To the Editor:
Recent criticisms of Barbara Comstock's position on so-called "women's issues," and the concomitant accusations of a Republican "war on women" have left me frustrated. Our Constitution does not, and should not, guarantee access to free abortion and contraception. While some may believe that these represent important women's health issues, others put a much higher priority on treating actual illnesses that afflict many women, such as cancer and heart disease. A great deal of research suggests that both abortion and contraception may increase a woman's likelihood of suffering from these prevalent life-threatening health problems. Whatever your position, it is extraordinarily unfair and deceptive to characterize those who prioritize health care issues differently as conducting a "war on women" or even as being insensitive to women's health issues. As a woman myself, I rather prefer to see any government funds or any mandated funds from employers go to help those who need to fight life threatening illness. Moreover, I cherish the freedoms granted to me by our Constitution and Bill of Rights, which will diminish if the HHS mandate stands.
Believe it or not, there are many women who feel that no employer should be forced to provide abortion, abortifacient drugs, or artificial contraception. Many women note that there is no evidence that any of these things have improved women's health. On the other hand, much proof exists that they have led to far more problems than they were supposed to solve.