Given our belief in honest, thoughtful discourse, we must at times cover topics and issues that are politically, emotionally and personally charged. As issues themselves grow more controversial, we tend to internalize these very polarized arguments over critical debates. Our interest in objectivity is therefore more difficult to disentangle from our personal biases, whatever they may be. This week, we welcome Charlotte Graham to discuss controversial TRAP Laws dealing with a woman's right to an abortion. While we are both pro-choice individuals, we do hope listeners who feel differently will feel comfortable sharing their perspectives as well. We examine misunderstandings we perceive in the discussion as well as the political efforts made by those who disapprove of the access to abortion. What are some of the consequences for a woman's biological autonomy? Is the argument related to a quantity of life vs. a quality of life dichotomy? How can we have more respectful and open-minded discussions over such tense issues?

Further Reading:

The Washington Post, "Supreme Court strikes down Texas abortion clinic restrictions"

The Toast, "The Morgentaler Series: Joanne's Story"

The Toast, "First With Truth: On Choice and the Misuse of Empathy"

TED, "What we learn before we're born"

The Toast, "I'm Glad My Birthmom Had a Choice"

The Guardian, "'I can't think of a time when it was worse': US abortion doctors speak out"

The New York Times, "Pregnant, and No Civil Rights"

SCOTUSblog, "Court strikes down abortion clinic 'buffer zone': In Plain English"

SCOTUSblog, "Justices enter the fray with grant in Texas abortion case: In Plain English"