Category: Scarlett Rants

  • Three Supreme Court Justices Read the Constitution …

    Three Supreme Court Justices Read the Constitution …

    and said… “Nah.”

    Three Supreme Court justices looked at the Fourteenth Amendment and apparently thought — Eh. Maybe it doesn’t really mean that.

    Not a tax law.

    Not a regulation.

    Not some dusty agency rule no one can explain without needing a nap.

    A constitutional right.

    A right understood for more than 150 years.

    And three members of the highest court in the country were willing to let a president try to rewrite it with an executive order.

    That is not an immigration debate.

    That is a constitutional fire alarm.

    People keep saying this is about birthright citizenship.

    No.

    This is about whether constitutional rights can be reinterpreted every time someone in power decides they don’t like them. If you’ve been following Scarlett for any length of time, you already know why I keep saying No Rights Are Safe.

    That’s the precedent.

    Today it’s birthright citizenship.

    Tomorrow it’s another constitutional protection.

    The day after that?

    Maybe it’s one you actually care about.

    Free speech.

    Religious freedom.

    Due process.

    Protection from unreasonable searches.

    Equal protection.

    Once you accept that constitutional rights can simply be “reinterpreted” to fit the politics of the moment, you’ve stopped talking about rights.

    You’re talking about permissions.

    And permissions can be revoked.

    If Americans want to change the Constitution, there’s already a process for that.

    It’s called a constitutional amendment.

    It is intentionally difficult because our rights are not supposed to swing back and forth every time the White House changes hands.

    If you believe constitutional rights deserve more protection than political opinions, don’t just complain about it. Take Action.

    Here’s the part people want to dodge.

    You don’t have to support birthright citizenship to be disturbed by this.

    You don’t even have to like the Fourteenth Amendment.

    You should still care whether presidents can decide which parts of the Constitution count.

    Because once that answer becomes “yes,” every constitutional right comes with an expiration date.

    The Constitution was not written in pencil.

    It does not come with an eraser.

    If you’re new here, find out why Scarlett keeps saying no.

    Scarlett says no.

  • Ron DeSantis Had a Billion Dollars ….

    Ron DeSantis Had a Billion Dollars ….

    He Just Didn’t Spend It on Floridians.

    Every year, Floridians are told to prepare.

    Prepare for another hurricane.

    Prepare for another insurance increase.

    Prepare for higher property taxes.

    Prepare for crowded classrooms.

    Prepare for another year of not being able to afford a home.

    Prepare to do more with less.

    Apparently, the only person in Florida who never has to prepare for a budget shortage is Ron DeSantis.

    Because when he wanted to build immigration detention camps, he somehow found nearly a billion dollars.

    According to a Miami Herald investigation, DeSantis’ administration signed at least 55 contracts worth roughly $1 billion to build and operate two state-run immigration detention facilities, including the Everglades camp his administration proudly called “Alligator Alcatraz.”

    A billion dollars.

    Think about that for a minute.

    A governor who says government spends too much…

    …spent a billion dollars building cages.

    And before anyone says, “Well, they were all dangerous criminals…”

    No.

    Reporting found that hundreds of people detained had no criminal charges. Some had pending asylum claims. Some were seeking lawful permanent residence. Many had jobs, spouses, children, and lives rooted in Florida.

    These weren’t strangers from some distant place.

    Some were Florida’s neighbors.

    Florida’s coworkers.

    Florida’s taxpayers.

    People who helped pay into the very system that ended up locking them behind its fences.

    Read that again.

    Florida taxpayers helped finance a detention system that could be used against other Florida taxpayers.

    If that doesn’t bother you, it should.

    Because history has taught us something over and over again.

    Governments don’t spend a billion dollars building detention systems because they expect to use them once.

    They build them because they plan to use them.

    Today it’s undocumented immigrants.

    Tomorrow it’s someone with Temporary Protected Status.

    Someone whose green card renewal is delayed.

    Someone with a pending asylum case.

    Someone who showed up for an immigration appointment believing they were following the rules.

    Every expansion of government power begins with the promise that it will only be used against those people.

    Until one day…

    Those people become your neighbors.

    Or your coworkers.

    Or your family.

    Or you.

    Meanwhile, back in the real Florida…

    Families are choosing between groceries and homeowners insurance.

    Teachers are buying school supplies with their own money.

