We hold these truths to be self-evident

[Tigger]

As Billy Joel says "The good ole days weren't always good and tomorrow isn't as bad as it seems."

Clearly, anyone who can quote Billy Joel (and not even one of his most popular songs!) in a discussion thread about the 4th of July has to be a truly enlightened individual

 

[Luigi59]

The Founding Fathers subscribed to the reprehensible belief that those held in bondage were not men at all but merely chattel property to be bought and sold at will.

You could write 100 paragraphs and still not change the fact that "all men are created equal" did not mean "all men."

I guess their "creator" didn't see fit to "endow" their property with any rights whatsoever.

 

[bruno]

Clearly, anyone who can quote Billy Joel (and not even one of his most popular songs!) in a discussion thread about the 4th of July has to be a truly enlightened individual

Yep- Billy Joel is pretty 4th of July group, though I think the Beach Boys are the penultimate 4th of July Band. Regardless - they are all pretty good being played with fireworks overhead, and a cold one in your hand!

 

[goaliedad]

You paint with a broad brush stroke. Your characterization of the signers as being in monolithic agreement over slavery is simply not accurate. A number of the signers were anti-slavery, including Roger Sherman and James Wilson, who proposed the three fifths compromise you reference (found in Article 1, Section 2, Paragraph 3 of the US Constitution) during the Constitutional Convention in 1787.

While on the surface, the 3/5 concept is degrading in that it considered a slave to be 3/5 of a person (which is an understandably offensive concept in our day and time), in reality this was a political compromise that reduced the representation of slave states by 40% relative to their slave population. Understood within its historical context, this was a significant step forward in terms of calling out the hypocrisy of those who wanted slaves to be counted fully in terms of a state's population and proportional representation in the US House of Representatives, and yet would not count slaves as men on an equal footing with free-men who were afforded the right to vote.

The compromise itself speaks to the ongoing tensions that existed over slavery, which were born out over subsequent decades of debate as the founders and those who followed them wrestled over the issue and its philosophical, political, religious, moral, social, and economic implications (good reference site addressing the abolition of the slave trade from the colonial US to the present is here: http://abolition.nypl.org/home/)

The portion of the Declaration you quote is also significant in that it included the phrase "the pursuit of Happiness" -- prior statements, such as the "Right of the Colonists as Men" by Samuel Adams in 1772 spoke of Life, Liberty, and Property - also, John Locke's "Second Treatise on Government" from 1690 spoke of "life, health, liberty, or possessions." The exclusion of any reference to property or possessions is significant, and was a nod to those who opposed a statement that could have been construed as being sympathetic to the protection of a slave owner's right to view slaves as property.

To sum up, while you appear to be taking a "glass half empty" view of the Declaration, pointing out accurately the divide between the ideals of the Declaration and the reality of how they were applied, I'd prefer a "glass half full" approach.

The Declaration itself is a shining light - and the fact that it was crafted within such an imperfect historical context is all the more amazing. The language in the Declaration that "all men are created equal" in and of itself creates a tension, calling on future generations to justify how a practice that enslaves men and takes away their freedom can be reconciled with the self-evident declaration that all men have a God given and unalienable right to be free.

The light of this beacon was reflected nearly 200 years later, on the steps of the Lincoln memorial, by Martin Luther King, Jr., in an often overlooked portion of his "I Have a Dream" speech:



Hard to improve upon that...

Well put. As I remember when I was growing up, the American idea of democracy was always taught as a "work in progress". I think this is true in many senses of the words.

The Founding Fathers subscribed to the reprehensible belief that those held in bondage were not men at all but merely chattel property to be bought and sold at will.

You could write 100 paragraphs and still not change the fact that "all men are created equal" did not mean "all men."

I guess their "creator" didn't see fit to "endow" their property with any rights whatsoever.

Perhaps you missed the above quote talking about the open debate about slaves and how to express an ideal without losing a significant percentage of the colonists necessary for a successful rebellion - solving the larger problem while being aware of the problems not addressed. As a piece of statesmanship, the declaration and the following constitution were a superb move to unite a country that could very well have fallen into chaos.

