Episode 103: TRAP Laws and Abortion Rights

Four decades after the 1973 supreme court ruling Roe v Wade gave women a constitutional right to abortion, the Boyds say they are “deeply disturbed” by the march of anti-abortion laws. They believe the procedure has been hijacked as a political rather than a medical issue, causing women to feel more shame than ever before.
— Karen McVeigh, The Guardian, November 21, 2014
Empathy can be the foundation of profound understanding, communication and connection despite differences, the central mechanic of any personal or character-driven story, real or fictional. If indifference maintains a callous and unjust status quo, to be moved to feel deeply or strongly for another must therefore be positive and constructive, and if not helpful than certainly not harmful.
— K. Talt Jarboe, The Toast, December 3, 2015

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?