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must contain the author's name, hometown (state as well, if not in New Hampshire) and phone number, but the number will not be published.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. Letters may be edited for spelling, grammar, punctuation and legal concerns.

 

Bras should give your female friends all the support they need

To The Daily Sun,

An open response to a letter by Roger Goun printed in the July 21 Daily Sun in support of the Free the Nipple movement:

I see your listed on your google sites as:

1. An amateur photographer, yet I looked at your photos and they are really good.

2. I see you liked Bernie, a much better choice than the two we are stuck with now.

3. You list yourself as a political geek and dork, I didn't see you as that in your self photo.

4. This last one got me, you stated you are a general trouble-maker?!

You're not a nudist advocate and you are from New Hampshire, just not this area, so I was happy to see that. You are an artist, and you see the body differently. Where as some view a topless women as a ogling opportunity, which I fear can turn into a bad situation in time.

As for the constitutional rights, I am so done with arguments over that. It's like beating a dead horse over and over again. Simply put, we are never all going to agree on it, period.

I don't support your female friends, I believe their bras should give them all the support they need. And no, I will never just look the other way, I have said that before. I also said that I will continue to call the police whenever I see it, no matter where I am, unless it's a designated area for that behavior. Then Roger I have no right to complain. Are you seeing my point?

Good luck in your photography, you should stick to it. Best of luck.

Denise C. Burke
Gilford

  • Category: Letters
  • Hits: 444

If 2nd Amendment is subject to updating, how about the 1st?

To The Daily Sun,

I try to refrain from commenting on someone else's letter; we all have our own opinions. However, I cannot let pass something that was said by Bernadette Loesch on July 1.

I will not discuss her opinions regarding the 2nd Amendment, gun rights, the NRA or gun lobby, directly. Others have done that quite well. Her opinion that the Constitution is a "living breathing document" subject to change with the times is troubling. (This opinion arises almost exclusively when liberals discuss the 2n Amendment.)

Let us assume that Ms. Loesch's opinion is true; that since the Constitution was written, its relevance diminishes with every year that passes due to the inability of the framers to envision the many changes that would take place in the future, and must change accordingly. Would that not also include the First Amendment? As Ms. Loesch pointed out, so many things have changed, "railroads, telephones, automobiles, the internet, and on and on and on."

The internet is an interesting example to discuss. Of course the men who wrote the Constitution couldn't possibly dream of the technology that is available today. We all know the many advantages the computer and internet have given us. However there is the other side of the coin; computers and the internet also make available: pornography, seditious sites advocating violence, false information, inaccurate "facts," fraud, identity theft, hackers, and on and on and on.

When the 1st Amendment was written, the only ways to communicate were by word of mouth or written. The framers "could never have imagined" the internet, the computer or their potential.

The shooter in Orlando was exercising his 1st (as well as his 2nd) Amendment rights. Freedom of religion (extreme Islamic terrorism), his hatred of gay rights, and even worse, his right to live-stream to YouTube the entire slaughter for all to see.

Is it time to consider government control of the internet, or shutting down all "unacceptable" sites exalting violence against certain races, religions, personal beliefs and lifestyles? We could outlaw Google, Explorer, Firefox, Dogpile and all other search engines that give free access to these sites. Ultimately, all computers should probably be outlawed, only to be used by the government, approved individuals, and of course, the criminal element that will always have access to computers.

Sure, there are billions of people who own and use this technology legally, morally and responsibly, for their own personal purposes. But using the same logic of Ms. Loesch regarding gun rights, the rights of the vast majority who use computers responsibly should be eliminated to accomplish the goal of stopping the few who do misuse them and the 1st Amendment. This would ensure that the Constitution keeps up with the times, right?

So ... be careful what door you open Ms. Loesch. Once you successfully deny the people their 2nd Amendment rights, it will be just a matter of time before someone else will advocate the denial other rights due to changing times and the actions of a few.

Ken Knowlton

Belmont

  • Category: Letters
  • Hits: 637