    Young adults have given up on buying a home.

    Seniors are wondering how much longer they can afford to stay in theirs.

    Veterans wait for services.

    Communities brace for the next hurricane.

    And somehow we’re told there’s never enough money.

    Really?

    Because when Ron DeSantis wanted a headline, a billion dollars appeared out of thin air.

    Imagine if he’d shown the same urgency for lowering insurance premiums.

    Or making housing affordable.

    Or strengthening schools.

    Or helping communities recover after storms.

    Or fixing Florida’s crumbling infrastructure.

    Instead, Florida got Alligator Alcatraz—a political stunt with a billion-dollar price tag.

    One more thing.

    According to the Herald, one of the biggest winners wasn’t a construction company.

    It wasn’t an engineering firm.

    It wasn’t a hospital.

    It wasn’t emergency management.

    It was a portable toilet company.

    More than $219 million.

    For porta-potties.

    You really can’t make this stuff up.

    The question isn’t whether Florida had a billion dollars.

    It did.

    The question is what kind of governor looks at families struggling to insure their homes, teachers struggling to educate their students, seniors struggling to stay afloat… and decides the state’s biggest priority is building more places to lock people up.

    That’s not fiscal responsibility.

    That’s not leadership.

    That’s choosing political theater over the people you were elected to serve.

    Scarlett says no.

  • Haiti Is Too Dangerous for Americans

    Haiti Is Too Dangerous for Americans

    Why Is It Safe Enough to Deport Haitians?

    The Supreme Court just handed Donald Trump another immigration victory.

    Not because Haiti suddenly became safe.

    Not because Syria suddenly found peace.

    Not because the facts changed.

    Because six justices said the administration could move forward anyway.

    Hundreds of thousands of Haitians and thousands of Syrians who have been living and working here legally under Temporary Protected Status can now lose that protection.

    Let’s be clear about something.

    Temporary Protected Status wasn’t created to reward people.

    It exists because Congress recognized that sometimes sending people home means sending them into war, political collapse, natural disasters, or violence so severe that doing so would be unconscionable.

    So here’s Scarlett’s question.

    What changed?

    Because the State Department is still telling Americans not to travel to Haiti.

    Kidnappings.

    Gang violence.

    Civil unrest.

    A government struggling to function.

    The warning is clear.

    Don’t go.

    Unless, apparently, you’re Haitian.

    Then suddenly it’s…

    Go home.

    What in the actual flip?

    The dissent didn’t dance around what this case was really about.

    Justice Elena Kagan, joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson, said the evidence was “plain to see.”

    Not hidden.

    Not speculative.

    Plain to see.

    They pointed directly to Donald Trump’s own words.

    The man who called Haiti a “shithole country.”

    The man who falsely claimed Haitian immigrants were “eating the dogs” and “eating the cats.”

    The man who has repeatedly claimed immigrants are “poisoning the blood of our country.”

    Those aren’t harmless campaign slogans.

    Those are the words of a president describing an entire group of human beings as dirty, dangerous, and somehow less worthy than everyone else.

    The dissent didn’t pretend those statements were irrelevant.

    It recognized them for what they are: evidence.

    Evidence that race may have played a role in this administration’s immigration decisions.

    The majority didn’t seriously engage with that evidence.

    It simply allowed the administration to move forward.

    And then there’s Justice Amy Coney Barrett.

    Scarlett has struggled with this one.

    Justice Barrett is raising two children who were born in Haiti.

    I’m not questioning her love for her children.

    I’m questioning something much bigger.

    How do you learn enough about Haiti to make it part of your own family…

    …and still conclude that sending hundreds of thousands of other Haitian families back there raises no alarm?

    No, I’m not saying adopting Haitian children creates a legal obligation to rule a certain way.

    I am saying it should deepen your understanding.

    It should give you a front-row seat to Haiti’s history, its poverty, its instability, and the reasons so many families have desperately searched for safety.

    If that experience doesn’t expand your empathy beyond your own household…

    …what exactly did it teach you?

    Before anyone accuses Scarlett of attacking Justice Barrett personally, don’t.

    This isn’t about her children.

    It’s about whether empathy stops at our own front door.

    Because that’s what this ruling feels like.

    The dissent looked at Trump’s words and saw a pattern.

    The majority looked at the same words and looked away.

    One side saw racism as something courts should examine.

