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contain the author's name, hometown (state as well, if not in New Hampshire) and phone number, but the number will not be published.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


In order to participate in politics it was necessary to join a church

To the editor,

Bob Meade has not only failed in his assertions regarding the founding era, he turns out to be quite the accomplished fiction writer. Mr. Meade claims that Article 11 of the Treaty of Tripoli was intended to mollify the Barbary Coast and that the U.S. senators and the president didn't really mean Article 11. Bob was there, of course.

Those are the talking points of the historical revisionists in the Christian Reconstructionist camp (David Barton, etc). The problem with Mr. Meade's claim is that Article 11 isn't in the Arab versions. None of the known Arabic versions of the treaty contains Article 11 so there was no attempt to mollify the Barbary Coast in the treaty the Arabs agreed to. But Article 11 was in the version unanimously ratified, article by article, by the U.S. Senate and then signed by President Adams. Article 11's statement that the "government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion" accords perfectly with the Constitution's ban on religious tests and the Establishment Clause of the First Amendments as understood by Jefferson and Madison. Why it went down this way we will probably never know. But it still doesn't negate that the article was ratified by the U.S. Senate, signed, and became the law of the land and mollification is fiction.

Mr. Meade also claimed that all the founders who signed the Declaration of Independence were Christians. It's not that simple. What he seems to be unaware of is that since the colonial era, no person could be involved or be influential in civil affairs in any of the colonies or states unless they were members of an official church. These were the times before religious tests were banned by the Constitution.

For example, George Washington refused the sacrament of communion all of his adult life. He always left the church service prior to its administration. When he was outed publicly by the pastor of the church for not participating in the sacrament, Washington promptly quit that congregation and joined another.

As Paul F. Boller noted in his book, "George Washington & Religion", "Actually, under the Anglican establishment in Virginia before the Revolution, the duties of a parish vestry were as much civil as religious in nature and it is not possible to deduce any exceptional religious zeal from the mere fact of membership. Even Thomas Jefferson was a vestryman for a while. Consisting of the leading gentlemen of the parish in position and influence (many of whom, like Washington, were also at one time or other members of the county court and of the House of Burgesses), the parish vestry, among other things, levied the parish taxes, handled poor relief, fixed land boundaries in the parish, supervised the construction, furnishing, and repairs of churches, and hired ministers and paid their salaries."

Boller also mentioned Bishop William Meade who complained in his 1857 book, "Old Churches, Ministers and Families of Virginia," "Even Mr. Jefferson and George Wythe, who did not conceal their disbelief in Christianity, took their parts in the duties of vestrymen, the one at Williamsburg, the other at Albermarle; for they wished to be men of influence."

So it's pretty clear that being a member of a church meant nothing as far as deducing the beliefs of a politician because in order to participate in politics, one was required to join a state-approved church.

"Christianity is not established by law, and the genius of our institutions requires that the Church and the State should be kept separate." (U. S. Supreme Court, Melvin v. Easley, 1860)

James Veverka

  • Category: Letters
  • Hits: 183

We in Town of Warren are grateful for Charlie Chandler's leadership

To The Daily Sun,

As we are confronted with so many political candidates with dubious qualifications or questionable character, it is refreshing to have running for our state Senate a candidate who stands out for his long history of exemplary public service, proven wisdom, and a committed concern for the State of New Hampshire and its citizens.

Charlie Chandler, running for the District 2 seat, is a retired small-town lawyer, currently volunteering on several boards, who has served in numerous capacities in state and local government, both in elected and appointed positions. We would be very fortunate to have his energy, sharp mind, and balanced approach in our state Senate.

As a resident of Warren, I have witnessed firsthand how our town has benefited from Charlie's leadership, both as a selectman and the moderator of the Warren School District. Charlie excels at running productive meetings, even when things get heated. He is a good and open listener who offers a fair hearing to all voices. His knowledge of the law and government, business, and the environment are invaluable to efficient and effective outcomes. I see him as a compassionate progressive whose wit and temperament will be welcomed by his Senate colleagues on both sides of the aisle.

Charlie's efforts on behalf of our school district have demonstrated his strong support of public education. He is also deeply committed to a healthy environment and seeking alternate energy for the state. He is the board director of the Pemi-Baker Land Trust and was appointed by the governor to the Cannon Mountain Advisory Commission. Charlie was instrumental in the creation of the Warren Woods hiking trails complex on Mount Moosilauke. He has a commendable ability to get things done.

In the Senate, Charlie will advocate for an economy that works for everyone. Already he supports members of the community through his oversight as board chairman of a local bank. Because of his legal and business acumen, he was appointed by the Secretary of the State to lead an investigation into a Ponzi scheme that had profoundly affected many New Hampshire residents.

Charlie is generous in sharing his time and knowledge, and we in Warren are grateful for his leadership. He no doubt would be an asset to his 2nd District constituents, and I strongly encourage you to give Charlie Chandler your vote.

Jennifer Alford

  • Category: Letters
  • Hits: 191