During all my years of school, I have never actually read the whole Declaration of Independence. I really enjoyed reading it, especially after reading Rousseau which was very difficult for me to understand. Even though the Declaration of Independence was written over 200 years ago, the principle behind it still holds true today. People have certain rights that one’s government must never take away.
People must not be ruled by a tyrant. That was the whole reason behind writing the Declaration of Independence. Jefferson set up his argument it a form that was easy to follow. First there was the introduction and the reason why people may separate from their ruler. Then Jefferson specifically accuses the King of Great Britain of having tyranny over the States in the end of paragraph 2. Following this there are 26 examples and reasons why the States were separating from Great Britain. The document concludes by mentioning other times in the past when the States asked Britain to grant them more freedom and how each time, they were oppressed more.
I find this format of writing an argument to be very solid. It is logical and easy to follow. Jefferson first makes his argument, then supports it through evidence.
The first paragraph is very formal. The first line is one of the famous ones from the whole Declaration. “When in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the Powers of the earth…” The Declaration of Independence is one of America’s most famous documents. It was the first step to freedom and democracy. In Jefferson’s opinion the purpose to writing such a document is so that the nation that the people are separating from knows why. It was done for formality.
One thing I find most interesting is the use of the word God. Know a days, it is such a heated topic to refer to God in any government document. People even want God removed from the pledge of allegiance; yet God is mentioned in the very first paragraph. “… the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them…” This is in reference to humans rights. In paragraph 2, Creator is mentioned. This once again refers to the rights a person has. Twice Jefferson referrers to God/Creator. He is considered to be on of America’s founding fathers. When the Supreme Court debates and issue, they try to interpret what was meant by our founding fathers. If the found fathers found it to be important to mention God and our Creator in the Declaration of Independence, why then do people not want to mention those words today? Why is there such a debate over teaching divine creation versus evolution? Just some thoughts I that came to me while I was reading.
posted by Anonymous at 9:47 PM
2 Comments:
The Declaration of Independence is a document that when thinking about the inclusion of God, we may want to ask some questions and consider possible rationales for including it. For example, who was it's target audience? The king? England? The American colonists? How would each audience view that inclusion? Has there ever been a war between two peoples where God has not been invoked to show the rightchousness of the cause? Is that what was being done here?
The Constitution does not include a mention of God, but instead calls for the separation of Church and State. This is the document by which the Founders made our government, not the Declaration of Independence. Does that affect our percetion of the founders' intention(s)?
The Pledge of Allegiance also did not include God until 1954, I believe, when it was added primarily in response to the Cold War. The pledge itself actually wasn't written until 1829. And it it wasn't officially adopted until 1942. Even after it was adopted, without "under God", the Supreme Court said in 1943 that schools could not force children to say it.
Matt, when you say in the last sentence "this is not the case" could you clarify what you mean by "this"?
interesting ideas here -- keep it going.
10:51 AM
Matt, you refer to "critics of the pledge" -- examples or specifics? And how do they refer to the constitution?
And here "However, this is not the case and individuals have the choice to say it or not, do freedom of religion is not infringed," because they do not have to recite pledge, it's not a freedom of religion issue?
6:55 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home