New Texas Law on Abortion

There is a new law in Texas that recently passed in October 1st and it is about abortion. With this law, it requires abortion providers to show or at least a given a verbal detail an ultrasound to the mother of what is going with the fetus at the time of making the decision of having an abortion. This law requires women to have at least 2 ultrasounds before having the procedure done. This law shows how Texas is pro-life. This law makes a lot of sense as it will reduce the number of women having abortions and just ending lives like if it was just a game. An abortion is a difficult choice to make, and I think this law helps women have a little more understanding of what an abortion means. I've heard people making uneducated choices when deciding to either have an abortion or not and personally, I think it is critical for a women to know what is going on inside her body before making this kind of decision. Texas' new law about abortions will create a more aware society. I do understand that sometimes that if a woman makes the choice of having an abortion should be respected, but I also think that at least she should be educated first as far as knowing what is going on with the fetus at least. This new law can help Texans be more aware about protection and reduce the chance of unwanted pregnancies. This could be the start of a more sexual educated society. This law will create a more conscious picture at the timrmof making the decion of having an abortion or not.

"Texas Will No Longer Take Sex Lying Down"

While searching for something good to write about, I encounter this blog "Texas Will No Longer Take Sex Lying Down" by, Eileen Smith. In her blog she talks about the current debate of banning family planning in Texas' schools and religious-affiliated hospitals. On her blog she uses a lot of sarcasm: "Thank God. This will dissuade the teachers from having protected sex with their students. Now they’ll just have unprotected sex with their students..." This makes her point of view more obvious, which is being against the lawsuit against the government trying to mandate birth control pills in school and religious-affiliated hospitals. She uses actual statements made from Texas attorney Greg Abbot, who is the attorney representing Texas. She does not use actual articles where all the information comes from, but she does gives her opinion on how she is against it. Her blog was directed to all the public but specially those who are directed affected by it, as parents and religious people. Smith's opinion seems to be derived from articles read about the current debate, but her evidence is weak.

I do agree with her, that having birth control pills in schools doesn't necessarily means that it would be like allowing school students to have sex, but instead it gives them at least protection. Banning birth control pills does not solve the issue of school students having sex, they would be prohibiting something that actually solves more problems than it creates. Smith did a good job on her blog, but she should have provided more evidence and information on the current debate.

"Invest in care for our aging Texas inmates"

  As I was searching for something interesting to talk about, I found this article "Invest in care for our aging Texas inmates". At the statesman.com. In this editorial, the author talks about how Texas is always proud to say how tough they are on crime, but they have notice how much money it is spent to have people in jail, especially older people.    The author, who is unknown, did a great job on providing facts about the topic. His point of view was obvious in the article as he agreed that there should be new methods of incarceration and that old people in jails were more expensive as they needed health care. He based his argument on previous articles and statistics that showed the number of older inmates that needed medical attention. The audience was obviously every tax payer in Texas.     In the article he also introduced a new system where they setted up special geriatric units for inmates that are 60 and older. This article was very informative as well as opiniated. The author did a very good job by providing evidence which gave him more credit and made the article more interesting.

Death Penalty " A Texas Issue, but Not A National One"

       As I went through different  websites, I encountered this article: "A Texas Issue, but Not a National One" at the Texas Tribune written by Brandi Grissom. In this article Grissom talks about a controversial case where Rick Perry issued a stay of execution for Hank Skinner; who was convicted of triple murder on New Year's Eve in 1993. Skinner had requested to have a DNA test that he believed would have proved his innocence but it was denied per Rick Perry. On Grissom's article, you can tell that she does not agree how the system for Death Penalty works. On the article, Grissom points out how by approving DNA testing, Skinner might have been proven innocent of the murders. She gives examples of some other cases where the same thing happened; where DNA testing was denied and a stay of execution was issued. Grissom also wrote: "But for Perry the stay and the court’s continued deliberations over DNA testing makes this one issue he doesn't have to deal with while he is on the campaign trail."; which you can tell that the decision made by Perry was not completely thought about.


      On her article, she mainly believes that a decision like this, should not be made only by the State Governor but it should be taken as a National decision. Grissom showed a lot of her opinions on the article, but also gave proven facts as how the decision a stay of execution is not done properly, and gave her point on how it can be faulty and mistakenly execute innocent people.