Luigi, I think everyone here gets the point that the Founding Fathers were far from perfect, but their effort truly moved the world forward.

I think another great (but also flawed) American, Theodore Roosevelt (although from a different generation) who also did much to move this country forward said what I am trying to say the best...

It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.

 

[Luigi59]

Luigi, I think everyone here gets the point that the Founding Fathers were far from perfect, but their effort truly moved the world forward.

I don't disagree.

What I find fascinating is those who attempt to rationalize the Founding Fathers words with their actions.

Yes, Jefferson may have eloquently written "all men are created equal" but he went home at night to a slave plantation built upon the backs and served by men not so equal in his eyes.

 

[goaliedad]

I don't disagree.

What I find fascinating is those who attempt to rationalize the Founding Fathers words with their actions.

Yes, Jefferson may have eloquently written "all men are created equal" but he went home at night to a slave plantation built upon the backs and served by men not so equal in his eyes.

I don't remember anyone on this thread praising their actions, just their words.

I find it ironic that you stand in judgement of those centuries before your time without the thought that people a couple of centuries forward from now will think similar thoughts about the leaders of today (and deservedly so).

We live in a brief slice of history. We learn from the mistakes of others and hopefully do not repeat them. No one is perfect in their introspection nor in their remedy to their own faults.

We understand that we should not put people on pedestals, as this is not teaching people how to think. We praise people's efforts improving the life of all while weighing those efforts against the costs incurred in doing so. I don't think anyone on this forum is unaware of Thomas Jefferson's (or any other founding father's) shortcomings. However, most of us agree that his (and their) impact on the greater good of mankind outweighed their shortcomings (even by today's standards) given the world they lived in. You may call this rationalization. Most call this putting things in historical perspective.

Our actions as a society today will be put under the microscope generations from now on a whole variety of things that we don't even discuss today. While we praise ourselves on the progress we make on various individual rights today, we sweep under the rug many in this society whose aberrant behavior we stigmatize, criminalize, and shame. You may focus on one class of individuals, but trust me there are people that all of us marginalize because we do not understand nor do we choose to understand.

Hopefully we do greater good than harm in our times. Perfection will come in its own time if we do our best and keep it moving forward.

 

[scoutpilot]

Don't feed the troll.

 

[Bravo]

The Founding Fathers subscribed to the reprehensible belief that those held in bondage were not men at all but merely chattel property to be bought and sold at will.

You could write 100 paragraphs and still not change the fact that "all men are created equal" did not mean "all men."

I guess their "creator" didn't see fit to "endow" their property with any rights whatsoever.

I'll keep this short - among the 56 signers of the Declaration were men such as John Adams, Samuel Adams, Charles Carroll, Richard Henry Lee, Benjamin Rush, Roger Sherman, and James Wilson. It is simply not accurate to say that these "Founding Fathers subscribed to the reprehensible belief that those held in bondage were not men at all..."

...What I find fascinating is those who attempt to rationalize the Founding Fathers words with their actions.

Yes, Jefferson may have eloquently written "all men are created equal" but he went home at night to a slave plantation built upon the backs and served by men not so equal in his eyes.

Not trying to rationalize anything. Simply saying that your opinions and characterizations are overly simplistic, and treat all of the founders as being of one mind and completely devoid of any sensibilities with regard to the issue of slavery, which is frankly not true.

The fact is that many of the signers of the Declaration, as well as many other founders, such as Gouverner Morris, Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, and Thomas Paine, opposed slavery and worked to see its end. This is why 7 of the original 13 states had enacted laws to either outright abolish or gradually bring an end to slavery less than 30 years after the Declaration's signing.

Were these men perfect? Certainly not (and neither are we). But not everyone's beliefs and actions were as inconsistent or as hypocritical as that of Jefferson. And even Jefferson's views and actions evolved over time. Again, not trying to rationalize, but it's important that we understand people's attitudes and actions within their own historical context.

Easy to play Monday morning quarterback, judge historical figures by today's standards, and pat ourselves on the back for being so enlightened. But this doesn't help us to truly understand and wrestle with the issues the Founders were facing, learn from their examples, and hopefully root out our own hypocrisy and disconnects between word and deed.

