This blog allows students of Mr. Chazen's AP US Government classes to continue discussions, debates and conversations concerning issues and topics introduced in class.
Starting off with why only having the right to abolish is a terrible idea. Empirics. Egypt is a perfect example of a nation that has the right to abolish but none of the other rights. And with the right to abolish a government, instead of creating a government that instills the other rights like chazen or george predicted. They toiled in a cesspool of political instability for 5 years re-electing 3 different totalitarian dictatorships. Thus, from history it is evident that simply having a right to revolt and abolish is ineffective.
With the expectation that government will protect all rights held by its citizens from anyone, I agree with Bryan that an unnecessary movement to revolt would be harmful to the existing system. The focus of a government should be placed on preserving the rights it endows on its citizens through defense against foreign invasion, internal turmoil and itself. If a right to abolish is present, it could potentially prove detrimental, allowing for the aforementioned political instability to occur. Instead, by protecting these given rights, the government can ensure the continued expansion of free enterprise and growth of the nation under fair standards not intrusive towards other citizens, all the while limiting its own power from potential tyranny as a result of hypocrisy.
Naw, Egypt is the exception, not the rule. It wasn't the people overthrowing, it was the military acting. Tunisia is a much better example. And if you want to use Empirics, arguably the most successful democracy and the current hegemon was born out of revolution. Further, revolution is the necessary mechanism to accompany any ideals. Without a mechanism to act, we can't stop abuses. Additionally, we need to verbalize our right to revolt, because through verbalization the words become not an idea but a call to action. Without a call to action or the realization of this right, we cannot revolt.
I believe the most important principle of the Declaration of Independence is that all men are created equal. This is the foundation that the rest of the principles are built from. If all men were not created equal, there would be no basis for unalienable rights or the governments need to protect them. The same can be said for the consent of the people in government power because if all men were not considered equal the people wouldn’t have a say and if they did it would leave the government in a state of unrest. In that same state of unrest, the people would not band together to abolish the government if needed if they did not feel like one people in the first place. Therefore, this is the most important principle as it is the principle that the rest stand on.
I think that the most important right is the right to abolish the government. Without this right, we might end up like China or other country's where people have no rights. I agree with this right because we would have no rights or the governments roles wouldn't be to protect your rights if we had a bad government that we couldn't abolish. That being said, I don't agree that equality isn't important, I do. However, we wouldn't have equality if our government had full control. So with this being said... I don't think that equal rights of men or that unalienable rights aren't important, but we wouldn't have either one of those without a government that we are able to change and get rid of if it doesn't fit the citizens of America's needs.
I would like to bring up what Ellie said "we would have no rights or the governments roles wouldn't be to protect your rights if we had a bad government that we couldn't abolish". First of all, like what someone said in class, people will revolt whether or not they have the right to. So therefore they can overthrow the government as long as they have the want and army to do so. People not having the right to abolish government is not the main problem, humans will do anything when they do not feel like their voice is getting heard or if they do not trust what the government is doing. People would still have rights, but maybe they would have to fight for their rights and risk their lives to attain them, which is why I think that the most principle is that we must all have our unalienable rights. Humans need to start off with rights in order for people to take them away.
Out of the five principles of the Declaration of Independence, the most important right is the fourth, which states that a government’s power comes from the consent of the people. This does not, by any means, imply that it is not important that men are to be established as equal, or that mankind has a set of unalienable rights, however, humans are inherently good. Even without an official statement by the governing force declaring that all people should be treated equally with respect, humankind is more than capable of defining that for itself. While having these principles be a concrete part of a nation’s foundation would certainly facilitate with and quicken the passing of laws, such as that of the abolition of slavery, it is not entirely necessary to have them in place. Additionally, while such beautiful and inspiring statements are great in theory, they do little themselves to actually help the situation of the people. All humans were created equal, yes. But do we really need the government to tell us that? This ultimately makes the first two principles important, but not the most. As for the third principle stating that the government’s job is to secure rights, if a government is run by the people and for the people, with the consent of the people, it is likely that a person would not consciously elect to limit their own rights. When the time calls for it, most probably the people will demand for the government to secure such rights and political officials will have no choice but to heed their call if they wish to stay in power. If a government did not depend on the people for its power, then the rest of the population would simply be abused by the overabundance of authority in the hands of the few. In addition to that, it is a little precarious to state that the government's job is to secure a person's rights, and nothing else. Rights may be considered and boiled down by the government to simply mean the unalienable rights such as life and liberty: both of which you could technically achieve if the government were to choose to go against the wishes of the people and corrupt the government. Protecting rights is not enough because unfortunately, the right to own property will not do anyone much good if the economic stability of the nation is nonexistent. While the significance of the fifth principle – the right to revolt/abolish government – is evident, it is hardly something that should be prioritized over the others. If the right to revolt takes precedence over the simplest definitions of order, than such rebellions would only cause even more chaos than what they tend to already do in established societies today. Additionally, it is likely that the people would not care if rebellion were a right of theirs or not. The amazing thing about humanity is that it is always constantly attempting to improve, regardless of the complications it may cause. Mr. Chazen, as well as a few other students mentioned how it is necessary for such an incentive to exist in order for the government to function in the favor of the people. However, if the government gains its power from the consent of the people, if the government were to not listen to the people's wishes, that alone would lead to that person's demise. In other words, the fact that figures in government gain all of their power from their backing of the people, that is enough of an incentive for it to act in the people's favor. Lastly, if the government is properly abiding by the principle that they are to listen to the people, such drastic rebellions would be deemed unnecessary: a simple vote out of that particular political figure would suffice.
When first assigned the 1 page paper on this topic I chose "all men are created equal" to be the most important principle in the Declaration of Independence. Since having the discussion in class my opinion has changed to believe in unalienable rights because in my opinion all men being equal falls under the alienable rights umbrella. Having rights as a citizen is important because it means you have a say in the government in your home country. The right to own property is important to a person because it is theirs, you feel like your hard work has paid off because you own a part of this glorious country of the USA. The basic right to have life and the pursuit of happiness is simple but important because not all country's have that right. Some people spend their whole life being slaved or forced into a life they don't choose. So I believe it is an important right that we have in the US. All in all I believe that the most important principle in the Declaration of Independence is the having unalienable rights like life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness/property.
Then what should be treated as the rule instead of the exception. Perhaps Thailand, who has also one through years of humans that have the right to abolish? And what has Thailand done with this right to abolish? The exact same thing that happened to Egypt. Furthermore , you point out that the people weren't overthrowing the government, but instead is was the military; does that explain the riots by the PEOPLE of Egypt in Tahrir Square? NO. While you can argue that the ones that actually took power in the end was Sisi and the military, the fact remains that the people were the ones that tried to abolish the government 2 times and almost a third time.The right to abolish ,given to the people of Egypt AND Thailand, is ultimately a tool that brings nothing but more oppression and strife. The list could go on with nations that had been overthrown due to the right to revolt and ended up no better than they were before (Latin America).
I still hold to my first belief that the unalienable rights are the most important principle. If you don’t list those basic rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, you know there are going to be those whack jobs that want to take away certain people’s rights (*cough* Hitler *cough*) and if they aren’t specifically listed in the constitution, it’ll be perfectly legal for him/her to do it. So that’s my stance. Now to address the rights to abolish thing, I think that there are two basic things to me that refute this as being the most important. While it is true that the government needs to have that pressure to keep it in line and doing its job, I don’t think it’s the most important principle. If you take it away, the people still have the option to revolt. They will take it upon themselves to do so. Naomi stated this in our class as a final comment and I 100% agree with it. The people will revolt or change the government if they see fit and if the right to revolt wasn’t listed in the constitution, they would do it anyway. Also, this right to revolt is just an extension of the UNALIENABLE right of liberty, so if you took away the unalienable rights, you would be taking away this one too.
Of all the principles in the Declaration of Independence, I believe that unalienable rights are the most important. When regarding the importance of unalienable rights, it is vital to remember the things we take for granted every single day. For example, our privilege to practice whatever religion we choose is an unalienable right. Also, our freedom of speech is an unalienable right as well. Finally, unalienable rights are what protect us from having our own property taken away. Of course, there are many more unalienable rights, but these are the three to focus on at the moment. Now, imagine that unalienable rights are removed. You can no longer practice a religion of your choosing, speak as you please, or rest assured that your property will stay yours. Three things that you used to count on every single day, just gone in an instant. This is why unalienable rights are the most important, they impact our lives all the time.
