Rights Endowed by Whom?
Next Tuesday's 2010 midterm election marks the first major battle in a fired-up grassroots effort to restore constitutional integrity, one with a fervor not seen since the election of Ronald Reagan 30 years ago.
The stakes in this election and those to follow are much higher than a mere contest between competing political platforms and personas. These elections will determine who is this nation's arbiter of "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
What is really at stake?
“The preservation of the sacred fire of liberty, and the destiny of the republican model of government, are justly considered deeply, perhaps as finally, staked on the experiment entrusted to the hands of the American people.” –George Washington
Their is a substantial grassroots resurgence underway, focused primarily on restoring constitutional integrity. It is reminiscent of that inspired by Ronald Reagan 30 years ago.
The stakes of our national elections are much higher than a mere contest between competing political platforms and personas. They determine who is this nation’s arbiter of “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
Barack Hussein Obama, by way of omission in recent speeches, has made it abundantly clear whom he and his comrades reject as the author of the Rights of Man. On five separate occasions, when speaking at public events or fundraisers for his Leftist comrades, Obama has referenced the Declaration of Independence.
Speaking at the Hispanic Caucus Institute’s Annual Awards Gala, Obama said, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are … endowed with certain inalienable [sic] rights: life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” When questioned about the omission of who, precisely, endowed those rights, the White House press office claimed that Obama went off script … unlikely for a man who has been glued and tattooed to his Teleprompters.
A few days later, speaking at a fundraiser for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, Obama said, “If we believe that … everybody is endowed with certain inalienable [sic] rights and we’re going to make those words live, and we’re going to give everybody opportunity, everybody a ladder into the middle class…” For the record, that utterance was not “off script.” Rather, it was precisely how the White House posted his speech.
At the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee fundraiser, he did it again, saying, “What makes this place special is not something physical. It has to do with this idea that was started by 13 colonies that decided to throw off the yoke of an empire and said, ‘We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men … are endowed with certain inalienable [sic] rights.’”
In each instance, Obama omitted the Declaration’s clear affirmation that the Rights of all people are “endowed by their Creator,” not by some potentate or government.
When asked about Obama’s omission, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs asserted, “I can assure you the president believes in the Declaration of Independence.”
Mr. Gibbs' assurances notwithstanding, Obama’s subtle but telling omissions expose the underbelly of the political beast that is intent on devouring Essential Liberty and replacing it with the rule of men.
So, Obama “believes in the Declaration”? The Declaration is a piece of paper, one that expresses a self-evident Truth. Were it destroyed today, or had it never been written, the right of all people to “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness,” among other Rights, would still be endowed by our Creator.
Allow me to offer an elementary civics lesson in order to answer the question, “Who endows the Rights of Man, God (as ordained in natural law) or government (as ordained by man)?”
The first paragraph of our Declaration references “the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them,” which informs the words “endowed by their Creator” in the second paragraph.
To better understand what is meant by “the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God,” recall that our Declaration’s signers were not of one mind on matters of theology and doctrine. They were Christians, Deists and Agnostics, but they did, however, uniformly declare that the Rights of all people were, are and forever will be innate and unalienable, as established by “the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God.”
This is not an article of “faith.” It is the assertion that the right to “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness,” while enshrined in our Declaration, is inherent and applicable to all humans of every nation, religion, race and ethnicity, for all time.
It makes no difference what your concept of “Nature’s God” or our “Creator” is, or whether you even subscribe to any such conceptualization. You, and all people, are entitled to Liberty and all the rights it embodies. Those Rights not the gift of man or the declarations and constitutions written by men. As Founder Alexander Hamilton wrote, “The sacred Rights of mankind are not to be rummaged for among parchments and musty records. They are written, as with a sunbeam, in the whole volume of human nature, by the Hand of Divinity itself, and can never be erased or obscured by mortal power.” Indeed, the Declaration and Constitution were designed to protect those Rights, not award them.
Perhaps most offensive was his errant assertion in an internationally televised speech from Indonesia, that “our motto is E pluribus unum – out of many one.” Our national motto is, of course, “In God We Trust.”
With his omissions and ignorance of our national motto now a matter of public interest, Obama has tossed “our Creator” into his stump speechs before Election Day. But make no mistake: That would be subterfuge. Obama believes that the Rights of men are subject to the rule of men, and the terminus of the unabated rule of men is always tyranny.
The election of Barack Hussein Obama was the worst of insults to our nation’s heritage of Liberty, but in one important way, it has proven a blessing in disguise.
It has drawn millions of Americans to the frontlines of the eternal war for Liberty and Rule of Law, as enshrined in our national Constitution. Still, this midterm election cycle is different than the knee-jerk response to Bill Clinton that seated a Republican majority back in 1994.
There is a Great Awakening across our nation, one being spearheaded by Tea Party Patriots who are armed with, among other things, the right tools to articulate the difference between Rule of Law and rule of men, and who are willing to passionately fight for the former over the latter.
In the words of Thomas Paine, “I call not upon a few, but upon all: not on this state or that state, but on every state; up and help us; lay your shoulders to the wheel; better have too much force than too little, when so great an object is at stake.”
At this moment, the future of Liberty is at stake.
Our Declaration of Independence concludes, “And for the 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.” (I suspect Obama would omit “with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence.”)