Wednesday, July 15, 2009

Rediscovering Our Unalienable Rights

Okay, so let me recap my last blog, because this one will be tied to it. In the last blog we see that not all progress is helpful, but rather that some is destructive towards a society and towards a country. We also realized that politicians and citizens have used the Constitution as a tool to carry out the "progress" that they want, because they do not view it as an immutable document, but rather a guideline for how America should be today subject to change. In other words, they view the Constitution as subjective, open to opinions, debate, and discussion, rather than an objective, unchanging standard for American government and society. But before I continue, I have to say that this is not every politician, and probably not even most, but it is a view that I have noticed is growing larger and rapidly in America.

So the main point of this blog will be my opinion on why these views have been growing. But in order to do this, we have to realize why the Constitution is an unchanging standard in the first place, and to do that I think we have to go to the Declaration of Independence once again. And in this Declaration are the famous words, "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." This could be the most important sentence within the Declaration of Independence, because from this single sentence we get the reason for the Revolution and the basis for the Constitution. The colonies broke free from Britain because they were denied the unalienable Rights given to them by their Creator, and then they created the Constitution to protect those rights given to them by their Creator, and create a system of government that would be able to protect those rights the most effectively.

Now what would happen if that society largely stopped believing in that Creator and those inalienable rights given to man by Him? Unfortunately this is being seen in America today. Everything has become relative to what man thinks, since there is no ultimate authority from the Creator to keep things from changing. If people believe that the Constitution is based on rights given to them by the Creator, then it will not change and is the ultimate foundation for America. However, if people largely begin to believe there is no Creator, then the Constitution along with truth and morality become relative, and are then susceptible to change.

You might ask why is this that big of a deal or what difference does it make? Well, we are beginning to see the consequences of this type of thinking, especially through the judicial branch and the Supreme Court. We see some of the justices, not all, ruling based on their opinions and emotions rather than testing cases to what the Constitution says. Then, they build on their former rulings in future ones, saying based on Court Case ____________ (fill in the blank) we ruled this, so now we are going to base our decision on that ruling rather than based on the Constitution. In other words, the Creator is no longer the supreme authority, but man is, and man becomes the author of our rights.

When this happens, people can then be promised "fake" rights that man creates, which sound good but end up taking away individual rights, and also the rights of others. And even today we see new rights that have never been a part of this country: gay rights, the right for health care, abortion rights, and others, while we see our Constitutional rights under attack, such as the right to bear arms and property rights. If nothing changes in America, it will be no surprise to see more man-made rights created and Constitutional rights come under attack.

But like I said, it is not too late to stop the attacks taking place. We need to stand up for what we believe, and be able to refute others who think differently. I will stand up for the rights given to me by the Creator and urge you to do the same. What do you think?

No comments:

Post a Comment