Before the discussion started, I advocated for the unalienable rights principle to be the most important one. After the discussion, I still believe that it is the most essential principle in the Declaration of Independence. I agree with Zoe in believing that this is the most useful principle. It is the most relatable one that we practice. Our freedoms that fall under the "Liberty" part of the principle are what we exercise every day. A lot of people practice the freedom to practice their own religion every day, they practice freedom of speech by using social media to support their core beliefs. Unalienable rights are the fundamental rights encompassing every American, rights that every citizen can relate to. They are the most important. Like Helen said, some of the other principles like the one to revolt and abolish government can fall under one of the following: "Life, Liberty, and Pursuit of Happiness." Furthermore, the government does need to protect our fundamental rights but if these rights are not put in place in the first place, what is it going to protect? This is why I firmly stand on the belief that our unalienable rights are the most important ones.
@Megan Todd, While equality sounds like a decent principle to have, equality has not always been practiced in the United Staes. Examples: discrimination against African Americans, women's suffrage, the fact that the 30 richest Americans own as much as half the US population, same-sex marriage laws, etc. Whether we like to admit it or not, even if everyone is created equal, it certainly does not work out that way, especially not in the United States of America. There has always been inequality in issues that matter and although we would like more justice, it is inevitable that disparity will always exist.
I believe that the most important principle of the Declaration of Independence is that all men are given a set of unalienable rights by their Creator at birth and cannot be taken away, such as life, liberty, and property. This principle affects every other principle of the Declaration of Independence because not every man could be created equal if they were not all granted the same rights as each other, men with more rights would clearly have the upper hand over people given less. It affects the principle that government has to protect these rights because without unalienable rights the government would have nothing to keep secure and could potentially oppress and withhold rights from their citizens, which is part of the reason America wanted to break away from Great Britain. It also relates to the statement that government gets its power from the people because without these rights men hold no power and cannot fully and truly contribute their power to the government. And it affects the last principle that the people have the right to rebel against and abolish a government if it is unable to protect their rights because it is essential for governments to grant their people these rights or else the government could become dictatorial and corrupt which is what the founding fathers tried their hardest to prevent and create a successful democracy. Ultimately, every principle of the Declaration of Independence ties back and is affected by the doctrine that all men are privileged with unalienable rights that not even the government can deny or take away from a man, as they are granted to them by a higher power.
Out of the five principles in the Declaration of Independence, I believe that the most important one is that "all men are created equal". While many people made good arguments for the other four principles, i think that the first principle is the basic foundation for all the other statements. Only by acknowledging that all men are created equal and that no one is better than the other, will people be able to have an equal opportunity to pursue their natural rights, give government consent, and the government will be able to maintain the principle that all men are created equal.
I agree with Michelle Workman that being able to revolt against a corrupt government is important, however it's not as vital as having everyone acknowledge that all men are created equal. If we are able to take down a government that is limiting our freedom and rights, then how will we know that our next form of government won't do the same thing as the previous if we don't establish basic principles. It would just be a chaotic cycle of overthrowing the government without ever having peace.
I believe the most important principle of the Declaration of Independence is the right to revolt/abolish the government. Many have said that the unalienable rights or that all men are equal are the most important but those are just words; you cannot be one hundred percent sure that those rights will be guaranteed and followed through with. If the government is not actually protecting those rights for us, the people should have the right to get rid of the government. People may not think about this now because the government is there to secure our rights but if it was ever corrupted then we should have the right to remove it from power. Because a group of people revolted against the King of England, the United States was able to be established and if our government ever became unbearable, like England when was back then, the people of the United States should have the right to abolish the government.
The government power= consent of the people is the most important part of the Declaration of Independence. This part alone eliminates all the others because everyone votes and participates in the elections than there would be less discrimination and more people will be represented equally. Also there will be little to no need of abolishing the government because the leaders will be elected as choice of the people so many bad politicians will probably not be in office.
Look, some other radical libertarian has been saying ignorant things about the right to abolish not being the most important right, and he presented some half-truths and maybee's trying to dissuade other people like a childish 13 year old. The point is, if the people have a will and the government does not uphold that will or even detests that will. To continue, the right to abolish does includes many other examples in history where the tyrannical empires have fallen because of that right. People who argue for other rights are basically expecting the rights to just be handed to them, thinking that government is always going to be good, and without this right, the mindset of the people would be to stay passive and let the harms. All of the rights of the declaration are indeed important, but the right to abolish and rebel is the whole purpose of the declaration of independence. Of course, all of the rights are needed, but without this right itself, you cannot have access to the others. If revolution did not exist, the world today would be a lot different. It's not the action itself, but the premise behind the right. With an government that oppresses, the right to abolish is the first step into achieving the other rights. Also, we need to start breaking ice in the arctic to open trade routes and stuff.
First of all, in response to Bryan and Steven, the responsibility of the government has and never will be to protect our rights. If we believe that our rights are unalienable, then that stands whether or not the government is protecting them or not because then by general consensus, if the government acts in such a way that does not respect these rights, the people who understand that they have unalienable rights can protect their rights for themselves with their right to revolt. The right to revolt is the most important piece of the DOI because it ultimately leaves the power to protect our unalienable rights to the individual. We can interpret the right to revolt and abolish many different ways. I'm not even sure that I am interpreting it the same way as Andrew who is also supportive of the right to abolish. The right to abolish does not mean that Americans have the right to throw the United States into anarchy when the government does something unpopular. Far from it! The right to abolish means that when the majority of the country deems that the national government is not holding up its part of the social contract, the people have the right to collectively agree to retract the power given by the people for the people from the government. This right to abolish is prevent civil war type catastrophes like those in the Arab Spring in which Gadhafi hired mercenaries to kill his own people when his people and the military decided it was time to take away his dictatorial power. The "right to abolish" forces those in power, if abusing the power, to renounce it as the populace see fit.
I feel like the consent of the people is the most important right of the Declaration of Independence. The government should represent the ideas and beliefs of the people and the sole purpose of a democracy is to carry out policies that reflect the views of the people so that everybody will benefit from it. If the government had The consent of the people in the first place, then there would be no need to revolt. This would prevent chaotic rebellion. Also, unalienable rights and equality would be secured if the people could voice their opinion in government and influence party members to represent their beliefs. There could still be potential conflicts, but for the most part if the people’s views are represented through Congress, the nation would be more unified.
I strongly agree with Rebecca beliving that the right to abloish is the most important principle stated in the Declaration of Independence. Addressing Bryan's commment: This discussion is not about what principle produces the most effective form of government. What we are really trying to understand is what is most important to the individual. Democracy is about keeping the individual happy. The information based world we live in today has a strong emphasis on change and how we can improve poicy and government. We need the right to abolish in order to give people the right to disagree, to give their ideas on how government should be run, to fight governement that they do not agree with. The founders of this nation were tired of a King who thought it was fair to tax us from the other side of the ocean even when we had no representation in our government. I firmly believe that the most important principle is the right to abolish/revolt when we as individuals do not approve of the way our government is treating us.
The principle that states it is the governments right to secure our rights is the most important principle. Many of the other principles are simply just rights, like all men are equal and unalienable rights, so this principle covers many others. Without establishing that this is the governments main responsibility, there would be no definite way that these rights would be protected and they could be taken away very easily. The right to abolish the government does not need to be formally written down. America did not have the right to revolt against Great Britain. If the citizens are that angry with the government, they're going to revolt anyway.
While I do agree with Helen's point to a certain extent, I still believe that the most important principle of the Declaration of Independence is that the government must protect the unalienable rights. It is not enough to merely say that "all people have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Yay! Happy!" We need a strong government who's role is to protect these rights, otherwise they just become words on paper with no real weight. If the government ever stops fulfilling this role, then the people can simply revolt with or without that right explicitly stated, as Helen (and Naomi) pointed out.
What we have to realize is that people, inherently by nature, want to have power over other people. Something else we have to realize is that government is run by people. Therefore, the government wants to have power over people. The way that they do this is by limiting the citizens' rights. The government needs a discentive to do this, otherwise they will continue to go around limiting our rights as citizens of the government. The right to abolish the government is the most important because of this. If the government is being thrown out of power, they will stop doing the things that made the people mad in the first place. Without the right to abolish the government, none of the other rights will exist.
The principle that states that all men are created equal is the most important. Without this principle our society would not be shaped as it is today. Would women have the right to vote? Would African Americans be free? Also, if everybody was not equal then everybody would not have the same rights. Who would get to decide who had what rights and why? All humans are created equal and our country could not possibly be as advanced as it is today without this principle, therefore it is the most important principle.
The most important DOI principle is "All men are created equal". If everybody isn't equal, than not everybody will have unalienable rights. Also they wouldn't have an equal say in government because their voice would be taken away because they aren't seen as equal to others. When all people are created equal, then there is an equal say in government so that the government knows what the population wants as a whole as opposed to knowing what a selected few want.
At the end of the day, I still believe that unalienable rights are the most important part of the Declaration of Independence. To me, the idea that every person has the right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, defines this country most accurately and brings the most net benefit out of any individual principle of the DoI. If everyone has the right to life and liberty, then surely all men must have equal opportunity in life and are thus equal from the beginning. Furthermore, the importance of securing rights only results if there are important rights for the government to secure--first there have to be unalienable rights. Also, the consent of the govern cannot give people the same sense of control as the rights to life, liberty and death. Lastly, if everyone has unalienable rights, then there would be no reason for anyone to revolt or abolish the government. For these reasons I think that unalienable rights are the most important principle and define America the best.
