In a way, it is a kind of divide, but in a good way. States have always been divided in a variety of ways, not just geographically. State sovereignty was always the original ideal of the U.S. Ideally, the smaller the entity in question, the more sovereign the entity should be. From least to most sovereign:

Federal > State > Municipality > Family > Individual

In the case of the article and the Texas law, it's Federal vs State, and State should trump the former. This is good because it encourages competition between states and doesn't cause lock-in for families and individuals - much in the same way that any business competes.

If Texas laws and values don't jibe with me, I can live in and support another state that does. Same goes for municipality, family, and individual - you can live in a different village, you can sever familial relations and form new ones, you can change your habits, actions, place of employment, etc.