Letter Submission

To submit a letter to the editor, please email us at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.. Letters must contain the author's name, hometown (state as well, if not in New Hampshire) and phone number, but the number will not be published. We do not run anonymous letters. Local issues get priority, as do local writers. We encourage writers to keep letters to no more than 400 words, but will accept longer letters to be run on a space-available basis. Editors reserve the right to edit letters for spelling, grammar, punctuation, excessive length and unsuitable content.

 

Legislature needs to support the Community Rights Amendment

To The Daily Sun,

New Hampshire was the very first state to adopt a form of government separate from the British Empire. New Hampshire's first constitution — only 911 words long — was adopted by the state Legislature on January 5, 1776, six months before the Declaration of Independence was signed. The current New Hampshire Constitution was adopted on June 2, 1784, replacing the original state constitution with a two-part document. The first part enumerates some of the unalienable rights which are the birthright of everyone, and the second part lays out the form of government for the state.

The Bill of Rights that constitutes the first part of the New Hampshire Constitution is unique and remarkable when compared to most other modern state constitutions. It retains much of the fervor for self-governing rights that was expressed in Thomas Paine's world-changing "Common Sense," as well as the inspirational and powerful words of the Declaration Independence.

Article 1 declares: All men are born equally free and independent; therefore, all government of right originates from the people, is founded in consent, and instituted for the general good.

Article 2 declares: All men have certain natural, essential, and inherent rights among which are, the enjoying and defending life and liberty; acquiring, possessing, and protecting, property; and, in a word, of seeking and obtaining happiness.

Article 8 declares: All power residing originally in, and being derived from the people, all the magistrates and officers of government are their substitutes and agents, and at all times accountable to them.

And Article 10 declares: Government being instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security, of the whole community, and not for the private interest or emolument of any one man, family, or class of men; therefore, whenever the ends of government are perverted, and public liberty manifestly endangered, and all other means of redress are ineffectual, the people may, and of right ought to reform the old, or establish a new government. The doctrine of nonresistance against arbitrary power, and oppression, is absurd, slavish, and destructive of the good and happiness of mankind.

Article 14 declares: Every subject of this state is entitled to a certain remedy, by having recourse to the laws, for all injuries he may receive in his person, property or character, to obtain right and justice freely, without being obliged to purchase it; completely, and without any denial; promptly, and without delay, conformably to the laws.

As we can see, there should be no shyness about the right and authority of the people of New Hampshire to change their Constitution and style of government when the living generation finds that old ways and new wrongs have the effect of depriving them of their unalienable rights and their ability to govern their own communities.

Systemic errors in our current state and national governments result in violations of the right of local community self-government. It is beyond argument that these violations are real, constant, and have gone without remedy by elected representatives and the court system of the state. It has been left to the people to take corrective action, by demanding constitutional change that will guarantee in specific, unassailable terms that it is the people who govern, that they have the authority, power and right to enact and enforce laws in their own communities that prevent the state from empowering corporations to violate community rights under color of state law.

In the name of the people, the state creates corporations by issuing charters. Corporations are therefore creatures of the state, and governable in their existence and in their actions by the people. But a long train of abuses and usurpations, in which courts and legislatures have elevated corporate power over general community rights suggests an unspoken plan to reduce our democratic rights to proportions manageable by a corporate minority. It is, as our state constitution enumerates, the people may, and of right ought to reform the old, or establish a new government. The doctrine of nonresistance against arbitrary power, and oppression, is absurd, slavish, and destructive of the good and happiness of mankind.

The peaceful remedy for these wrongs is for our state Legislature to support the New Hampshire Community Rights Amendment and allow the people of the state to decide whether or not to adopt it as part of our Constitution. This amendment has been drafted and proposed by the New Hampshire Community Rights Network (NHCRN). Contact NHCRN at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..

Michelle Sanborn
NHCRN Coordinator
Alexandria

  • Category: Letters
  • Hits: 316

Accusing people of 'murdering babies' gets them up in arms

To The Daily Sun,

To Mr. Harry Mitchell: I honestly don't care about what opinion you have as long as you stop trying to impose it on others. Period.

Religion has no bearing here, nor do your personal beliefs. They just don't. And they aren't what precipitated my initial letter regarding you. No, my letter came because you lied. You lied about what Hillary Clinton stands for in direct regard to the topic of abortion. You twisted the truth to try and make a political point, and I am sick to death of you and your ilk doing exactly that.

Late last year and earlier this year the same thing happened with Planned Parenthood videos. Remember those? People wrote in to this paper slamming Democrats because of their support of Planned Parenthood and these supposed videos. Carly Fiorina even claimed to have seen these videos during one of the debates. Remember that? It was all a lie — a complete and total fabrication that was put forward to push an agenda that you support. And do you remember the outcome of that push? I do. Because on Nov. 27 of last year, a gunman who was convinced that horrible things were happening at a Planned Parenthood clinic in Colorado Springs, went there with the intention to kill someone.

That someone was 44-year-old Garrett Swasey. Gerald was originally from Melrose, Mass.. Gerald was someone my wife knew as a child. She spent some time at his home. Gerald was shot and killed by someone who believed the kinds of lies you are prone to tell. And that, Mr. Mitchell — that right there — is why I wrote in in all my pro-murdering, crass, inhumane, and rude glory. I am not anti-life or pro-abortion. I am pro-choice.

One of those choices is the one you prescribe to. The other choice you call "murder." You accuse people of "murdering babies," and that, sir, gets people up in arms and creates trouble. It leads to real and actual murder. Murder of a man with a wife and two children. Murder of doctors and nurses and countless others over the past 40 years. All because you want to impose your religious beliefs on others. And that, sir, that is why I am angry and why I respond and why I will challenge you every single time you open your mouth.

You decry murder and yet you encourage it. That is called hypocrisy. And the Bible is full of quotes about hypocrisy. I like this one from 1 John 4:20 that reads, "If anyone says, 'I love God,' and hates his brother, he is a liar; for he who does not love his brother whom he has seen cannot love God whom he has not seen." Or Psalm 55:21: "His speech was smooth as butter, yet war was in his heart; his words were softer than oil, yet they were drawn swords."

So Mr. Mitchell, that is why I write in. Not to prevent your opinions but to stymie your lies. Your opinions are harmless; your lies are fatal.

Alan Vervaeke
Gilford

  • Category: Letters
  • Hits: 530