I believe that the unalienable rights are the most important because those are the rights we fought for when we separated from Britain. Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness is important in every governmental society, because without those, freedom is not guaranteed. Having the right to abolish a government has not always worked in history. We did not have that freedom when we separated from Britain, we had to create it. Therefor the other options are eliminated.
I would like to go all the way back to what Bryan said about the right to abolish. I believe that what most people are thinking when the say the right to abolish is the most important (myself included)they are not saying it could survive alone as you stated, but rather the others could not be there without it. Government has changed its definition of equality many times over the course of its history. Civil rights have generally improved over time, going from only white males being allowed to vote, then blacks, then women. While all of these improvements are a true part of american history, who is to say that the government's opinion of equality could not retrogress? Sure this is a bit of a stretch, however the right to abolish is there for this reason. The right to abolish goes hand in hand with the consent of the people, and without these,the other principles would not be as significant. The point of the right to abolish is not to stand alone without the other principles present, but to validate the others and prepare for an oppressive government. This principle is the most important since it is the most visionary and future-thinking of all of them.
I feel that the principle saying it is the governments job is to secure and protect the rights of the people is by far the most important of the principles. If the government is not actively securing, or at least has passed legislature in the past that has helped secure, the rights of the people, the people will not have anything with which to support their rights. For example, some believe that the fact that men are created equal is the principle principle of the Declaration of Independence, however, while this is true, it is not the most important. Of course all sane people know that one man is created just as equal as another, and we can all go talk about how equal we are, but until there is something in place, say a law, that protects this equality, nothing is stopping someone who does not hold this belief from harming those who that person does not see as equals. The same holds true for our unalienable rights, we all feel like we have the basic right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, but unless the Government protects our unalienable rights, they would be trampled on by someone who does not hold this same belief. Finally, if government did not protect the rights of the citizens, the power to change, and even overthrow, the government would be useless. If rights were not respected or secured by the government, they would not listen to the people if the people wanted to get rid of those in power. If the government did not consider it a priority to protect the rights of those it rules over, they certainly would not consider making the desires of the people a priority, especially if the people’s desire was to remove the elected officials. Because of these reasons the principle stating the Government's job is to secure the rights of the people is the most important principle of the Declaration of Independence.
I believe that the most important idea from the Declaration of Independence is the idea that there must be consent from the people on the government’s power. With this idea, government mustn’t do anything without the approval of the citizens who fall under the government. Without this point in the Declaration of Independence, the entire system of democracy and the purpose of breaking away from England will become useless and pointless. If government decided to run things and not confer with the citizens, the government would not be a democracy any more. Without this idea society would be unfair and government would be bias against citizens. No policies would be followed through and mayhem could fill the society. Not being able to have a say in the community that you live it develops more opportunities for revolt and un-civilization. Also, if this weren’t an idea in the Declaration of Independence, the newly founded America would resemble the same as England. While the majority of the classes believe that the most valued point from the Declaration of Independence is that all men are created equally, I want to point out Naomi's statement: " All humans were created equal, yes. But do we really need the government to tell us that?". Having the consent of the government from the people is the sole and most important idea in the Declaration of Independence. Removing this idea from the document would completely paralyze our nation and destroy every effort we took to break away.
I think the most important principle is the consent of the governed because in the Declaration it states that, "Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed". Which means that government gets all its power from its people, and the people set up the government, so the people decide how they want to be governed, thus I think the this principle puts itself above unalienable rights because by having the consent of the governed you're essentially choosing to have these rights if the people "run the government".
The most important principle of the Declaration of Independence is the first one which states that all men are equal. Without this statement, none of the others would have any significance. For example, the second principle which protects human rights would not be valid if all men where not equal to begin with. What's to say that someone wouldn't have the same rights as someone else if they were unequal. At any time a leader could come along who decides that some men are better than others, and if there wasn't a statement that all men are equal then this dictator could abolish every other principle of the Declaration.
The most important principle in the Declaration of Independence is undoubtedly that all men are created with unalienable rights. It is from this principle that the ideal of all men being created equally stems from. Being able to have rights such as life and the pursuit of happiness means that as a US citizen, one can participate in the government, work towards what makes them happy, and be free. The reason I cannot believe that having the right to abolish the government is the most important is because as many of my classmates have already stated, humans will revolt against something they do not want. We don't need it spelled out for us to be able to fight for what we believe in; that would happen regardless of what the DOI says about it.
I believe that the right to abolish is the most important, because that is how America started. A group of people decided that they didn't like the current government and it was their right as a human being to change the government. They decided that the current government was taking away all of their rights, and they where not ok with that. So they used the right that no one can ever take away from you until you die. The right to revolt and to fight back. The founding fathers believed that when the King took everything away, they still had their will to fight back. That is why i believe the right to revolt is the most important one.
The first principle that states that all men are created equal is the most important principle in the Declaration of Independence. Although the others are important, the first ensures that everyone had the right to the others. Without the first principle there is nothing that ensures that everyone had the right to abolish the government or that everyone has inalienable rights and so on. It is because of the first principle that people come to America, so that everyone has equal opportunities.
The most important principle in the Declaration of Independence is that we have unalienable rights. When Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence, he felt that we needed all of our rights to be listed out. These rights were eventually written down in the Bill of Rights. We need our rights to be listed because these are our natural rights. The British government was not giving the people their unalienable rights so that is why we broke away. According to the beliefs of the Founding Fathers, our natural rights cannot be taken away. This is the most important principle because in some countries, citizens are not given their natural rights. The founders believed that these rights were given by God to all men. Among the rights are life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness.
The most important point of the Declaration of Independence is that the purpose of the government is to secure the rights of the people. If the government does not protect the rights of the people, then not all people would be equal. Also the country would be mostly controlled by the government and the people won't have any rights. Without any rights, people will become frustrated and angry and eventually rebel against the government leading to the destruction of the country.
After the fishbowl discussion in class, I still hold my opinion that the all men are equal principle is the most important because without it, all of the others would crumble. You cannot have a government empowered by the people and have it be fair if not all people are equal. I know this is still an issue today with gay rights, and the previous civil rights movements for women and african american suffrage. I realize that this may never be completely achieved, but without it, our government would be unequal. And this could lead to the government being turned into an aristocracy or a monarchy or an oligarchy. This is the principle that mainly set us apart from England in the beginning because the citizens were not equal, the rich did have more power than the poor, and there always was this unbalance of power. Without this principle, there could not be unalienable rights, not everybody would have the same ones. A poor person may have the rights of the declaration while a rich one would have others beyond that and it would be easier to take away a poor person's because they do not have as much power to get you back for it or prevent you from doing it. If citizens are unequal then we cannot abolish or change the government, and not all citizens will be happy, because the rich will be in charge of the government and it will be in the fashion that they want it, and they would have more power to stop the rest of us from changing it because we are not equal and we do not have as much power, even in large numbers, as the rich people would in small numbers.
Having the right to abolish is most important because that forces the government to be held to a standard. The government would have to give people their rights and freedoms if the only rule in place was that the people could revolt against the government. The government's whole purpose would be to satisfy the people which is what all the other principles state. And if the government failed at their job then the people would revolt and create a better government that passes laws the people want and that makes them happy.
Sydney, you claim "there would be less discrimination and more people will be represented equally" when the government power comes from the consent of the people. Inevitably, the majority or most influential people would control the government. The cornerstone principle that all men are born equal is essential to ensure less discrimination.
Originally I had a very firm belief that the first principle of the Declaration of Independence, stating that all men are created equal, was the most important. However, after the fishbowl debate on Friday, I have changed my mind. I tried to keep pushing that the first was the most important, but Spencer Aalfs had an amazing argument. He brought up the point that what does it matter if we all are created equal if the government does not protect that, therefore the third principle, that the government must protect the rights of the people is the most important. I now believe that is the most important.
I believe that the government deriving its power from the consent of the governed is the most important principle of the Declaration of Independence. Without it, the government protection of inalienable rights, which has effectively been argued to be more important than the rights themselves, is far from guaranteed. Politicians need to be elected and not chosen by some sort of other system so that they heavily rely on the approval of the people. Elected officials are obligated to protect basic rights so that they retain approval and get re-elected. Therefore, basic rights and the fundamental duty of the government to protect these rights will only be upheld if the government has the consent of the people. Only when the dependent relationship between the government and the people (and vice versa) is our system will the government be unable to stray from the Declaration of Independence ideals.