    The other decided it wasn’t important enough to stop the deportations.

    History has a funny way of remembering moments like this.

    Not because of the legal citations.

    Because of the choices.

    The United States is still warning Americans that Haiti is too dangerous to visit.

    Yet we’re preparing to tell Haitians it’s safe enough to go back.

    Read that sentence again.

    Slowly.

    Because one day people will ask how that made sense.

    And I hope somebody has a better answer than, “The Supreme Court said it was okay.”


    Read the Original Sources


    The dissent saw racism.

    The majority saw paperwork.

    History will decide which one was actually looking.

    Scarlett already has.

  • You Can’t Afford a House

    You Can’t Afford a House

    He’s Using Housing as a Bargaining Chip

    Millions of Americans are getting crushed by housing costs.

    Rent is too high.

    Mortgage payments are too high.

    Starter homes are disappearing.

    Big investors are buying up neighborhoods like houses are Pokémon cards.

    Young families are realizing the math isn’t mathing.

    And then…

    A miracle.

    Congress actually agreed on something.

    Not a little something.

    A real bipartisan housing bill.

    The 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act passed the Senate 85-5 and the House 358-32.

    That isn’t “barely passed.

    That’s Congress practically shouting, “We have a housing crisis. Let’s do something.”

    And then Donald Trump refused to sign it.

    Not because the bill was too expensive.

    Not because it wouldn’t work.

    Not because he suddenly developed a passion for housing policy somewhere between another round of golf and apparently falling asleep at the G7 Summit.

    I guess “Sleepy Joe” wasn’t a diagnosis. It was projection.

    No.

    He refused to sign it unless Congress first passed his unrelated SAVE Act.

    Housing.

    For voting.

    Because apparently if millions of Americans need help buying or renting a home, that’s just another bargaining chip.

    What in the flip?

    Here’s What He’s Holding Hostage

    Whether you’re a renter, a first-time homebuyer, a veteran, or just wondering why your kids can’t afford to move out — this bill was written with you in mind.

    This bill won’t solve the housing crisis overnight.

    Nobody claims it will.

    But it would actually move the ball in the right direction.

    It helps communities build more housing.

    Because when there aren’t enough homes, prices go up.

    This isn’t complicated.

    It cracks down on large investors buying thousands of single-family homes that should be available to families trying to buy their first house.

    It helps convert vacant office buildings into housing instead of letting them sit empty while people struggle to find somewhere they can afford to live.

    It expands manufactured and modular housing, making it easier to build quality homes faster and at lower cost.

    It supports veterans, rural communities, affordable housing initiatives, and programs designed to help increase the housing supply.

    In other words…

    It actually tries to do something.

    Imagine that!

    This Is Why People Hate Politics

    This is the part that drives people crazy.

    When Congress actually works together…

    When Republicans and Democrats agree on something.

    When they finally pass legislation that could HELP ordinary Americans…

    Washington decides to use it as leverage for something completely unrelated.

    Not because the housing bill is bad.

    Not because families don’t need homes.

    Not because veterans don’t deserve affordable housing.

    Because — well, politics.

    Meanwhile, first-time buyers are giving up.

    Renters are paying half their paycheck just to keep a roof over their heads.

    Young adults are moving back in with their parents because buying a starter home has become a fantasy.

    And Washington is playing, “I’ll help you… if you give me what I want first.”

    Housing isn’t a poker chip.

    Families shouldn’t be collateral damage.

    And if Congress finally manages to pass something that might actually help people find a place to live????

    Sign the damn bill.

    Scarlett says no.


    Want to Read It Yourself?

    I always encourage people to verify what they’re reading—even when it’s me.

    Official Congressional Resources

    •  Bill Summary

    •  Full Bill Text⁠


  • They didn’t change the laws, they changed the words.

    They didn’t change the laws, they changed the words.

    How “embryo adoption” became the next step to personhood.

    They learned something after Roe v. Wade was overturned.

    If you tell people exactly what you’re trying to do, they push back.

    So now they call it something people won’t question.

    “Embryo adoption.”

    It sounds compassionate.

    Who could possibly be against helping families?

    That’s exactly why the name matters.

    The Trump administration is using federal dollars to support an Embryo Adoption Program. On the surface, it sounds like another fertility program.

    It isn’t.

    The entire premise is that frozen embryos should be treated as children waiting to be adopted.