 

[NorwichDad]

Besides the declaration - Fourth of July Seaside NJ (Rebuilt) Boardwalk. Thanks Snookie. No Roller Coaster but some really bad for you food, fireworks and the crowds.

JERSEY STRONG

 

[Pima]

Just want to know how Bruce Springsteen is not above Billy Joel...C'Mon Born In The USA is a classic for the 4th.

Curiosity question...is it so wrong to be thankful for how this great nation has grown? When we had our children, we didn't expect them to be perfect. They became great people from their mistakes, yet they are not perfect, nor you or I.

This reminds me of a question my prof asked once. Do you sacrifice the good for some over the good for many? Isn't that what they did? I doubt any of us in the course of our life did not have to make some philosophical decisions where it came down to the good for a select few or the good for the many.

Luigi,

Just one question, why is this causing such great heartburn? If I am correct you are against diversity program for the SAs. Isn't that the same regarding equality? Don't shoot me, I may be 1000% wrong, but I thought diversity and red shirting are two things that you do not support regarding SAs.

Just trying to figure out the line for you. Diversity exists IMPO a way to correct our mistakes as a country.

Have you done an ancestry investigation, with your roots? Would you think so little of people like John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, etc. if they were your great-great-great-great grandfather?

JMPO, as others have said it is easy to do Monday morning quarterbacking, 237 yrs later.

 

[NorwichDad]

Just want to know how Bruce Springsteen is not above Billy Joel...C'Mon Born In The USA is a classic for the 4th.

.

+1

Spoken like a true Jersey Girl

 

[scoutpilot]

Just want to know how Bruce Springsteen is not above Billy Joel...C'Mon Born In The USA is a classic for the 4th.

Born in the USA is a song about socio-economic despair...

Born down in a dead man's town
First kick I took was when I hit the ground
End up like a dog that's been beat too much
Til ya spend half your life
Just a coverin' up

Questionable involvement in foreign wars...

Got in a little hometown jam
So they put a rifle in my hand
Sent me off to a foreign land
To go and kill the yellow man

The plight of Vietnam-veterans in post-war America...

Come back home to the refinery
Hiring man said son if it was up to me
Went down to see my v.a. man
He said son, don't you understand

The loss of life and innocence that accompanied Vietnam...

I had a brother at Khe Sahn
Fighting off the Viet Cong
They're still there, he's all gone

He had a woman he loved in Saigon
I got a picture of him in her arms now

And a man with seemingly no options in the wake of his generation's defining conflict...

Down in the shadow of the penitentiary
Out by the gas fires of the refinery
I'm ten years burning down the road
Nowhere to run aint got nowhere to go

Either you've never listened to the song, you don't know Springsteen, or you have a really screwed up idea of "classic for the 4th."

 

[Luigi59]

The fact is that many of the signers of the Declaration, as well as many other founders, such as Gouverner Morris, Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, and Thomas Paine, opposed slavery and worked to see its end. This is why 7 of the original 13 states had enacted laws to either outright abolish or gradually bring an end to slavery less than 30 years after the Declaration's signing.

For any of the FF to write such words, or put their signature to a document, with full knowledge that "men" were being bought and sold like a a sack of flour by their fellow "founders"--really doesn't deserve to elevate it (and them) to the level of pious reverence sough by the OP.

 

[Pima]

Here we go....now a fight on songs!

Scout,

I am a Jersey girl, and for Jersey people, that is the song you can hear on every boardwalk (Seaside Heights, Wildwood, LBI, Pt Pleasant, Asbury Park), along with Great Adventure blasting on the 4th of July.

You read way too much into that comment! Bruce is our home state pride!

It was not to be political. It was to say, Billy Joel is NY...Bruce is NJ and for Jersey that song is about pain, nobody denies it, just like Streets of Philadelphia.

Born in the u.s.a., I was born in the u.s.a.
Born in the u.s.a., I'm a long gone daddy in the u.s.a.
Born in the u.s.a., born in the u.s.a.
Born in the u.s.a., I'm a cool rocking daddy in the u.s.a.

Last lines of the song!