I believe that All men are created equal is the most important principle to the Declaration of Independence. With that being said I do believe that all principles are necessary but All men created equal is the most important. Why, you might ask? Well if all men weren't created equal, then no one would have unalienable rights because some believe they should have more rights then others and if that is the case then the government wouldn't do its job to secure and protect our rights. So if we didn't have this important principle then it would cause the downfall of two other principles. That's why I believe All men are created equal is the most important.
The main principle of the Declaration of Independence that is the most important is the one that states that “all men are created equal”. While this principle may not have been upheld by practices of earlier years, today it serves as the main reason behind many laws to ensure that every human, by race, gender, and other factors, is indeed equal to all others. In the 1800’s, only white men could vote. However, the 15th amendment extended suffrage by giving black men the right to vote as well. This was the precursor to the government taking action to back up its declaration’s statement of equality for all. Today, men and women of all kinds can vote, and laws are put in place to make sure that people are not discriminated against for any reason. One such law is the Fair Housing Act, which forbids discriminating against people who are applying for a loan. Even people with different sexualities, such as gay people, are getting laws to ensure that they too can be treated equally with the same rights as other citizens. Every person should be treated the same because we are all humans, no matter the slight physical, mental, and emotional differences. When all people are equal, the world will not have as much fighting between groups. Past conflicts, like the African Americans’ Civil Rights Movement, have persuaded the government and its citizens to try and make life equal not only to have peace, but because it is the right action as humans to take. If the equality of all persons was not a foundation of America, this country would be even more overflowing with violence, the mistreatment of others, and unhappy lives. It is clear that today’s society constantly revolves around and is built on the creation of this main principle, so it is the most important one.
I believe that the most important principle of the Declaration of Independence is that the governments power comes from the consent of the people. This is most important because with the peoples opinions and consent, then how will the government be respected by them? if the people do not agree with the government and the government refuses to hear the peoples problems, then people will slowly revolt(ex: hunger games). Throughout the class discussion, I still believe the fourth principle is the most important. To be honest, I don't know why everyone chose the first principle: all men are equal. Don't get me wrong, I believe all men should have equal rights and should be treated equally with respect but not every single man can be equal with the amount of money they, the amount of food they have, or any other tangible or intangible item that could be equal to them. This is why our society works because not every single man is equal and give the government their consent to make the nation better and stronger.
Having unalienable rights is what I think is the most important of the five. They give us rights that we are guaranteed to always have, and it is an insurance that certain parts of our lives can't be messed with by the government. In the beginning of the Declaration of Independence, it says that all men have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. I think of this as giving the people assurance that we can not be oppressed by our government in any way shape or form, unlike when we were under the ruling of the British monarchy; they will never be able to dictate every bit of our lives. The other four are important, but unalienable rights are the basic rights everyone should be given. In my mind, it is the most important.
Out of the 5 principles stated in the DOI, the third, A government's duty is to protect unalienable rights, is truly the most important.
This is due to the simple fact that if the government cannot protect this fundamental principle, the rest collapse, save for the the fifth; People have a right to revolt if the previous principles are not met. However, this principle is not relevant in my opinion(I'll explain later).
We'll start by examining the second principle; All people are given unalienable rights at birth, namely life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. While I support these unalienble rights, and the theory of them, "unalienable rights" are in fact only theoretical. These rights listed are alienable due to the fact that they can be alienated. This simply means they can be taken away. For an unalienable right to be truly unalienable, then they must have no possibility of being stripped, or not given, to ANY person, regardless of race, religion, sexual orientation, gender, or any other seperating factor. Throughout history we've seen governments take away these rights with examples such as the holocaust (Adolf Hitler killed jews (life), stripped them of citizenship and took away many fo their other rights (Liberty) and forced them in to ghettos and concentration camps(pursuit of happiness)). While there are thousands of other examples throughout history, this example alone proves my case that: If a government cannot protect these "unalienable rights", they are therefore alienable and do not exist. They can only exist in a society where the governing party supports and defends these rights.
This brings us to the first principle: All men(and women) are created equal. This principle is extremely important as well, and a fundamental aspect of all of our lives. That being said, however, this right lays on the foundation of "unalienable" rights. As I proved in my last point, "unalienable" rights do not exist unless a government supports and defends them. if a persons' "unalienable" rights are taken away, they are not equal to others who in fact have these rights. Therefore, equality of all human beings is just a theory as well and does not exist. These rights can be taken away and have been in the past (like... ya know... Slavery), showing us that without a general public or a government that supports and defends equality and "unalienable" rights, it cannot exist. This being said, the only way for it to exist is if a government supports, defends, and impliments it into society.
This brings us to the fourth principle: Power comes from the consent of the people. Once again, we have seen this right stripped from the people many times in the past (Namely the countless dicatorships/monarchies/Anything that really didn't get consent from the people, yo). Consent from the government can only truly exist if a government supports it and can defend this right from those who seek to destroy it.
Finally, all of these are more important that the right to revolt. I believe this simply because people do not need a specific right to revolt. If needed, people will revolt regardless of whether or not it says "yo u gis kan do dis" on a piece of paper.
Before the discussion, I thought that the principle of unalienable rights was the most important in the constitution. However, since participating in the discussion, my opinions have swayed to the principle of the governments job to protect our rights. Without government protection of our citizens' rights, the rights would just be writing on a paper. Laws and regulations are needed to ensure everyone can enjoy their unalienable rights, and without this security rights can be easily infringed on, or forgotten. Furthermore, if the government does their job right, there will be no need to revolt.
In my opinion, the principle that all men are equal is the most important because it sets a standard for how the country will run. Without this simple statement, the government would run unfairly and inefficiently. Only the concerns of some would be heard while others would suffer in silence. If it were not stated that all men are equal, then the statement of unalienable rights would be irrelevant. Some people would have more unalienable rights than others. There is no point in having rights that “cannot be taken away” if not everyone is respected equally. The rights of some would not be taken as seriously as others. If not all men are equal, what makes the government protect the rights of the less equal? They can make loopholes in order to avoid protecting the people who are seen as lesser. Thus, this statement would be null. The government supposedly gets its power from the people, but with inequality, only some would be heard. The rich and powerful can shift the system to where the less fortunate have no say in what happens. Elections would be pointless because only the concerns of the higher class would be brought to attention. The system of democracy would crumble. This government would obviously be inefficient and most people would want to change it for the better but they would not be able to for their voices would not be heard. They would most likely be forced to violence in order to change anything. Without the principle that all men are equal, the government would not run effectively and would ignore the concerns of the people as a whole.
Out of the 5 main principles of the Declaration of Independence, the right of the citizens to revolt and to abolish government is the most important. This is the one principle that gives power directly to the people who are being governed, as it allows people to revolt and take the power away from the government if the government does not uphold the promises made to the governed people. All of the other principles are just stating the duties of the government. For example, the first principle, which states that all men are created equal, cannot be the most important because the government has the power to change the definition of what a "man" is. This principle is an original statement from the document, yet minority men and all women were not considered equals for many years. All the other principles including the first, which are just statements that the government is expected to uphold, and these principles are weak because the government can find loopholes to modify them (as they did by excluding blacks and women from the "all men are created equal" statement). The right to revolt and abolish government is a power that is directly given to the people, and thus it is the most important of the principles.
I believe the most important principle of the Declaration of Independence is the proclamation that everyone has the unalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. I believe this because it is so true. I believe that people in this world should have these rights listed. Further, these rights are even more important because they determine the determine the limit of the government in our basic, fundamental human rights. By respecting these rights, gov should have the consent of the people and therefore have no need to be abolished. And on the argument of all men being created equally, I believe this idea is a bit miscommunicated. I don't think everyone is exactly created equally: some people are smarter, more athletic, better looking, etc. So everyone isn't technically created equal, but i do everyone should be treated equally, both morally and by the law. So overall, I see the belief that everyone has unalienable rights and respecting them is the best way to keep people happy and keeps a fine boundary between the gov and the people in the nation.
I believe that the most important of the five points in the Declaration of Independence is the first, that all men are created equal. I believe this despite the actual meaning it was written with, which was that all white men were created equal. This is mainly because of how the meaning has changed over the years to all people, more or less, are created equal. I feel that this point encompasses all the other points by giving a guideline of who receives the rights and privileges listed. It is most important because it makes the main point of the Declaration of Independence, the people are angry because the king has all the power. Then by making it clear that as a part of their new existence they will all be equal it is very powerful.
The second principle of the Declaration of Independence, stating that all men are born with unalienable rights, is the most important of the five. If this principle were to be removed, the other four would surely collapse, simply because without this principle, the other four would hold no reasonable meaning. Stating that all men are equal, the first principle would be shallow without the rights that the second principle entails. These unalienable rights enable men to be made equal, because they all share the same rights that belong to them naturally, and they must be treated equally without infringing upon those rights. The third principle, stating that it is the government’s job to secure the unalienable rights of everyone, would be rendered useless if there were not any unalienable rights to be protected. Along with principles one and three, principle four would be ineffective as well, because without natural rights, the will and consent of the people for government would not matter. The government would just do as they please without regards to the population, because a population without basic, natural rights has no influence. Finally, the fifth principle, stating that the people have the right to revolt or abolish their government if it tries to revoke their rights, is an unalienable right in itself and would not be an effective principle if there were no natural rights to stand as its foundation. Each of the first five principles of the Declaration of Independence would be inept without the second principle, declaring that all Americans are born with unalienable rights that can not be taken away.
