Founders define the rights of man, a declaration

[Classact]

Serious debate of Jefferson should include this background of the arguments of Jefferson and Patrick Henry on the Virginia Statute of Religious Freedom http://www.pbs.org/jefferson/enlight/religi.htm Here is a video from Baylor University http://www.baylortv.com/video.php?id=000842 that provides backing for most of my talking points. It is long but gets to the meat of the conversation at the 32 minute (• Windows Media (streaming, 300kbps)) and you can go there on the buffering slide bar quickly. However I recommend the entire video to immerse yourself in the era so you can fully understand the debate.

[Kathianne]

...

Excellent observation, read the lead http://oregonstate.edu/instruct/phl3...rs/hobbes.html and http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/locke/ interestingly both were educated by the church.

What a difference 40 years made, from the end of "Dark Ages" to the entrance of "Age of Enlightenment." I've always been fascinated by it.

[Mugged Liberal]

I’ve just read most of this thread and feel compelled to say it’s the most interesting thing I’ve seen on the site thus far. It has raised my regard significantly for those who have contributed to it. I would not dare to contribute to this discussion without doing much more reading than I have done or that I have the time for.

[Rick OShea]

Focusing on "endowed by their Creator" as a statement of theology is incorrect.

It was a statement of political philosophy; it is simply a rebuttal and rebuke to the British Monarch's "divine" right to arbitrarily rule, nothing more.

Read some of the works the framers used to frame this republic (Locke, Sidney) that outlined this new concept of inherent rights and the concept of "legitimate" government. Each and every one was written as an indictment of the Crown and as rebuttals to other political treatises (Bodin, Filmer etc) endorsing the monarchy and validating the King's "God given" power (from direct heredity from Adam).

The statement that our rights are "endowed by their Creator" is only establishing a maxim guiding the fight for independence, that our rights are not gift from the magistrate but are an innate part of us that we bring with us before we enter into a social compact (government) established to protect those pre-existing rights . . .

"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, . . . "

[Yurt]

I’ve just read most of this thread and feel compelled to say it’s the most interesting thing I’ve seen on the site thus far. It has raised my regard significantly for those who have contributed to it. I would not dare to contribute to this discussion without doing much more reading than I have done or that I have the time for.

and what value are your posts? that you get to give your opinion without actually debating.....and yet you complain about others and feuds and not debating....

weird

[Classact]

Focusing on "endowed by their Creator" as a statement of theology is incorrect.

It was a statement of political philosophy; it is simply a rebuttal and rebuke to the British Monarch's "divine" right to arbitrarily rule, nothing more.

Read some of the works the framers used to frame this republic (Locke, Sidney) that outlined this new concept of inherent rights and the concept of "legitimate" government. Each and every one was written as an indictment of the Crown and as rebuttals to other political treatises (Bodin, Filmer etc) endorsing the monarchy and validating the King's "God given" power (from direct heredity from Adam).

The statement that our rights are "endowed by their Creator" is only establishing a maxim guiding the fight for independence, that our rights are not gift from the magistrate but are an innate part of us that we bring with us before we enter into a social compact (government) established to protect those pre-existing rights . . .

"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, . . . "

I don't think you are correct in your assumption. I do agree to an extent that during the age of enlightenment much of the discussion was to do with the right of the Church and the King and their base for authority but disagree with your conclusion. If you go back and read the links on age of enlightenment and view the video in my last post you'll come to a quite different outcome.