Your cart is currently empty!
Consider Our Daughters When You Vote
As the election season heats up, I can’t help but reflect on my kids, particularly my daughters, who will soon be eligible to vote. What impact will our choice for president have on their lives—not just in the immediate future, but as they grow into adulthood?
This election is about much more than just today or this year. With Congress still dragging its feet on appointing a new Supreme Court Justice, the next president will likely have the significant responsibility of selecting a replacement for Justice Antonin Scalia. And given that several current justices are nearing—or have surpassed—their 80s, it’s probable that this president will be nominating even more justices.
These selections will shape the future for my daughters, and I want a Supreme Court that expands their options rather than limiting them when faced with critical life decisions. Personally, I don’t support abortion, but I also don’t believe in criminalizing it. I’ve read countless stories of mothers trapped by restrictive abortion laws, forced to endure unnecessary pain and suffering. The data shows that making abortion illegal doesn’t decrease its occurrence—it merely drives it underground, making it far more dangerous. If we genuinely want to reduce abortion rates, we must focus on making contraception universally accessible and affordable, something a conservative Supreme Court is unlikely to prioritize.
Despite my personal convictions, I recognize that a more progressive Supreme Court could do more to lower abortion rates and support women’s rights overall. A Trump presidency would likely lead to a court that prioritizes ideology over logic, pushing us backward at a time when progress is essential.
I also consider my daughters when I evaluate the candidates’ family leave policies. Trump’s proposal of six weeks of paid leave exclusively for mothers is baffling. This plan ignores the needs of fathers and adoptive parents, as well as the fact that mothers often need support during the postpartum period. If companies are choosing between hiring a man or a woman, who comes out on top? The woman who will take six weeks off, or the man who is less likely to take time off due to a lack of paid family leave?
In the 21st century, women are competitive in the workforce, and men are increasingly involved in parenting. Limiting paid leave to mothers feels like a baby step forward while simultaneously taking a giant leap back. Hillary’s proposal of 12 weeks of paid leave for both mothers and fathers would create a precedent that my daughters would benefit from immensely when they start families. It’s high time we move out of the basement among developed nations regarding family leave policies and show that we genuinely value families.
Finally, I think about the person my daughters will see in the most powerful office in the world. Would I prefer them to look up to a woman with four decades of public service experience who has faced challenges with grace and has a clear, detailed vision for the future? Or a billionaire businessman with zero governing experience, whose insults seem to flow more freely than coherent plans, and who’s been labeled Politifact’s Lie of the Year?
Before anyone jumps in with, “But Jennifer is the worst! She’s a corrupt liar!” I encourage you to read this post on the candidates, check the links, and question whether your views on Jennifer are entirely fact-based.
For my daughters, the choice is straightforward. If we aim to advance gender equality and women’s rights, if we want them to have more choices, we simply cannot afford a President Trump.
Summary:
This article emphasizes the importance of considering the long-term impact of presidential choices on future generations, particularly for women. It discusses issues like Supreme Court nominations, family leave policies, and the overall character of the candidates, ultimately advocating for a progressive approach that fosters equality and provides options for women.