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must contain the author's name, hometown (state as well, if not in New Hampshire) and phone number, but the number will not be published.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.

 

Turtles, birds, elephants – and babies – they all deserve the right to life and protections from being killed

To The Daily Sun,

I'm just going to start by making no bones about the fact that I am a Christian. I can almost see a lot of "eye rolling" going on. But for a true Christian, the Bible is our guide book. God's word is His word to us. You may not agree with it or like everything that's in it, but that doesn't change the fact that it IS His word to us. I also understand that there are many of you readers out there who don't believe God even exists. That is your free choice. God did not create robots; He created beings with free wills to love Him or not to. You cannot change my mind concerning this and I probably cannot change your mind either. We are free to disagree.

I want to take a few moments to discuss a very divisive topic – abortion. I want to address those of you who feel a woman should have a choice to decide whether a baby has a life or not. To all of you who think a woman should be able to kill a child – I can bet that every one of you would be totally appalled if a person decided to kill a cat that was pregnant. That cat is carrying LIFE. You'd be freaking out if the kittens were born and then the owner killed them. You'd be angry if you saw someone kill all the tiny eggs in a bird's nest. Those eggs contain LIFE. You would be mortified if someone took a pregnant dog ( a dog with LIFE in it) and killed it so they wouldn't have to deal with all the pups, vet bills, care, feeding them all, etc. You would be on the phone so fast calling the SPCA, the Humane Society (maybe babies need a "Humane Society"--just a thought), or the police. Don't ever intentionally kill a cat, a bird, a dog; but it's absolutely okay to kill a human being, a helpless baby, a miraculous creation of God? A fetus , a baby, is LIFE. Even if you don't believe in God, you surely don't believe in murdering someone OUTSIDE the womb, so why is it ok to murder someone INSIDE the womb? I really cannot wrap my brain around your thinking.

This world has gone crazy! We save the turtles and it's against the law to tamper with their eggs. We protest the circus because we don't like the way an elephant might be treated. Some are protesting the pig scramble at the Deerfield fair that it's inhumane treatment for the piglets. We save the mountain gorillas, the mountain plovers, the red pandas, the plains bison, the black footed ferret. Save the whales, tuna, dolphins. Save the orangutan, save the flying earwig Hawaiian damselfly, save the Hungerford's crawling water beetle. Save the snails, save the condors, save the giant sea bass, save the wolf. Then we save the wetlands, we save the trees, we save the bees. But a person – a baby, a human – has no rights, no protection, no sympathy. God help us!

"You made all the delicate, inner parts of my body and knit me together in my mother's womb. Thank you for making me so wonderfully complex! Your workmanship is marvelous – and how well I know it. You watched me as I was being formed in utter seclusion. You saw me before I was born." Psalm 139:13-16

Marie Ludwick
Center Harbor

  • Written by Mike Mortensen
  • Category: Letters
  • Hits: 128

Second Amendment clearly says well-regulated militia, not individuals, may bear arms

To The Daily Sun,

It seems to me that the Supreme Court decision/s that have freed just about everyone to own whatever guns they want have been cynical and deliberately ignorant, and here's why:

As a (retired) high school English teacher who taught spelling, grammar and punctuation for over 50 years, I am pretty sure I know my English grammar - and know what the Second Amendment actually says:

"A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

The opening phrases clearly state that the authors of the Amendment were thinking about public safety ("well-regulated militia" and "free State") NOT UNREGULATED INDIVIDUALS. What became the National Guard is what the authors of the Second Amendment had in mind. Meanwhile, in the 18th century, because there was no National Guard yet, any "well-regulated militia" would necessarily be made up of local, voluntary, individual citizens - and so the authors of the Amendment logically and sensibly said that "the people" (not individual persons) had the right to keep and bear arms. Again: the Second Amendment is mainly about public safety - and gives individuals the right to keep and bear arms only for the sake of public safety. (Notice the staggering irony that it is precisely individuals' freedom to keep and bear ams that has unleashed public slaughters, in our country.)

To the short list of terrible decisions the Supreme Court has made, over the years, may be added this one - perhaps the most destructive and consequential of them all.

Richard B. Davis
Thornton

  • Written by Ginger Kozlowski
  • Category: Letters
  • Hits: 201