Charlotte Taft once said “Women who have abortions do so because they value life and because they take very seriously the responsibilities that come not just with birth, but with nurturing a human being”. The Editorial Board at The New York Times believes in this statement as well. The Editorial Board published an editorial on June 27, 2016 titled “A major Victory for Abortion Rights”. The article published, is about a change in Texas 's anti-abortion law and is intended for woman who can or will bear children. The editorial was created to persuade these women that if another woman who is pregnant and cannot keep the unborn child or does not want to keep the child, that these women should have the right to abort the embryo or fetus legally. …show more content…
When telling the audience of the anti-abortion law, which got struck down by the Supreme Court, the board says that it is a “significant victory” clearly displaying their view on abortion right away. The word “significant” makes the audience believe that it was a good thing that the law got overturned. Moreover, the board mentions that the law was a “dishonest anti-abortion law.” This makes the audience not trust the state of Texas and their beliefs about pro-life because of the word “dishonest”. Dishonesty brings a bad connotation in which the audience will be persuaded away from Texas’ anti-abortion laws and towards the board’s beliefs on abortion and pro-choice. Lastly, the board speaks of the overturning of the law and how this decision to overturn it was “unquestionably correct.” The board specifically picked “unquestionably” in order to persuade the audience to believe that, with out of a doubt, the decision the Supreme Court made was the right choice. The board is able to sway the audience towards their opinion and away from Texas and other anti-abortion believer’s opinions by using a very vivid word choice that convinces the audience that the boards views are correct and that their oppositions viewpoint is