Endowed by our Creator
In the prevailing political debate, defending the Constitution is a rallying cry of shared human values and a diametric culture of ownership. Most of the original document defined the role of the Legislative, Executive, and Judicial departments, and did not enumerate the rights and freedoms most often cited. Most of us refer to the Bill of Rights and specific “Emancipation Amendments” and other extensions of voting rights to define unalienable rights.
More frequently, challenging candidates and political activists cite the second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence. Whether or not our nation was established as a Christian nation the quote reads “We are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.” I don’t think anyone would question this, but the Declaration of Independence was primarily a treatise avowing our national sovereignty and condemnation of the tyranny and abuses of the King of Great Britain. It is not our governing document.
There are so many ambiguities in that statement. Life is a continuum originating in the Garden of Eden, or in the scientific function of either intelligent design or laws of nature. Life as an individual is a function of human reproduction and the complexity of the DNA miracle. In the interest of brevity, I will not address the concept of birth control, personhood, conflicting rights, and rights of citizenship. That unyielding debate continues.
The Constitution is neutral in its minimal religious references. The Creator cited in the Declaration of Independence may have been a reference to the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, or the Christian God, or as defined by the Deists, Humanists, and founders with a more scientific and secular comprehension of the creative process.
Liberty also has relative disparity. Our nation was born in Colonialism within which slavery was permitted, or even necessary, for an agricultural economy. The denial of liberty and the fractional humanity of slaves; the trail of tears and confiscation of Native American land; and Bible-based subjugation of women give little credence to the erroneous nostalgia for the myth of a former time.
The pursuit of happiness is not to be confused with the right of happiness. Happiness is a state of mind, contingent to some extent to success and quality of life. Success is a variable based on individual economic, moral, altruistic, physical, and intellectual goals. The ambiguity of this right is that happiness is defined, not by law or consensus, but rather is determined subjectively by the person seeking individual happiness.
These rights are endowed by our Creator, but the Founding Fathers chose to enumerate specific rights not easily assumed. Some are difficult to interpret—the establishment of religion or infringement thereof; the funding, maintaining, and quartering of a militia; a speedy trial by a jury of peers; search and seizure and being secure in your home. Even more complex, certain rights not enumerated are retained by the individual (Ninth Amendment) or retained by the states (Tenth Amendment). Both of these were enacted to limit federal power, but many of the conflicts coming before the Supreme Court, then and now, involve denial of individual rights by the states and are often reversed by judicial interpretation of the Constitution.
The transition from a confederation of colonies to a democratic republic included the compromise of the Electoral College for the selection of the President. In numerical theory, a candidate could be elected with 22% of the popular vote today. On the other hand, if the outcome were to be determined by popular vote, major cities would wield disproportional power. If there were a minimal margin in total votes would we demand a recount the votes in all states?
Historically, we have often found rights in conflict. The Emancipation Proclamation was followed by 130-plus years of prejudicial inequity. The right to bear arms or the perceived safety of living in a gun-free environment is an ideological impasse. The redefining of the personhood of the corporation was a major loss of individual freedom. The presumption of constitutional rights of a fertilized egg is defended concurrently with insensitive attitudes toward the rights of women, children, and same-sex relationships. Deportation of immigrants is influenced by needed labor skills and country of origin. The presumption of guilt or innocence does not always sit neatly in the scales of justice.
We still debate the conflicting merits of the economic benefits in the extraction, processing, and marketing of natural resources and regulation of harmful environmental practices. Liberty is predicated on the right to profit from capital investment and the worth and dignity of human labor. The enactment of the Sixteenth Amendment came at a time when income was more easily defined, and the competition among near-equal individuals enabled a workable system of free enterprise. We empowered Congress to declare war in the days when warfare was a respected and noble endeavor between identifiable combatants in distinguishing uniforms and textbook formations of combat.
Regardless of our religious and political differences, we share a Constitution, a common animated origin, a singular Creative entity however interpreted, and three departments elected by regional or national majorities, or appointed and confirmed by elected officials. The principles of which, can or should with benign silence, enable or insure the quality of life of each individual.
The voices I hear, the words I read, the images on television, and the persons willing to assemble in the public square–all cry out for redress of grievance as endowed by our Creator, or Founding Fathers in the First Amendment. I have tried to find a balance between established authority and the logic of change; between a strict or living interpretation of Constitution; between the success of the individual and the moral imperative of the general welfare; between a revealed sectarian certainty and a parallel philosophical and moral discovery; and the answers are elusive for me and may differ from your answers.
Explore posts in the same categories: ConstitutionTags: Declaration of Independence
You can comment below, or link to this permanent URL from your own site.
February 14, 2012 at 8:21 pm
I think you are a combination of your experiences, your intellect and your Christian values. Wish I could have been in your Sunday School classes. Thanks for sharing.
My parents were also good people . An old black fellow who worked for my Dad at Ransom’s Cotton Gin told me that my Dad “stood tall”. I know he did not mean physically tall. And my mother befriended a black family who moved in next door to us.
Becky