than female health.
Analysis
Valenti and Smith’s Articles
Regarding analysis, the first opinion article by Valenti reflects the facts mentioned in Smith’s article. Valenti emphasizes how the general public and Republican politicians. Do not address the issue of abortions and, instead, focus on more “relevant” problems. Moreover, Valenti illustrates how the quote of Robert McBurney reflects reality, with women being denied basic care.
Aside from this, the article does not misstate any information. However, the opinion article does not interpret the issue from an ideological perspective but instead illuminates the violation of civil rights and injustice. Lastly, the missing information might be statistics to show the broader picture.
The Guardian and Olsen‘s Articles
The opinion article by Olsen accurately reflects the facts in the news article by The Guardian, providing details regarding the heartbeat. However, it partially reflects the facts from Smith’s article, since while the news article emphasized the statistics, Olsen only claimed that the majority of voters support abortion bans. Moreover, while there were no significant misstatements, Olsen ignores essential facts, such as the polls and surveys he mentions that are not named. Still, the article is not based on ideology since, although Olsen’s statements are pro-life, they are not based on religious tenets. Among the aspects that were missing were the details regarding women’s health, since the author only emphasized the health of an unborn child.
Opinion
Finally, my opinion of the article correlates with that of Valenti, who wrote for The New York Times. I believe this writer illustrated a call for action and provided all the necessary evidence and examples. In most of the paragraphs, the author remained objective, allowing the readers to ponder the grim situations.
Therefore, I believe Valenti’s article is stronger due to these points. In turn, as seen from the previous analysis of Olsen’s article, the man seems to see the fight for abortion bans as a contest instead of actually focusing on the interests of women. I did not find the words of this man convincing at all.
As for personal opinion on the given matter, I believe that any restriction of fundamental human rights violates a person’s autonomy. As a matter of fact, I believe that abortion bans are intentional acts of torture and a lack of empathy, given that women will die of unsafe abortions or pregnancy complications, and many children will be born into poverty or with defects.
Conclusion
Hence, abortion rights continue to be a topic that affects elections and seeks more supporters to change the existing situation. The news articles emphasized the facts regarding the impartiality of many people who wish to concentrate on other issues and the bans on abortions after a heartbeat occurs in many states. Opinion articles emphasize two perspectives on the matter, with Valenti accentuating the violation of the right to care and Olsen concentrating on the murder of an unborn child.
References
Olsen, V. (2022). Where the pro-life movement goes from here. The Washington Post. Web.
Smith, S. (2022). How abortion law could still impact who wins US midterms. BBC. Web.
The Guardian. (2022). Georgia state supreme court reinstates six-week abortion ban. Web.
Valenti, J. (2022). I write about post-Roe America every day. It’s worse than you think. The New York Times. Web.