Prior to the discussion, the most significant principle in the DOI was the unalienable rights. However, based on what was said in class and the comments on here, I have concluded that there is no one principle that is the most important. Whilst deciding, I constantly asked myself which principle could stand alone if the others weren’t present. Based upon the comments before me, it appears that people are split between unalienable rights the government’s job to protect those rights, and with the idea of standing alone in mind, it is certain that neither of these principles could exist without the presence of the other. Unalienable rights wouldn’t mean a thing if the government didn’t protect them. Like many people before me said: they would simply just be rights on a piece of paper. Nothing more, nothing less. On the other hand, the government’s job to protect these rights would not exist if the unalienable rights did not exist, For if they didn’t, the government would have nothing to protect and therefore no true job. Now, although people may argue I am missing the point of this assignment (pick the most important), based on Chazen’s instructions (pick which principle would force the others to crumble if it wasn’t there) there is simply no one principle that is the most important.
Out of the five main principles of the Declaration of independence, I believe the most important one is the Right to revolt or even Abolish Government. I believe this because if this right was not present, then the other four wouldn’t have to be completed to the full potential by the Government. One big obvious example of this right being or not being practiced by our own U.S. government was the black civil rights movement. For a better part of 300 years, Black people/African Americans were 2nd class citizens in the United States. Even after slavery was abolished by Abraham Lincoln in 1863, rules and regulations against Black people were still present. That is until the Late 50s and 60s, when Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. led a peaceful revolt to end segregation and discrimination in the United States. It took them a little less than a hundred years to successfully stand up to their own government. Who knows what the world would be like if those people didn’t do what they did? Same goes to our forefathers. What would the world be like if they didn’t revolt against the British? The government needs to have a certain fear of the very same people they govern. Not the fear that makes them worry for their lives, but the fear that the people will fight back if you try to push them down. Without this fear, the government would not feel as obligated to execute the other principles because no one would tell them otherwise. That is why I think the Right to Revolt is the most important principle out of the five.
The most important DOI principal is the unalienable rights. If the government takes these away then naturally the people will revolt so why do you have to write the right to revolt down if it's something people will do whether the government allows it or not. Also With out those rights, why does the government have to protect and what makes you think the citizens can be a part of the government? These are all of the questions I have to the people who are against my viewpoint. I think all of the principles are important but the foundation of human/unalienable rights is the most important.
The most important principle of the five principles stated in the D.O.I, is the principle that governments derive their power from the consent of the people. If a government can only be as powerful as its people allow it to be, government corruption is thus minimized which lowers the importance of the last of the five principles; right to revolt and abolish government. Also, as time has passed, certain ethnic groups have been under minded and thus accomidated for but how would the government be made aware of the issues without the consent of the people? From where could the government receive the power to pass laws to aid and secure these "unalienable rights"? Through the peoples consent is how. Plus in todays society, certain people who reside in the united states arent even provided with the same unalienable rights as others, such as convicts and immagrants. So how could this principle be that important, but its not provided for all people
I believe that the right to the unalienable rights is the most important and significant principle in the Declaration of Independence. Without the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, a citizen would have no rights at all. If these rights were to be removed, one would not be able to live life and have the freedom that comes along with these rights. Although I believe that all of the DOI rights are very important, without the freedom to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, all of the others do not matter. I also believe that this principle is broad enough to cover so many topics, and so many freedoms can be considered a part of this principle, which increases the amount of freedom citizens would have with just one rule. By having the rights of life, liberty, and happiness, this would also secure ones rights and prevent the complete domination of one specific group or person. Overall, I believe the unalienable rights principle is the most important for giving people the basic rights and freedoms of life, and protecting the citizens rights to happiness.
I believe that the most important principle is the right to abolish. The government is given the job to make sure that our rights are preserved; however, the government could potentially act in ways that challenge whether or not our rights are being upheld. Issues that challenge this in the eyes of some include forcing people to have photo ID's while voting and the death penalty to name a few. While these issues don't necessarily warrant a revolution against the government, they are still things in our society that can be logically argued that these are things put in place by the government that impede on our rights given in the first part of DOI. The only group that truly know if the government is oppressing them are the people, not the leaders or policymakers. The right to abolish gives citizens the ability to take matters into their own and restore their own rights if absolutely necessary.
To me, the most important principle is that all men are created equal. This is because, ideally, if all men are equal, there is no need for the rest of these principles to be written down in a document, they will all just simply exist. Now I understand that this is a flawed system, but if we were to put more time into making sure equal rights were distributed to all, the rest of the principles would be ensured. Without equal rights for all, the government would crumble because citizens would all be vying for power against each other, causing the country to become chaotic
I agree with Helen and Nicole because if people have their unalienable rights than, the other principles of the Declaration of Independence will fall into place. If everyone has their rights, than people will be technically equal because they would all have the same rights. Next, without this principle, the government would have no rights to secure for the people and the principle would be worthless. Also, the principle that government rules with consent of people goes along with unalienable rights. For instance, it is our right to vote freely and citizens will elect who they want to help govern them and that is a form of consent of the people. The other principles can be derived from this one principle, therefore this is the most important.
I believe that the most significant of all principles of the Declaration of Independence is that all men have unalienable rights. You can say that all men are created equal or that people have the right to abolish government yet people will believe what they want to believe and if they truly desired to abolish the government they surely wouldn't ask for permission. People care about their freedom more than anything, without that what do we have? A peaceful world where we're held captive in our society? The consent of the governed is important but you can't always do what the people want versus what they need. If everyone got what they wanted we wouldn't be here today. The government should be able to do as it sees fit at times. The cost of freedom is more than worth the price to pay for the other principles. If need be people could secure their own rights stated by the government. When things would go too far from people taking power into their own hands, eventually the government would secure their rights for them. The natural rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are most important parts of the Declaration of Independence, enforced or not, the rights are stated and clear for all to see.
A representative democracy, such as conceived in The United States, no matter how dependent of elected officials it has become, none the less finds its roots in the consent of the governed. Political change is always the after-effect of social change rather than the other way about. The government cannot and will not take precautionary measures to instill the political rights of a certain group for example, minorities, unless there is vehement social backing; as principles made on the basis of moral ambiguity lack the force to become laws. The people, and only the people possess the ability to drive said policy measures, at which point it becomes clear that it is no longer the government’s job to secure rights associated with the policy, but rather of society’s to obey them. The power of any legislation is found in the people's best interests, which prone to change at any point in time, respectively redefines the political and social meaning of equality, rights, and the form of government to regnant standards. Equality and the unalienable rights clauses of the Declaration of Independence in specific are in historical retrospective the most contorted points, and least enduring in time. The ability of the people to abolish the government, while important need not be specifically noted if the consent of the governed is obeyed in its respective range. There have been instances in which the wish for change was indeed so great as to cause the collapse of a governmental institution, however the recovery measures were not redefined, and the pool of officials in these instances was often limited to those who have held positions of authority under the previous moral era, thereby uncannily creating a similar government to before the revolution.
Unalienable rights are what make us intrinsically human, and are the basis of what makes us equal to one another on the most basic levels. The right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness give us a reason to keep getting up in the morning; without those, we may as well be heartless robots, rather than content and active participants in politics. While it is also the government’s job to make sure rights are protected, if the rights did not exist themselves, there would be nothing worth protecting. The people are also more likely to give their consent for the government to move forward if they are pursuing happiness, looking to make the best of the life they were given. Without liberty, the idea of revolt would not exist.
The principle that is most important in the Declaration of Independence is that the governments job is to protect the rights of the people. We could set up a nation where people have full rights and all are equal, but if the government doesn't protect those rights, they will more than likely disappear. As for the right to revolt, rebelling often does more damage then it is worth, it would be better to change the government in ways that are possible through our current constitution. Besides if the government takes away the right of privacy, freedom of speech, and peaceful assemble, it would be almost impossible to organize any revolution.
The most important principle in the u.s. Constitution, is the power of government, because the government must have limitations. It cannot do whatever it wants without the consent of the people. So, a limited government is a government that , again, doesn't do whatever it wants, and that is a good thing, because that way they can't take away the rights of the people. All the other principles of the constitution are just arguable made to ensure that the government cannot dictate/ tyrannies us. For example, the first amendment explicitly prevents the government from depriving us of our freedom of speech. There are many other areas in the constitution, in which the government may not interfere (eg. 2nd and 4th amendments). We also have popular sovereignty which allowed us to control the government so that it will not abouse us. We have separated powers of government between the various branches and we have given them checks and balances over one another, including the power of judicial review. All of these thing are devices to make the government powerful, just not too powerful.
