By Tad Cronn – Re-Blogged From http://constitution.com
Liberals hate the Declaration of Independence. That’s one quirk of the Liberal mentality I’ve encountered repeatedly throughout the years — as much as they despise and subvert the Constitution, they reserve even more bile for the Declaration.
They hate it so much, in fact, that they will manufacture endless excuses for ignoring it, even to the point of flat out denying that it is a legal document, despite its being passed unanimously by Congress, and going even further to denying that the United States existed as a nation until our independence was “granted” — not won, “granted” like a Christmas present — by the British king.
This used to be puzzling to me, but it long ago became clear that what Liberals really objected to was the fact that the Declaration spells out in plain language that government is subservient to the people, and people get their rights — as Conservatives know — from God the Creator. The reason, too, is clear: Liberals have to destroy that principle in order to push forward their worldview and agendas, in which the state is supreme, effectively God, rights come from and can be repealed by government, the individual must serve the collective for the betterment of the state, and certain classes of people are worthier of government largesse and political favor than others.
An excellent illustration of this point was made this past week in the Louisiana State Legislature, where Democrats pounced on House Republican Valarie Hodges’ proposal to require schools to make children recite part of the Declaration of Independence daily after the Pledge of Allegiance.
The portion the children would have had to recite comes from the famous second paragraph and reads:
“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. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”
In other words, kids would have had to be exposed to, and even memorize, every idea at the heart of what Liberals hold in disdain.
Democratic Rep. Barbara Norton, who is black, jumped to the front of the mob. You’d think a black woman in the 21st century would appreciate the words of the Declaration. Nonetheless, she said, “One thing I do know is, all men are not created equal. When I think back in 1776, July the 4th, African-Americans were slaves, and for you to bring a bill to request that our children will recite the Declaration, I think is a little bit unfair to us to ask those children to recite something that’s not the truth.”
Hodges sought to clarify what Norton’s problem was, asking if Norton did not believe that all men are equal.
Norton replied, “For you to ask our children to repeat the Declaration stating that all mens [sic] are free – I think that’s unfair. In 1776, Dr. King was not even born. African-Americans were in slavery, so since they were in slavery, the Declaration of Independence say we are ‘all created equal,’ we were not created equal because in 1776, July the 4th, I nor you nor any of us were born, nor was Dr. King born, so we were in slavery, and to have our children repeat again and again documents that were not even validated, I don’t think that that’s fair.”
Now, everybody who is aware of history understands that at the time of the Declaration’s writing, slavery existed. In fact, debate over the institution nearly put the kibosh on the whole effort to become an independent nation. In the end, the anti-slavery faction of Congress had to compromise in order to give birth to the United States, but those tensions over slavery continued, finally coming to a head in the Civil War, the bloodiest engagement in our history.
In Norton’s mind, however, history apparently resembles an M.C. Escher mezzotint. An effort to follow the threads of her ramblings suggests that she thinks the words “all men are created equal” had no impact on law, the course of history or the final abolition of slavery, which in her version of reality apparently didn’t happen until Martin Luther King freed the slaves.
And on top of all that, it’s not fair!
Hodges tried to share what King actually said about the Declaration, along with some words from Frederick Douglass, but she was cut off by Democrat Rep. Pat Smith, who is also black and who argued that reading the Declaration was used as a poll test to prevent blacks from voting in the South and was therefore an instrument of oppression.
That such stunts were the province of Democrats apparently eluded her keen intellect.
Then Smith got to the real point — what is always the real point with Liberals who attack the Declaration:
“But I think there is one word in there that concerns me … that you are endowed by your Creator, and Creator is in capital letters. I don’t believe that. If you say that to individuals and have them repeat that then you may be attacking religions in schools.”
Norton then proposed an amendment to Hodges’ bill that would require students to recite the 14th Amendment. King proposed an amendment to require the reading of some manifesto from a 19th-century women’s suffrage conference. And Democratic Rep. Ed Price, who is black, proposed an amendment to have kids recite King’s “I Have a Dream” speech.
Hodges finally pulled her bill in frustration. She told KTAL-TV that she was astonished “at the hatred that was expressed at the forefathers and this document.”
She shouldn’t have been. Imagine a generation of children who would grow up having memorized and understanding just the beginning of the second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence; what a different world we would soon live in.
Under Liberalism, that can never be allowed.
It’s sad, but Liberalism is and has always been a philosophy of slavery, and some of its most ardent supporters are among the people who should be the first to reject it.