    Read that again.

    Not potential life.

    Not embryos stored in a fertility clinic.

    Children.

    That isn’t just a wording choice.

    It’s a legal argument.

    For years, anti-abortion organizations have been working toward one goal: fetal personhood. The idea is simple. If legal personhood begins the moment an egg is fertilized, then every fertilized embryo has the legal rights of a child.

    Once you accept that idea, everything else starts to change.

    If a frozen embryo is a child, what happens to IVF clinics that routinely create multiple embryos?

    What happens when embryos are tested for genetic conditions?

    What happens when unused embryos are discarded because the family has completed treatment?

    And what happens to emergency contraception or other birth control methods that opponents argue could affect a fertilized egg, even when medical evidence says they primarily work by preventing ovulation?

    These aren’t hypothetical questions.

    They’re the legal consequences of redefining when personhood begins.

    Notice what’s missing from the conversation.

    Nobody asked the American people whether frozen embryos should have the same legal status as children.

    Nobody voted on it.

    Congress didn’t debate it.

    Instead, the language is changing first.

    Because language shapes law.

    If government agencies start describing frozen embryos as children in grant programs, policy documents, and official guidance, that language doesn’t stay there forever. It becomes part of the legal foundation for future court cases, legislation, and regulatory decisions.

    Support IVF if you want.

    Oppose abortion if you want.

    Those are debates reasonable people can have.

    But every American should be paying attention when the federal government quietly starts redefining personhood one policy at a time.

    This isn’t just about helping families have children.

    It’s about changing what the government believes a child already is.

    And once that definition changes, the consequences won’t stop at abortion.

    Scarlett says no.

  • When Did Everything Become Your Problem?

    When Did Everything Become Your Problem?

    Somewhere Along the Way, They Changed the Deal

    Nobody announced it.

    There wasn’t a national speech.

    No parade.

    No headline.

    But somewhere along the way, America quietly changed the deal.

    There was a time when employers took responsibility for more than your paycheck.

    If you worked hard and stayed loyal, many companies promised a pension.

    Healthcare in retirement was more common.

    College didn’t require decades of debt.

    A single income could often buy a home and support a family.

    Was life perfect?

    Of course not.

    But something fundamental has changed.

    Today, if you can’t afford college…

    That’s your problem.

    If your medical bills bankrupt you…

    That’s your problem.

    If housing prices outrun your paycheck…

    That’s your problem.

    If your retirement account loses half its value because the stock market crashes the year before you retire…

    That’s your problem too.

    Look closely and you’ll notice a pattern.

    The risks didn’t disappear.

    They changed owners.

    The responsibility that businesses and institutions once carried has been steadily shifted onto ordinary people.

    When pensions gave way to 401(k)s, companies didn’t just change retirement plans.

    They changed who carried the risk.

    If the investments failed, workers paid the price.

    Not the company.

    That wasn’t an accident.

    It was a business decision.

    And it wasn’t the only one.

    Over the past forty years we’ve watched more and more of life’s biggest risks land squarely on the shoulders of the people least able to absorb them.

    Healthcare.

    Housing.

    Higher education.

    Retirement.

    Meanwhile, corporate profits reached record highs, CEO pay exploded, and workers were told to budget better, skip the avocado toast, and somehow invest their way to security.

    Here’s the question I can’t stop asking.

    When did America stop asking, “How do we build a country where hard work leads to security?”

    And start asking, “Why didn’t you prepare better?”

    Some people will tell you that’s just capitalism.

    Others will tell you that’s just life.

    Scarlett calls it something else.

    A broken deal.

    And maybe it’s time we stopped pretending nobody noticed.

    Scarlett says no.

  • When Did Belonging Become a Competition?

    When Did Belonging Become a Competition?

    America teaches children to scream “we’re number one” before it teaches them how to belong.

    What in the flip?

    Be the best.

    Beat the rest.

    Win the game.

    Make the team.

    Get the trophy.

    Get picked.

    Get ranked.

    Get ahead.

    And then we act shocked when people grow up believing their worth depends on being chosen.

    Scarlett loves effort. She loves excellence. She loves watching people push themselves and discover what they’re capable of.

    But there is a difference between encouraging people to grow and teaching them that second place means second-class.

    That is where the damage starts.

    Because here’s what is not on the pep rally banner —

    Most people will not be number one.