69 comments:
Starting off with why only having the right to abolish is a terrible idea. Empirics. Egypt is a perfect example of a nation that has the right to abolish but none of the other rights. And with the right to abolish a government, instead of creating a government that instills the other rights like chazen or george predicted. They toiled in a cesspool of political instability for 5 years re-electing 3 different totalitarian dictatorships. Thus, from history it is evident that simply having a right to revolt and abolish is ineffective.
With the expectation that government will protect all rights held by its citizens from anyone, I agree with Bryan that an unnecessary movement to revolt would be harmful to the existing system. The focus of a government should be placed on preserving the rights it endows on its citizens through defense against foreign invasion, internal turmoil and itself. If a right to abolish is present, it could potentially prove detrimental, allowing for the aforementioned political instability to occur. Instead, by protecting these given rights, the government can ensure the continued expansion of free enterprise and growth of the nation under fair standards not intrusive towards other citizens, all the while limiting its own power from potential tyranny as a result of hypocrisy.
Naw, Egypt is the exception, not the rule. It wasn't the people overthrowing, it was the military acting. Tunisia is a much better example. And if you want to use Empirics, arguably the most successful democracy and the current hegemon was born out of revolution. Further, revolution is the necessary mechanism to accompany any ideals. Without a mechanism to act, we can't stop abuses. Additionally, we need to verbalize our right to revolt, because through verbalization the words become not an idea but a call to action. Without a call to action or the realization of this right, we cannot revolt.
I believe the most important principle of the Declaration of Independence is that all men are created equal. This is the foundation that the rest of the principles are built from. If all men were not created equal, there would be no basis for unalienable rights or the governments need to protect them. The same can be said for the consent of the people in government power because if all men were not considered equal the people wouldn’t have a say and if they did it would leave the government in a state of unrest. In that same state of unrest, the people would not band together to abolish the government if needed if they did not feel like one people in the first place. Therefore, this is the most important principle as it is the principle that the rest stand on.
I think that the most important right is the right to abolish the government. Without this right, we might end up like China or other country's where people have no rights. I agree with this right because we would have no rights or the governments roles wouldn't be to protect your rights if we had a bad government that we couldn't abolish. That being said, I don't agree that equality isn't important, I do. However, we wouldn't have equality if our government had full control. So with this being said... I don't think that equal rights of men or that unalienable rights aren't important, but we wouldn't have either one of those without a government that we are able to change and get rid of if it doesn't fit the citizens of America's needs.
I would like to bring up what Ellie said "we would have no rights or the governments roles wouldn't be to protect your rights if we had a bad government that we couldn't abolish". First of all, like what someone said in class, people will revolt whether or not they have the right to. So therefore they can overthrow the government as long as they have the want and army to do so. People not having the right to abolish government is not the main problem, humans will do anything when they do not feel like their voice is getting heard or if they do not trust what the government is doing. People would still have rights, but maybe they would have to fight for their rights and risk their lives to attain them, which is why I think that the most principle is that we must all have our unalienable rights. Humans need to start off with rights in order for people to take them away.
Out of the five principles of the Declaration of Independence, the most important right is the fourth, which states that a government’s power comes from the consent of the people.
This does not, by any means, imply that it is not important that men are to be established as equal, or that mankind has a set of unalienable rights, however, humans are inherently good. Even without an official statement by the governing force declaring that all people should be treated equally with respect, humankind is more than capable of defining that for itself. While having these principles be a concrete part of a nation’s foundation would certainly facilitate with and quicken the passing of laws, such as that of the abolition of slavery, it is not entirely necessary to have them in place. Additionally, while such beautiful and inspiring statements are great in theory, they do little themselves to actually help the situation of the people. All humans were created equal, yes. But do we really need the government to tell us that? This ultimately makes the first two principles important, but not the most.
As for the third principle stating that the government’s job is to secure rights, if a government is run by the people and for the people, with the consent of the people, it is likely that a person would not consciously elect to limit their own rights. When the time calls for it, most probably the people will demand for the government to secure such rights and political officials will have no choice but to heed their call if they wish to stay in power. If a government did not depend on the people for its power, then the rest of the population would simply be abused by the overabundance of authority in the hands of the few. In addition to that, it is a little precarious to state that the government's job is to secure a person's rights, and nothing else. Rights may be considered and boiled down by the government to simply mean the unalienable rights such as life and liberty: both of which you could technically achieve if the government were to choose to go against the wishes of the people and corrupt the government. Protecting rights is not enough because unfortunately, the right to own property will not do anyone much good if the economic stability of the nation is nonexistent.
While the significance of the fifth principle – the right to revolt/abolish government – is evident, it is hardly something that should be prioritized over the others. If the right to revolt takes precedence over the simplest definitions of order, than such rebellions would only cause even more chaos than what they tend to already do in established societies today. Additionally, it is likely that the people would not care if rebellion were a right of theirs or not. The amazing thing about humanity is that it is always constantly attempting to improve, regardless of the complications it may cause. Mr. Chazen, as well as a few other students mentioned how it is necessary for such an incentive to exist in order for the government to function in the favor of the people. However, if the government gains its power from the consent of the people, if the government were to not listen to the people's wishes, that alone would lead to that person's demise. In other words, the fact that figures in government gain all of their power from their backing of the people, that is enough of an incentive for it to act in the people's favor. Lastly, if the government is properly abiding by the principle that they are to listen to the people, such drastic rebellions would be deemed unnecessary: a simple vote out of that particular political figure would suffice.
When first assigned the 1 page paper on this topic I chose "all men are created equal" to be the most important principle in the Declaration of Independence. Since having the discussion in class my opinion has changed to believe in unalienable rights because in my opinion all men being equal falls under the alienable rights umbrella. Having rights as a citizen is important because it means you have a say in the government in your home country. The right to own property is important to a person because it is theirs, you feel like your hard work has paid off because you own a part of this glorious country of the USA. The basic right to have life and the pursuit of happiness is simple but important because not all country's have that right. Some people spend their whole life being slaved or forced into a life they don't choose. So I believe it is an important right that we have in the US. All in all I believe that the most important principle in the Declaration of Independence is the having unalienable rights like life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness/property.
Then what should be treated as the rule instead of the exception. Perhaps Thailand, who has also one through years of humans that have the right to abolish? And what has Thailand done with this right to abolish? The exact same thing that happened to Egypt. Furthermore , you point out that the people weren't overthrowing the government, but instead is was the military; does that explain the riots by the PEOPLE of Egypt in Tahrir Square? NO. While you can argue that the ones that actually took power in the end was Sisi and the military, the fact remains that the people were the ones that tried to abolish the government 2 times and almost a third time.The right to abolish ,given to the people of Egypt AND Thailand, is ultimately a tool that brings nothing but more oppression and strife. The list could go on with nations that had been overthrown due to the right to revolt and ended up no better than they were before (Latin America).
I still hold to my first belief that the unalienable rights are the most important principle. If you don’t list those basic rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, you know there are going to be those whack jobs that want to take away certain people’s rights (*cough* Hitler *cough*) and if they aren’t specifically listed in the constitution, it’ll be perfectly legal for him/her to do it. So that’s my stance. Now to address the rights to abolish thing, I think that there are two basic things to me that refute this as being the most important. While it is true that the government needs to have that pressure to keep it in line and doing its job, I don’t think it’s the most important principle. If you take it away, the people still have the option to revolt. They will take it upon themselves to do so. Naomi stated this in our class as a final comment and I 100% agree with it. The people will revolt or change the government if they see fit and if the right to revolt wasn’t listed in the constitution, they would do it anyway. Also, this right to revolt is just an extension of the UNALIENABLE right of liberty, so if you took away the unalienable rights, you would be taking away this one too.
Of all the principles in the Declaration of Independence, I believe that unalienable rights are the most important. When regarding the importance of unalienable rights, it is vital to remember the things we take for granted every single day. For example, our privilege to practice whatever religion we choose is an unalienable right. Also, our freedom of speech is an unalienable right as well. Finally, unalienable rights are what protect us from having our own property taken away. Of course, there are many more unalienable rights, but these are the three to focus on at the moment. Now, imagine that unalienable rights are removed. You can no longer practice a religion of your choosing, speak as you please, or rest assured that your property will stay yours. Three things that you used to count on every single day, just gone in an instant. This is why unalienable rights are the most important, they impact our lives all the time.
Before the discussion started, I advocated for the unalienable rights principle to be the most important one. After the discussion, I still believe that it is the most essential principle in the Declaration of Independence. I agree with Zoe in believing that this is the most useful principle. It is the most relatable one that we practice. Our freedoms that fall under the "Liberty" part of the principle are what we exercise every day. A lot of people practice the freedom to practice their own religion every day, they practice freedom of speech by using social media to support their core beliefs. Unalienable rights are the fundamental rights encompassing every American, rights that every citizen can relate to. They are the most important.
