Jim Fossel’s recent commentary in the Jan. 26 Central Maine Sunday, “What was the point of Portland’s anti-Trump protest?,” relates his experience of being in Portland and wondering what demonstration participants hoped to accomplish. His piece would be stronger had he stopped to talk with them and given the opportunity to answer this question. A simple answer is “for a variety or reasons.” One might be to exercise the rights given in the Constitution of freedom of speech and “the right of the people peacefully to assemble, and petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

Fossel suggests that voters “demonstrate in protest a specific policy.” He might have learned that some demonstrators were protesting Project 2025, a policy agenda aiming at taking away rights that have been earned over centuries of hard work and negotiation; an agenda that the current administration knew about, tried to hide from voters, and denied knowing about despite evidence to the contrary.

Some protested the threat of civil rights laws being overturned such as Title IX, voting rights, disability rights, and LGBT laws. Others protested threats to constitutional amendments that guarantee freedom of religion, separation of church and state, and equal rights for women.

Protesters may have addressed things as trivial as ethics and civility in government. Had my five year old grandson called a fellow preschool classmate “dumb” he would have been disciplined. We are faced with a government where incivility is allowed and encouraged; ethics are ignored; a convicted criminal and tax evader rules our country; and murderers, and people who threatened our elected representatives and desecrated the house of our democracy, are pardoned.

Our constitutional rights “… establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, … promote the General Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty.” Kudos to the protesters who, with others nation wide, exercised those rights.

Dr. Beth Clark

Waterville