    Most kids will not be the star athlete.

    Most students will not be valedictorian.

    Most workers will not be the top producer.

    Most people will spend their lives doing ordinary, necessary, beautiful things that hold families, workplaces, neighborhoods, schools, and communities together.

    And somehow we teach them to feel like that is not enough.

    That is the part Scarlett cannot stand.

    Not everyone wants to be famous.

    Not everyone wants to dominate.

    Not everyone wants to crush the competition.

    Some people just want to belong.

    They want to be included.

    They want to be needed.

    They want to know they matter even when they are not winning, performing, producing, ranking, proving, and auditioning for basic human worth.

    And honestly?

    That should not be a radical request.

    The world does not run because everyone is the best.

    It runs because people show up.

    They help.

    They teach.

    They coach.

    They clean.

    They drive.

    They listen.

    They organize.

    They care.

    They stay.

    Competition has its place.

    But when a culture worships winning too much, it starts treating belonging like something people have to earn.

    You belong if you win.

    You belong if you stand out.

    You belong if someone chooses you.

    No.

    People need belonging before they can become their best.

    Not after.

    Scarlett says no to a world where everyone is taught to climb over each other just to feel worthy.

    Maybe the better question is not “are you number one?”

    Maybe it is this —

    Are the people around you glad you are on the team?

  • They Want June Cleaver Back

    They Want June Cleaver Back

    Women Remember the Fine Print.

    Every time women’s rights come up, somebody starts romanticizing the past.

    They want June Cleaver back.

    And Donna Reed.

    And Harriet Nelson.

    And every perfectly dressed television mother who smiled in a spotless kitchen while dinner magically appeared, children behaved, and nobody talked about money, fear, abuse, depression, alcoholism, infidelity, or what happened when the front door closed.

    Later came Carol Brady, Marion Cunningham, and a dozen other television versions of the ideal American family.

    The message was always the same:

    This is what a good woman looks like.

    Smile.

    Serve.

    Sacrifice.

    Don’t complain.

    Don’t ask for too much.

    And whatever you do, don’t make anyone uncomfortable by wanting more.

    The problem?

    Most of it was fantasy.

    Television sold America an image.

    Real women lived something very different.

    Women couldn’t get a credit card in their own name.

    Women couldn’t easily get a mortgage.

    Women often couldn’t build independent credit.

    Women had fewer career opportunities.

    Women frequently stayed in bad marriages because leaving meant financial disaster.

    June Cleaver never had to wonder how she would support herself if Ward left.

    The script never asked that question.

    Real women did.

    That’s why I roll my eyes every time someone talks about going back to “traditional values.”

    Traditional for whom?

    Because what some people call traditional values often looks suspiciously like traditional dependence.

    Women have spent generations fighting for rights men never had to fight for.

    The right to vote.

    The right to own property.

    The right to build credit.

    The right to have careers.

    The right to serve in the military.

    The right to control their own financial future.

    Not because women wanted special treatment.

    Because women wanted access to opportunities that men already had.

    And now we’re watching a military ceremony honoring women veterans get canceled.

    A ceremony recognizing women who volunteered, served, sacrificed, deployed, led, and defended this country.

    Women who earned that recognition.

    Women who earned that respect.

    Women who shouldn’t have to keep proving their value every single generation.

    That’s what bothers me.

    Women raise families.

    Women build careers.

    Women care for aging parents.

    Women volunteer.

    Women run businesses.

    Women serve their communities.

    Women serve their country.

    Women keep entire households functioning while carrying mental loads that would break most people.

    Then society turns around and asks whether women have contributed enough to deserve recognition.

    ENOUGH!

    Women are not a diversity initiative.

    Women are not a special interest group.

    Women are half the population.

    We’ve spent centuries helping build this country while fighting for rights that many men received simply by being born.

    Forgive us if we’re not interested in going backward.

    Scarlett says no.


  • Children With Disabilities Are Not Paperwork

    Children With Disabilities Are Not Paperwork

    The Trump administration is moving special education oversight out of the Department of Education and into Health and Human Services.

    Supporters call it reorganization.

    Parents call it something else.

    Because when a child needs help, the question is not which federal agency handles the paperwork.

    The question is whether that child gets the services they need.

    And that is where Scarlett gets pissed.

    Scarlett has a granddaughter on the autism spectrum.

