It seems to me that it is darn difficult to advocate for something that you don't have a full understanding of. When we're talking about saving the Republic, a clear understanding of the Republic's founding documents is important. So, I Googled "The Declaration of Independence". I read the entire thing, and then I went one step further. I made sure I understood what I read. When necessary, I did additional research to support an analysis. Now, I'm going to share what I am learning and what I think about it with you.
So, what is the Declaration of Independence? The last part of the first paragraph tells us very clearly what it is. "...a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation..." This isn't something our Founding Fathers took lightly. In simple terms, the Founding Fathers convened to put a stop to the long-standing tyranny, after years of attempts at redress had failed. Here, in this document, they made their case to the international community, knowing that doing so would brand them traitors to the British crown if the effort failed.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness."
A couple of things stand out to me about this sentence. But first, let's be clear that we understand a few terms.
Self-evident? What is it? According to Merriam-Webster, it is "evident without proof or reasoning". Since I don't think it's very clear to define a compound word using part of that compound, let's look at evident. "Clear to the sight or mind". I'll add "obvious".
Endowed? What is it? "To freely or naturally provide (someone or something) with something."
Unalienable? What is it? "Impossible to take away or give up."
Liberty? What is it? "The state or condition of people who are able to act and speak freely" and "The power to do or choose what you want to do."
Now let's put that all together in modern language. We state that these truths are obvious, that all men are created equal, that they are given by their Creator certain rights which are both impossible to take away and impossible to give up. The rights are life, the freedom to act and speak freely, and to seek their own happiness.
What's interesting here? The idea of truth has fallen out of fashion in our modern society. Truth begs the questions: What is truth? What makes them truth? These are truths according to whom? Our Founding Fathers believed that these rights were obvious. They didn't leave the existence of these rights open for debate. These rights are self-evident. Our Founding Fathers believed in a Creator. Our Founding Fathers believed that this Creator gave each of us life and liberty, and granted us the right to pursue happiness. Note there that our Founding Fathers said absolutely nothing about achieving happiness. None of us have a right to happiness. Moreover, unalienable means that government cannot take these rights away, nor can we give them up. These rights aren't owned by anyone, including the government. They are gifts, from our Creator. That leaves us with a conclusion that seems obvious to me. Truth isn't relative. Truth isn't "of man". Truth, like the rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, comes from our Creator.
What happens when we remove our Creator from the equation? We must accept that life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are privileges granted to us by our government. If those things can be given by men, they can be taken by men for any reason, at any time.
No comments:
Post a Comment