Wendy Long's comments in last week's Senate debate ("Rivals differ on key issues," Oct. 18) illustrate what's at stake in this election, and the dangers to women's health and rights were Ms. Long to prevail.
Ms. Long championed a state's rights approach to abortion, which would result in an uneven patchwork of laws severely restricting — if not outlawing — abortion across the country.
New Yorkers might be tempted to believe, as Ms. Long previously claimed, we wouldn't notice if Roe vs. Wade was overturned. But New York's abortion law is inadequate in protecting our rights and health today. New York still regulates abortion as an exception to a crime, leaving women and doctors susceptible to criminal prosecution for undergoing or providing an abortion.
New York also lacks a health exception, preventing a woman whose health is in danger later in pregnancy from accessing abortion care to protect herself.
Ms. Long also defended the Blunt amendment, a bill in Congress that would have allowed employers a "conscience" exemption to deny an employee affordable access to contraception. Ms. Long's characterization of contraception as "evil" shows exactly why we cannot have either politicians or bosses imposing their views on women.
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand was correct to remind voters the right to choose and use contraception and abortion are battles her mother and grandmother fought. Were Ms. Long's positions to prevail, we'd be waging those battles all over again.
ANDREA MILLER
President
NARAL Pro-Choice
New York
New York City