    She does not know exactly what support her granddaughter will need as she grows.

    She does not know what challenges she will face.

    But she knows this:

    Her granddaughter deserves every opportunity to become whoever she is capable of becoming.

    And that opportunity should not depend on how much money her parents have.

    Because here is the ugly truth nobody wants to talk about:

    When public support systems are weakened, wealthy families still find a way.

    They hire specialists.

    They pay for private evaluations.

    They pay for tutors.

    They pay for therapies.

    They pay for advocates.

    They pay for private schools designed specifically for children with additional needs.

    Someone close to Scarlett has a grandson who requires specialized educational support. His parents are fortunate enough to afford a private school designed to meet those needs.

    Good.

    Every child deserves that kind of support.

    But what about the families who cannot write those checks?

    What about the single mother working two jobs?

    What about the grandparents raising grandchildren?

    What about the parents already choosing between rent, groceries, prescriptions, and gas?

    What happens to their children?

    Because those children deserve the same opportunity to succeed.

    Scarlett’s own children benefited from IEPs and educational support because ADHD was part of their family’s story.

    And yes, Scarlett knows exactly what some people are thinking.

    ADHD?

    Scarlett?

    No.

    Surely not the woman with a demanding full-time job, a real life outside of Scarleting, 47 tabs open, three causes on fire, a missing password, a half-written post, an unanswered text, laundry judging her from the corner, and a sudden urgent need to reorganize a website menu at midnight.

    Shocking.

    But when Scarlett was a kid, nobody knew what the heck ADHD was.

    There were no IEP meetings.

    There were no accommodations.

    There were no conversations about executive functioning, learning differences, or how smart kids can still struggle.

    There was “sit still.”

    There was “pay attention.”

    There was “try harder.”

    And in Catholic school, there was sometimes a yardstick.

    Scarlett is not romanticizing that. She is condemning it.

    Because a lot of children were punished for things adults did not understand, did not support, or did not want to deal with.

    Scarlett still remembers getting whacked across the knees because her skirt was a little too short.

    Every Friday for most of seventh and all of eighth grade.

    The crime?

    Having a skirt that was more than 3 inches above her knee.

    The culprit?

    According to the school, the child wearing the uniform.

    Not the parent who bought it.

    Not the family budget.

    Not the fact that children have the audacity to grow.

    The child.

    Ah yes.

    The educational philosophy of the era seemed to be: when in doubt, blame the kid.

    That was not discipline.

    That was adults taking their frustration, control, and ignorance out on a child.

    And yes, here is another hidden connection to Scarlett’s abortion article.

    Because this is the same pattern.

    Force the birth.

    Police the child.

    Punish the parent.

    Ignore the poverty.

    Blame the kid.

    Then act shocked when people say the system was never really pro-life at all.

    Children are not born into equal circumstances.

    Some are born into families with money, time, advocates, access, transportation, flexibility, private specialists, and backup plans.

    Others are born into families doing the absolute best they can while barely keeping the lights on.

    That child’s future should not depend on which family they got dropped into.

    That is why special education matters.

    That is why IEPs matter.

    That is why public schools matter.

    That is why federal protections matter.

    That is why Federal Pell Grants matter. Or better yet, some form of universal secondary education.

    Because support does not make a child less capable.

    It helps the world finally see what was already there.

    Scarlett’s children didn’t succeed because someone lowered the bar.

    They succeeded because someone finally understood what they needed to clear it.

    And they succeeded because they had a mother in their corner.

    A mother who believed in them.

    A mother who pushed for them.

    A mother who sat through meetings, asked questions, challenged decisions, and occasionally became a royal pain in the ass when she thought someone was overlooking her kids.

    A mother who sometimes fought battles for them that, looking back, she probably should have let them fight themselves.

    But when you are a parent and you see your child struggling, you do not always get that balance right.

    You just fight.

    Because children need systems that work.

    But they also need adults who will fight like hell when those systems don’t.

    And if we make it harder for families to access services, harder to enforce protections, and harder to hold schools accountable, the children who suffer will not be the wealthy ones.

    The wealthy will find another option.

    The children who suffer will be the ones whose families do not have one.

    Children with disabilities are not paperwork.

    They are not budget items.

    They are not political talking points.

    They are children.

    And they deserve better than this.

    Scarlett says no.