Like Helen said, some of the other principles like the one to revolt and abolish government can fall under one of the following: "Life, Liberty, and Pursuit of Happiness." Furthermore, the government does need to protect our fundamental rights but if these rights are not put in place in the first place, what is it going to protect? This is why I firmly stand on the belief that our unalienable rights are the most important ones.
@Megan Todd,
While equality sounds like a decent principle to have, equality has not always been practiced in the United Staes. Examples: discrimination against African Americans, women's suffrage, the fact that the 30 richest Americans own as much as half the US population, same-sex marriage laws, etc. Whether we like to admit it or not, even if everyone is created equal, it certainly does not work out that way, especially not in the United States of America. There has always been inequality in issues that matter and although we would like more justice, it is inevitable that disparity will always exist.
I believe that the most important principle of the Declaration of Independence is that all men are given a set of unalienable rights by their Creator at birth and cannot be taken away, such as life, liberty, and property. This principle affects every other principle of the Declaration of Independence because not every man could be created equal if they were not all granted the same rights as each other, men with more rights would clearly have the upper hand over people given less. It affects the principle that government has to protect these rights because without unalienable rights the government would have nothing to keep secure and could potentially oppress and withhold rights from their citizens, which is part of the reason America wanted to break away from Great Britain. It also relates to the statement that government gets its power from the people because without these rights men hold no power and cannot fully and truly contribute their power to the government. And it affects the last principle that the people have the right to rebel against and abolish a government if it is unable to protect their rights because it is essential for governments to grant their people these rights or else the government could become dictatorial and corrupt which is what the founding fathers tried their hardest to prevent and create a successful democracy. Ultimately, every principle of the Declaration of Independence ties back and is affected by the doctrine that all men are privileged with unalienable rights that not even the government can deny or take away from a man, as they are granted to them by a higher power.
Out of the five principles in the Declaration of Independence, I believe that the most important one is that "all men are created equal". While many people made good arguments for the other four principles, i think that the first principle is the basic foundation for all the other statements. Only by acknowledging that all men are created equal and that no one is better than the other, will people be able to have an equal opportunity to pursue their natural rights, give government consent, and the government will be able to maintain the principle that all men are created equal.
I agree with Michelle Workman that being able to revolt against a corrupt government is important, however it's not as vital as having everyone acknowledge that all men are created equal. If we are able to take down a government that is limiting our freedom and rights, then how will we know that our next form of government won't do the same thing as the previous if we don't establish basic principles. It would just be a chaotic cycle of overthrowing the government without ever having peace.
I believe the most important principle of the Declaration of Independence is the right to revolt/abolish the government. Many have said that the unalienable rights or that all men are equal are the most important but those are just words; you cannot be one hundred percent sure that those rights will be guaranteed and followed through with. If the government is not actually protecting those rights for us, the people should have the right to get rid of the government. People may not think about this now because the government is there to secure our rights but if it was ever corrupted then we should have the right to remove it from power. Because a group of people revolted against the King of England, the United States was able to be established and if our government ever became unbearable, like England when was back then, the people of the United States should have the right to abolish the government.
The government power= consent of the people is the most important part of the Declaration of Independence. This part alone eliminates all the others because everyone votes and participates in the elections than there would be less discrimination and more people will be represented equally. Also there will be little to no need of abolishing the government because the leaders will be elected as choice of the people so many bad politicians will probably not be in office.
Look, some other radical libertarian has been saying ignorant things about the right to abolish not being the most important right, and he presented some half-truths and maybee's trying to dissuade other people like a childish 13 year old. The point is, if the people have a will and the government does not uphold that will or even detests that will. To continue, the right to abolish does includes many other examples in history where the tyrannical empires have fallen because of that right. People who argue for other rights are basically expecting the rights to just be handed to them, thinking that government is always going to be good, and without this right, the mindset of the people would be to stay passive and let the harms. All of the rights of the declaration are indeed important, but the right to abolish and rebel is the whole purpose of the declaration of independence. Of course, all of the rights are needed, but without this right itself, you cannot have access to the others. If revolution did not exist, the world today would be a lot different. It's not the action itself, but the premise behind the right. With an government that oppresses, the right to abolish is the first step into achieving the other rights. Also, we need to start breaking ice in the arctic to open trade routes and stuff.
First of all, in response to Bryan and Steven, the responsibility of the government has and never will be to protect our rights. If we believe that our rights are unalienable, then that stands whether or not the government is protecting them or not because then by general consensus, if the government acts in such a way that does not respect these rights, the people who understand that they have unalienable rights can protect their rights for themselves with their right to revolt. The right to revolt is the most important piece of the DOI because it ultimately leaves the power to protect our unalienable rights to the individual. We can interpret the right to revolt and abolish many different ways. I'm not even sure that I am interpreting it the same way as Andrew who is also supportive of the right to abolish. The right to abolish does not mean that Americans have the right to throw the United States into anarchy when the government does something unpopular. Far from it! The right to abolish means that when the majority of the country deems that the national government is not holding up its part of the social contract, the people have the right to collectively agree to retract the power given by the people for the people from the government. This right to abolish is prevent civil war type catastrophes like those in the Arab Spring in which Gadhafi hired mercenaries to kill his own people when his people and the military decided it was time to take away his dictatorial power. The "right to abolish" forces those in power, if abusing the power, to renounce it as the populace see fit.
I feel like the consent of the people is the most important right of the Declaration of Independence. The government should represent the ideas and beliefs of the people and the sole purpose of a democracy is to carry out policies that reflect the views of the people so that everybody will benefit from it. If the government had The consent of the people in the first place, then there would be no need to revolt. This would prevent chaotic rebellion. Also, unalienable rights and equality would be secured if the people could voice their opinion in government and influence party members to represent their beliefs. There could still be potential conflicts, but for the most part if the people’s views are represented through Congress, the nation would be more unified.
I strongly agree with Rebecca beliving that the right to abloish is the most important principle stated in the Declaration of Independence. Addressing Bryan's commment: This discussion is not about what principle produces the most effective form of government. What we are really trying to understand is what is most important to the individual. Democracy is about keeping the individual happy. The information based world we live in today has a strong emphasis on change and how we can improve poicy and government. We need the right to abolish in order to give people the right to disagree, to give their ideas on how government should be run, to fight governement that they do not agree with. The founders of this nation were tired of a King who thought it was fair to tax us from the other side of the ocean even when we had no representation in our government. I firmly believe that the most important principle is the right to abolish/revolt when we as individuals do not approve of the way our government is treating us.
The principle that states it is the governments right to secure our rights is the most important principle. Many of the other principles are simply just rights, like all men are equal and unalienable rights, so this principle covers many others. Without establishing that this is the governments main responsibility, there would be no definite way that these rights would be protected and they could be taken away very easily. The right to abolish the government does not need to be formally written down. America did not have the right to revolt against Great Britain. If the citizens are that angry with the government, they're going to revolt anyway.
While I do agree with Helen's point to a certain extent, I still believe that the most important principle of the Declaration of Independence is that the government must protect the unalienable rights. It is not enough to merely say that "all people have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Yay! Happy!" We need a strong government who's role is to protect these rights, otherwise they just become words on paper with no real weight. If the government ever stops fulfilling this role, then the people can simply revolt with or without that right explicitly stated, as Helen (and Naomi) pointed out.
What we have to realize is that people, inherently by nature, want to have power over other people. Something else we have to realize is that government is run by people. Therefore, the government wants to have power over people. The way that they do this is by limiting the citizens' rights. The government needs a discentive to do this, otherwise they will continue to go around limiting our rights as citizens of the government. The right to abolish the government is the most important because of this. If the government is being thrown out of power, they will stop doing the things that made the people mad in the first place. Without the right to abolish the government, none of the other rights will exist.
The principle that states that all men are created equal is the most important. Without this principle our society would not be shaped as it is today. Would women have the right to vote? Would African Americans be free? Also, if everybody was not equal then everybody would not have the same rights. Who would get to decide who had what rights and why? All humans are created equal and our country could not possibly be as advanced as it is today without this principle, therefore it is the most important principle.
The most important DOI principle is "All men are created equal". If everybody isn't equal, than not everybody will have unalienable rights. Also they wouldn't have an equal say in government because their voice would be taken away because they aren't seen as equal to others. When all people are created equal, then there is an equal say in government so that the government knows what the population wants as a whole as opposed to knowing what a selected few want.
