(CNN) -- Women seeking an abortion in Texas will have to view a picture of the embryo or fetus and hear a description of its development before having the procedure, under a law that takes effect September 1. The bill stirred some controversy in Texas, but it easily passed through the state House and Senate, both of which are controlled by Republicans. It was signed into law Thursday by Republican Gov. Rick Perry. The law says that at least 24 hours before an abortion is performed, women must undergo a sonogram, a procedure that uses ultrasound to create an image. The doctor, then, is required to give, "in a manner understandable to a layperson, a verbal explanation of the results of the sonogram images, including a medical description of the dimensions of the embryo or fetus, the presence of cardiac activity, and the presence of external members and internal organs," the law states. There are some exceptions, including pregnancies that resulted from sexual assault, incest or other violations of law. Women seeking abortions also are exempt if the fetus has been found to have an irreversible medical condition that will cause a disability. "Governor Perry was pleased to sign this important legislation, which bolsters our efforts to protect life by ensuring Texans are fully informed when considering such an important decision," said his deputy press secretary, Lucy Nashed. Critics say the new law is unnecessary. "What no one is focusing on is that this is a mandate to humiliate women who want an abortion," said Yvonne Gutierrez, vice president for public affairs at the Planned Parenthood Trust of South Texas. Texas already requires a 24-hour consent period, and the new law will simply add emotional and financial costs to those seeking abortions, she said.

Question: "Why do critics feel the law is unnecessary?"

Answer: "This is not separation of church and state"

Response: no

The Vice President stated that he called the President to discuss the rules of engagement for the CAP. He recalled feeling that it did no good to establish the CAP unless the pilots had instructions on whether they were authorized to shoot if the plane would not divert. He said the President signed off on that concept. The President said he remembered such a conversation, and that it reminded him of when he had been an interceptor pilot. The President emphasized to us that he had authorized the shootdown of hijacked aircraft. The Vice President's military aide told us he believed the Vice President spoke to the President just after entering the conference room, but he did not hear what they said. Rice, who entered the room shortly after the Vice President and sat next to him, remembered hearing him inform the President, "Sir, the CAPs are up. Sir, they're going to want to know what to do." Then she recalled hearing him say, "Yes sir." She believed this conversation occurred a few minutes, perhaps five, after they entered the conference room. We believe this call would have taken place sometime before 10:10 to 10:15. Among the sources that reflect other important events of that morning, there is no documentary evidence for this call, but the relevant sources are incomplete. Others nearby who were taking notes, such as the Vice President's chief of staff, Scooter Libby, who sat next to him, and Mrs. Cheney, did not note a call between the President and Vice President immediately after the Vice President entered the conference room. At 10:02, the communicators in the shelter began receiving reports from the Secret Service of an inbound aircraft-presumably hijacked-heading toward Washington. That aircraft was United 93. The Secret Service was getting this information directly from the FAA. The FAA may have been tracking the progress of United 93 on a display that showed its projected path to Washington, not its actual radar return. Thus, the Secret Service was relying on projections and was not aware the plane was already down in Pennsylvania.

Question: "What information did the secret service get directly from the FAA?"

Answer: "The hijacked aircraft's projected path"

Response: yes

MALS was formed here more than 30 years ago. Today, 14 staff attorneys, 26 office workers and 21 University of Memphis third- year law students work out of rented offices in the old Claridge Hotel building at 109 N. Main. Offices are spartan. There are no lush rugs or stylish furniture. The large table in the conference room is simple varnished wood. Offices are small and mostly plain, except for the eclectic mix of pop art, African statuary and neon that adorns litigation director Webb Brewer's space. Brewer, who has been at the agency 20 years, said there is a need for lawyers of all stripes to help with the problems of the poor. "The private bar could meet more of the need through pro bono work, but there are still cases that involve the systemic problems for low-income people that we would need to do," said Brewer. "The legal system marketplace just doesn't serve low-income people too well, except in fee-generat-ing type cases," Brewer said. "If a poor person gets run over by a bus, an attorney might take that case because they might be able to recover part of the damage award as attorney fees. But so many of the cases we handle have to do with basic rights and a decent life. There is just no profit motive." Larry Pivnick, law professor at the University of Memphis Law School and director of political programs at MALS, said Legal Services is a great learning laboratory for law students. "There are thousands and thousands of people who have problems that never get an opportunity to appear in court," Pivnick said. "Some people may not be particularly articulate. Courts have rules that clients don't always understand." Brewer said a major focus of the agency's work involves housing. "Although a lot of our work is grant-driven, we find that the lack of safe and decent affordable housing and the prevalence of predatory lending are the biggest problems in our client population," Brewer said, referring to clients such as James.

Question: "The director of political programs at MALS said that there are a lot of people who don't get the opportunity to what?"

Answer: "Decent life"

Response: no

But I think it is certain that most of the early Christians understood these words of our Lord's ascension and coming again in glory. They believed that He was coming again in a very little while during their own life-time, in a few months or years, to make an end of the world and to judge the quick and the dead. And as they waited for His coming, one generation after another, and yet He did not come, a sadness fell upon them. Christ seemed to have left the world. The little while that He had promised to be away seemed to have become a very long while. Hundreds of years passed, and yet Christ did not come in glory. And, as I said, a sadness fell on all the Church. Surely, they said, this is the time of which Christ said we were to weep and lament till we saw Him again--this is the time of which He said that the bridegroom should be taken from us, and we should fast in those days. And they did fast, and weep, and lament; and their religion became a very sad and melancholy one--most sad in those who were most holy, and loved their Lord best, and longed most for His coming in glory.

Question: "How many years had passed?"

Answer: "Years"

Response:
yes