  • Scarlett’s Granddaughters Have Fewer Rights Than She Did

    Scarlett’s Granddaughters Have Fewer Rights Than She Did

    Every now and then, Scarlett wonders where she would be today if she had not had an abortion in her 20s.

    Not because she regrets it.

    Not because she is looking for forgiveness.

    And certainly not because she owes strangers an explanation.

    She wonders because one decision can change the entire direction of a life.

    A different job.

    A different city.

    Different relationships.

    Different opportunities.

    Maybe different children.

    Maybe a completely different version of Scarlett.

    She will never know.

    That is the thing about life.

    You only get to live one version of it.

    The loudest people in the abortion debate always seem convinced they know exactly what would have happened.

    They do not.

    Neither does Scarlett.

    Maybe her life would have been better.

    Maybe it would have been harder.

    Maybe both.

    If Scarlett is being honest, she believes she made the right decision.

    More than that, she believes her life was better because she made it.

    She believes her family’s life was better because she made it.

    The opportunities she had.

    The people she loved.

    The children she eventually raised.

    The grandchildren she adores.

    None of it exists exactly as it does today without that choice.

    But certainty is a funny thing.

    Because Scarlett will never know.

    There is no alternate universe she can visit.

    No second life she can compare against this one.

    Only the life she lived.

    The one she built.

    The one she (mostly) loves.

    And the one she was free to choose.

    But she knows one thing for certain:

    The decision was hers.

    And that matters.

    While Scarlett was a child, abortion became legal.

    Women before her fought for that right.

    Not because they loved abortion.

    Not because they celebrated it.

    Not because they wanted anyone to have one.

    They fought because they understood something painfully basic:

    A woman should own her own future.

    She should decide whether she is ready.

    She should decide what risks she is willing to take.

    She should decide what path her life follows.

    Not politicians.

    Not judges.

    Not preachers.

    Not strangers.

    Her.

    By the time Scarlett was old enough to face that decision, that right existed.

    When one of the biggest crossroads of her life arrived, Scarlett was allowed to choose.

    Today, Scarlett’s granddaughters have fewer rights than she did.

    After decades of progress.

    Scarlett’s GRANDDAUGHTERS have fewer rights than she did.

    After generations of women fought, marched, voted, organized, argued, and sacrificed.

    SCARLETT’S GRANDDAUGHTERS HAVE FEWER RIGHTS THAN SHE DID.

    We are now debating whether young women deserve the same freedom their grandmothers had.

    What in the flip kind of progress is that?

    And before anyone says, “Well, adoption is always an option,” Scarlett would like a word.

    She was adopted.

    So yes, she knows adoption can be a beautiful answer.

    Scarlett had a classmate who was also adopted.  That friend’s parents told her she was chosen.

    Chosen.

    They said it so she would know she was loved.

    Wanted.

    Welcomed.

    That is one version of adoption.

    Scarlett had another.

    When her mother was angry about whatever normal childhood behavior had pushed the wrong button that day, she would remind Scarlett she should be grateful to have a roof over her head.

    Grateful she was not in foster care.  Grateful for private school.  Just flipping grateful.

    Imagine being a child and learning that love could come with a bill.

    Imagine learning that shelter could be used as a weapon.

    Imagine learning that belonging could be conditional if you were inconvenient enough.

    So please spare Scarlett the neat little adoption speeches.

    Adoption may be an answer.

    It is not the answer.

    Not for every woman.

    Not for every pregnancy.

    Not for every child.

    Not for every life.

    The people shouting “just put the baby up for adoption” are usually not volunteering to carry the pregnancy, endure the birth, navigate the trauma, pay the bills, or live with the consequences.

    Imagine.

    You do not have to agree with Scarlett’s decision.

    That was never the point.

    The point is that it was hers.

    No politician knew her circumstances.

    No judge knew her fears.

    No activist knew her future.

    And none of them had to live with the consequences.

    Scarlett did.

    That is what freedom means.

    The right to make profoundly personal decisions for yourself.

    The right to succeed because of them.

    The right to struggle because of them.

    The right to own them.

    So yes, Scarlett sometimes thinks about the life she did not live.

    But she spends a lot more time thinking about the young women whose futures are being decided by people they will never meet.

    And that makes her angry.

    Because every woman deserves ownership of her own future.

    Scarlett had that right.

    Our granddaughters should have it too.

    Scarlett says no.