You saw all of the bad...I saw that they made it through, and they were proud to be born in the U.S.A. He went from pain to acceptance.

I guess that's the Jersey girl in me! Or maybe the Bruce fan! Norwich got the intended message!

I tried to divert the the thread from an argument. Did you really need to make this into another debate?

 

[NorwichDad]

Life has a lot of pain throughout the history of the US. Wars, epidemics and tragedy.

Let me divert this thread further. Walking along the boardwalk at Seaside my 22 year old daughter says. "Look at all those old guys in the bars." I looked. Those guys were my age. Now that is pain."

 

[scoutpilot]

Here we go....now a fight on songs!

Scout,

I am a Jersey girl, and for Jersey people, that is the song you can hear on every boardwalk (Seaside Heights, Wildwood, LBI, Pt Pleasant, Asbury Park), along with Great Adventure blasting on the 4th of July.

You read way too much into that comment! Bruce is our home state pride!

It was not to be political. It was to say, Billy Joel is NY...Bruce is NJ and for Jersey that song is about pain, nobody denies it, just like Streets of Philadelphia.



Last lines of the song!

You saw all of the bad...I saw that they made it through, and they were proud to be born in the U.S.A. He went from pain to acceptance.

I guess that's the Jersey girl in me! Or maybe the Bruce fan! Norwich got the intended message!

I tried to divert the the thread from an argument. Did you really need to make this into another debate?

Well, don't be wrong and we won't have these problems. It's a song about the failure of the American dream for a generation of young men. If you can't comprehend that...

 

[goaliedad]

For any of the FF to write such words, or put their signature to a document, with full knowledge that "men" were being bought and sold like a a sack of flour by their fellow "founders"--really doesn't deserve to elevate it (and them) to the level of pious reverence sough by the OP.

And what does this say about the authors of certain sections of the Good Book?

I think such a narrow, black and white view of people, their writings, and their morality earns you nothing less than the same by your heirs.

Of course the trolling could stop...

 

[Bravo]

For any of the FF to write such words, or put their signature to a document, with full knowledge that "men" were being bought and sold like a a sack of flour by their fellow "founders"--really doesn't deserve to elevate it (and them) to the level of pious reverence sough by the OP.

Having a hard time following your logic.

So are you blaming the men who actually opposed slavery for signing a document that sowed the seeds for the eventual abolition of slavery? Is their offense that they were foolish enough to get those who approved of slavery to sign along with them?

If you were one of the Founders, what would you have done? Abstained from signing altogether to preserve your moral purity? Signed an alternative version that was vetted to include the signatures of only those who pledged to abolish slavery (even though the Declaration's focus was not slavery, but the pesky issue of declaring independence from the British)? Insisted that the language be less lofty and idealistic, and more descriptive of current conditions?

For my part, I hope that I would have done everything in my power to oppose the practice of slavery, while standing up for the cause of liberty. I hope also that I would have had enough courage in my convictions to join the other signers in saying "for support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor." And I would hope that hundreds of years later, my ancestors would remember me fondly, and honor the idealistic stand I took and sacrifices I made, carrying on my work despite my failings to translate those ideals into practical and real world change...

 

[Tigger]

I tried to divert the the thread from an argument. Did you really need to make this into another debate?

No good deed goes unpunished?

 

[Luigi59]

Having a hard time following your logic.

So are you blaming the men who actually opposed slavery for signing a document that sowed the seeds for the eventual abolition of slavery?

Yes, of course. Lip service opposition of something wrong but acceding to it anyway is a reason for praise? Seriously?

Is their offense that they were foolish enough to get those who approved of slavery to sign along with them?

They had the power to end it immediately, instead of "eventually." Stroke of the pen---and it's over. Yet they chose to do what was easy, instead of doing what was right.

If you were one of the Founders, what would you have done?

I wouldn't have included a lie stating "all men are created equal." Sounds good on paper, but not even close.

Let's turn around the "what would you do?" question -- f you were a black slave and read such a lie about "all men created equal" in the supposed "freedom document" knowing that the same men who just lied on paper were then going to come home and sell your family as easily as they sell the fall crop--what would you do?