Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I know the Declaration is divinely inspired. As we know Bible scripture is interpreted so many different ways and used to bolster any point of view mankind can think up. So it is with interpreting the Declaration.
The world (and America) in the 1776 did not have significant scientific academy. They knew nothing about the brain or psychiatry nor the function of bodily organs nor that germs existed. There were no railways, automobiles or other means of transportation other than livestock, wagons, hand-drawn carts and ships. There were no factories or machinery (industrialization).
Slavery was not invented in the Americas. It was common on the globe at the time. Spain, Portuguese, France, England, and the Dutch were colonizing all over the world, using the inhabitants as slaves and setting up distribution contracts.
Actually they were educated. Reading was taught separately from writing (much like today where kids are not taught legible script, some can only print) since it was considered necessary to read Scripture. By 1790, Alexandria VA with a population of 2,748 had five newspapers. At the time of the Revolution, Williamsburg had three papers (they all had the same name the Virginia Gazette which made it confusing) and its population was estimated to be 1,880.
The printing press was invented in China and first mechanized in France. Newspapers were usually a one page publication.
Great responses! You can't just read some basic historical facts from over 200 years ago and make assumptions. You have to explore the world these people were living in, read their letters and read writings from the time period. You have to put yourself in their time period before you can even attempt to understand anything from that time period.
Another thing to consider is that many states would just have chosen not to join the U.S. if that meant they had to do away with slavery. I imagine that might have lead to the south forming their own country at some point, independent of the north, and a continuation of slavery beyond 1865.
The Founding Fathers most certainly thought about slavery, the morality of it, and questioning how they could start a new country with slavery entrenched in its economic system. The problem is that there was no country, and wouldn't be one unless there were compromises. They focused on the first problem and that was uniting the independent colonies. They certainly knew that slavery would have to be dealt with at some point.
I'm paraphrasing here, but something Lincoln said in the Douglas-Lincoln debates was that he knows southerners were born into this system that uses slavery as its backbone. He said slavery was wrong, but he didn't condemn every slave owner. He also said if everyone were to start fresh no one would think to start the institution of slavery from scratch, it was something that they were handed, but something that needed to end.
Many of these people you consider "rich" were considered so based purely on the number of slaves and the amount of land they owned. It's easy to look back and say, I personally would have given everything away and started from absolutely nothing if it meant the end of slavery. If you go into studying history with that belief, then you will never understand anyone from a time period other than your own.
Exactly. An earlier post goes into the fact that slavery was pretty much standard fare for most of man's time from early civilization until recent times. We are actually in a social experiment (that is only about 150 years old) where the world has been largely WITHOUT slavery (and yes, it still exists today in various forms, ironically most often still in Mother Africa). The people today pointing and vilifying the U.S. because of the "All Men are Created Equal" statement not reconciling with the historical fact of slavery, would likely have been slaveowners (or slaves) themselves had they been born into that time. My own ancestors were likely some form of serf or sharecropper at one time in Europe. Does Europe owe me reparations?
We can't really explain away or be apologists for short-comings of the 18th century. The founding fathers looked at the world much differently and considered equality differently and the notion of "all men" quite differently than we understand it. The evolution of ideas and words cannot be ignored as we look at history.
The Declaration of Independence was a list of grievances as well as a broadside and persuasive document to gain popular support for independence over a year after the fighting had already begun. I have no doubt that the drafters fully believed in what they were doing, if not all of the words as we would understand them -- the consequences were much too great to just toss out an indictment of the King and Parliament even when separated by the Atlantic. The declaration was an attempt to explain why the Americans had taken up arms, to their own people as well as the sympathetic voices in Britain. We look back at the document as a guide-post and icon of our republic but it had a direct and timely purpose and focus on events in 1776. I don't know that Jefferson and Franklin were writing for people of the 21st century.
More importantly, the newly Federal Government was weak. The power belonged to the States. The shift to a powerful central government only after the Civil War has concluded.
Indeed. Several Supreme Court opinions since the conclusion of the Civil War have upheld that a state does not have the right to secede from the Union. If that's not a bastardization of the original intent of our founders, I don't know what is.
My recommendation: Ditch the Critical Theory propaganda and just READ some history.
That was going to be my next post: Go read a book. Or several.
You know, in school I just hated history with a passion. I am analytical, a numbers girl, and excelled at math (until pre-calc, at which point I completely petered out, lol). But after school and into adulthood? I can't get enough of history; I love it. And there are so many resources out there for anyone who genuinely wants to learn. The 24 years since I graduated college have been more educational for me than my 16 years of formal education.
Indeed. Several Supreme Court opinions since the conclusion of the Civil War have upheld that a state does not have the right to secede from the Union. If that's not a bastardization of the original intent of our founders, I don't know what is.
The Framers did not support the right of a state to secede. The Articles of Confederation stated in its preamble that the United States was perpetual. When the Constitution was written that weak perpetual union was strengthen.
Perhaps James Wilson summed it up best on July 28, 1787 when he said:
“Can we forget for whom we are forming a government ? Is it for men, or for the imaginary beings called States?”
Federalist 45 is perhaps worth reading. https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed45.asp While the states maintain some sovereignty in some things, secession is not listed. Madison thought so much of federal supremacy that he thought the federal government should have a veto over all state laws, that however was not passed by the Convention.
No, it wasn't. The Declaration of Independence listed the grievances the Colonies had against the British and provided a justification to go to war against Great Britain.
The Slavery issue that some posters have raised was not an issue. Thomas Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence and he was a slave owner. There was no incongruity in his mind, nor for John Adams who never owned a slave and abhorred the institution. This was in 1776, not 1976.
It IS interesting to note that there were quite a few slaves who joined the British side and were rewarded, after the Revolution, with land grants in Canada and some Caribbean possessions of the British.
Indeed. Several Supreme Court opinions since the conclusion of the Civil War have upheld that a state does not have the right to secede from the Union. If that's not a bastardization of the original intent of our founders, I don't know what is.
I can make it easy for you. The constitution provides an entry mechanism for states but no exit mechanism. This makes sense since a seceding state will rarely be in a position to repay benefits they received from joining the U.S. Do you really think recently admitted Texas could have, in 1861, repaid the Feds for paying off their hefty Republic of Texas debts?
I don’t the evidence suggests that the founding fathers were liars
I think the declaration is an ideal we must live up to
If Portland and the burning and looting of my town in June are evidence
We are in a poor position to scorn the founding fathers
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
