by Jarret Liotta
WESTPORT — Hoping to protect the longstanding federal choice law — and share their passion and emotion with a like-minded community — some 300 protesters filled the Post Road bridge downtown Saturday morning.
“If they think that women are just going to roll over and do nothing while they take our rights away and bring us back to 1970 … it’s not going to happen,” said Leslie Downey of Fairfield.
Well-over 100 signs dotted both sides of the Ruth Steinkraus Cohen Bridge, with a fervent but good-spirited crowd shouting support and slogans to passing cars.
“I can’t believe we have to be doing this stuff still,” said one Westport woman, reflecting the frustration of many present at the prospect of having to again battle out this civil rights issue.
Many drivers leaned on their horns in support as they passed, egging on the crowd. Some drove by in silence. One grey-haired bicycle rider headed across the bridge into Westport waving a rude Finger at the protestors as he scuttled by.
Several different organizations took part in organizing the event, including Planned Parenthood and the League of Women Voters.
Asked the purpose for even holding demonstrations like these, Laura Smits, president of the LWV of Connecticut, noted several reasons.
“A — it makes us feel better, like we can do something,” she said, “and also it takes it out of the shadows.”
She said that while the decision would impact low-income women the most, as well as women of color, it affects all women.
“This is not acceptable,” she said. “We can’t go back … This is ridiculous.”
While the majority of people represented on the bridge were adult women, there were also a number of men in attendance, as well as children and whole families.
“I’m here to support the League and the organizers,” said William Tong, Connecticut’s attorney general, who came to show support.
“This is a tragic and destructive decision if it becomes real,” he said.
Jarret Liotta is Executive Editor of the Westport Journal. Learn more at this link.
My body my choice – would love to know how many of the folks there supported mask mandates. 98 percent?
Probably all of them- they probably weren’t trumpers.
Meg, I understand your frustration. But for a communicable disease, the mask does two things. It protects you AND it decreases the chance that you will infect someone else. The key to minimizing death in an epidemic is decreasing transmission. The masks help with that. Same with speed limits and drinking-and-driving. We have laws about that, not to limit your freedom, but to protect others from harm. This sort of thing will always be a compromise.
Not to speak for Meg here, but I think the better analogy would have been vaccine mandates. Masks do help, although there have been plenty of studies that show that they do not work at all. But I do wonder how many of these folks supported vaccine mandates. My guess would be an overwhelming majority.
Vaccine mandate disconnect is probably even more meaningful. If bodily autonomy is sacrosanct, hard to reconcile why the state would have no legitimate interest in protecting the unborn but every right to require an injection of very questionable efficacy when it comes to disease spread with potential risks to the patient.
I noticed one banner started: “NEVER an easy choice.” Why isn’t it an easy choice? The only plausible reason I can come up with for why it’s NEVER easy because it’s a human life – a person – a child? And what about the millions (!!!) of FEMALE babies that have been aborted? Where was there right to choose? NEVER. They didn’t have a fighting chance.