At the end of the day, I still believe that unalienable rights are the most important part of the Declaration of Independence. To me, the idea that every person has the right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, defines this country most accurately and brings the most net benefit out of any individual principle of the DoI. If everyone has the right to life and liberty, then surely all men must have equal opportunity in life and are thus equal from the beginning. Furthermore, the importance of securing rights only results if there are important rights for the government to secure--first there have to be unalienable rights. Also, the consent of the govern cannot give people the same sense of control as the rights to life, liberty and death. Lastly, if everyone has unalienable rights, then there would be no reason for anyone to revolt or abolish the government. For these reasons I think that unalienable rights are the most important principle and define America the best.
I believe that the unalienable rights are the most important because those are the rights we fought for when we separated from Britain. Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness is important in every governmental society, because without those, freedom is not guaranteed. Having the right to abolish a government has not always worked in history. We did not have that freedom when we separated from Britain, we had to create it. Therefor the other options are eliminated.
I would like to go all the way back to what Bryan said about the right to abolish. I believe that what most people are thinking when the say the right to abolish is the most important (myself included)they are not saying it could survive alone as you stated, but rather the others could not be there without it. Government has changed its definition of equality many times over the course of its history. Civil rights have generally improved over time, going from only white males being allowed to vote, then blacks, then women. While all of these improvements are a true part of american history, who is to say that the government's opinion of equality could not retrogress? Sure this is a bit of a stretch, however the right to abolish is there for this reason. The right to abolish goes hand in hand with the consent of the people, and without these,the other principles would not be as significant. The point of the right to abolish is not to stand alone without the other principles present, but to validate the others and prepare for an oppressive government. This principle is the most important since it is the most visionary and future-thinking of all of them.
I feel that the principle saying it is the governments job is to secure and protect the rights of the people is by far the most important of the principles. If the government is not actively securing, or at least has passed legislature in the past that has helped secure, the rights of the people, the people will not have anything with which to support their rights. For example, some believe that the fact that men are created equal is the principle principle of the Declaration of Independence, however, while this is true, it is not the most important. Of course all sane people know that one man is created just as equal as another, and we can all go talk about how equal we are, but until there is something in place, say a law, that protects this equality, nothing is stopping someone who does not hold this belief from harming those who that person does not see as equals. The same holds true for our unalienable rights, we all feel like we have the basic right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, but unless the Government protects our unalienable rights, they would be trampled on by someone who does not hold this same belief. Finally, if government did not protect the rights of the citizens, the power to change, and even overthrow, the government would be useless. If rights were not respected or secured by the government, they would not listen to the people if the people wanted to get rid of those in power. If the government did not consider it a priority to protect the rights of those it rules over, they certainly would not consider making the desires of the people a priority, especially if the people’s desire was to remove the elected officials. Because of these reasons the principle stating the Government's job is to secure the rights of the people is the most important principle of the Declaration of Independence.
I believe that the most important idea from the Declaration of Independence is the idea that there must be consent from the people on the government’s power. With this idea, government mustn’t do anything without the approval of the citizens who fall under the government. Without this point in the Declaration of Independence, the entire system of democracy and the purpose of breaking away from England will become useless and pointless. If government decided to run things and not confer with the citizens, the government would not be a democracy any more. Without this idea society would be unfair and government would be bias against citizens. No policies would be followed through and mayhem could fill the society. Not being able to have a say in the community that you live it develops more opportunities for revolt and un-civilization. Also, if this weren’t an idea in the Declaration of Independence, the newly founded America would resemble the same as England. While the majority of the classes believe that the most valued point from the Declaration of Independence is that all men are created equally, I want to point out Naomi's statement: " All humans were created equal, yes. But do we really need the government to tell us that?". Having the consent of the government from the people is the sole and most important idea in the Declaration of Independence. Removing this idea from the document would completely paralyze our nation and destroy every effort we took to break away.
I think the most important principle is the consent of the governed because in the Declaration it states that, "Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed". Which means that government gets all its power from its people, and the people set up the government, so the people decide how they want to be governed, thus I think the this principle puts itself above unalienable rights because by having the consent of the governed you're essentially choosing to have these rights if the people "run the government".
The most important principle of the Declaration of Independence is the first one which states that all men are equal. Without this statement, none of the others would have any significance. For example, the second principle which protects human rights would not be valid if all men where not equal to begin with. What's to say that someone wouldn't have the same rights as someone else if they were unequal. At any time a leader could come along who decides that some men are better than others, and if there wasn't a statement that all men are equal then this dictator could abolish every other principle of the Declaration.
The most important principle in the Declaration of Independence is undoubtedly that all men are created with unalienable rights. It is from this principle that the ideal of all men being created equally stems from. Being able to have rights such as life and the pursuit of happiness means that as a US citizen, one can participate in the government, work towards what makes them happy, and be free. The reason I cannot believe that having the right to abolish the government is the most important is because as many of my classmates have already stated, humans will revolt against something they do not want. We don't need it spelled out for us to be able to fight for what we believe in; that would happen regardless of what the DOI says about it.
I believe that the right to abolish is the most important, because that is how America started. A group of people decided that they didn't like the current government and it was their right as a human being to change the government. They decided that the current government was taking away all of their rights, and they where not ok with that. So they used the right that no one can ever take away from you until you die. The right to revolt and to fight back. The founding fathers believed that when the King took everything away, they still had their will to fight back. That is why i believe the right to revolt is the most important one.
The first principle that states that all men are created equal is the most important principle in the Declaration of Independence. Although the others are important, the first ensures that everyone had the right to the others. Without the first principle there is nothing that ensures that everyone had the right to abolish the government or that everyone has inalienable rights and so on. It is because of the first principle that people come to America, so that everyone has equal opportunities.
The most important principle in the Declaration of Independence is that we have unalienable rights. When Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence, he felt that we needed all of our rights to be listed out. These rights were eventually written down in the Bill of Rights. We need our rights to be listed because these are our natural rights. The British government was not giving the people their unalienable rights so that is why we broke away. According to the beliefs of the Founding Fathers, our natural rights cannot be taken away. This is the most important principle because in some countries, citizens are not given their natural rights. The founders believed that these rights were given by God to all men. Among the rights are life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness.
The most important point of the Declaration of Independence is that the purpose of the government is to secure the rights of the people. If the government does not protect the rights of the people, then not all people would be equal. Also the country would be mostly controlled by the government and the people won't have any rights. Without any rights, people will become frustrated and angry and eventually rebel against the government leading to the destruction of the country.
After the fishbowl discussion in class, I still hold my opinion that the all men are equal principle is the most important because without it, all of the others would crumble. You cannot have a government empowered by the people and have it be fair if not all people are equal. I know this is still an issue today with gay rights, and the previous civil rights movements for women and african american suffrage. I realize that this may never be completely achieved, but without it, our government would be unequal. And this could lead to the government being turned into an aristocracy or a monarchy or an oligarchy. This is the principle that mainly set us apart from England in the beginning because the citizens were not equal, the rich did have more power than the poor, and there always was this unbalance of power. Without this principle, there could not be unalienable rights, not everybody would have the same ones. A poor person may have the rights of the declaration while a rich one would have others beyond that and it would be easier to take away a poor person's because they do not have as much power to get you back for it or prevent you from doing it. If citizens are unequal then we cannot abolish or change the government, and not all citizens will be happy, because the rich will be in charge of the government and it will be in the fashion that they want it, and they would have more power to stop the rest of us from changing it because we are not equal and we do not have as much power, even in large numbers, as the rich people would in small numbers.
Having the right to abolish is most important because that forces the government to be held to a standard. The government would have to give people their rights and freedoms if the only rule in place was that the people could revolt against the government. The government's whole purpose would be to satisfy the people which is what all the other principles state. And if the government failed at their job then the people would revolt and create a better government that passes laws the people want and that makes them happy.
Sydney, you claim "there would be less discrimination and more people will be represented equally" when the government power comes from the consent of the people. Inevitably, the majority or most influential people would control the government. The cornerstone principle that all men are born equal is essential to ensure less discrimination.
Originally I had a very firm belief that the first principle of the Declaration of Independence, stating that all men are created equal, was the most important. However, after the fishbowl debate on Friday, I have changed my mind. I tried to keep pushing that the first was the most important, but Spencer Aalfs had an amazing argument. He brought up the point that what does it matter if we all are created equal if the government does not protect that, therefore the third principle, that the government must protect the rights of the people is the most important. I now believe that is the most important.
I believe that the government deriving its power from the consent of the governed is the most important principle of the Declaration of Independence. Without it, the government protection of inalienable rights, which has effectively been argued to be more important than the rights themselves, is far from guaranteed. Politicians need to be elected and not chosen by some sort of other system so that they heavily rely on the approval of the people. Elected officials are obligated to protect basic rights so that they retain approval and get re-elected. Therefore, basic rights and the fundamental duty of the government to protect these rights will only be upheld if the government has the consent of the people. Only when the dependent relationship between the government and the people (and vice versa) is our system will the government be unable to stray from the Declaration of Independence ideals.
I believe that All men are created equal is the most important principle to the Declaration of Independence. With that being said I do believe that all principles are necessary but All men created equal is the most important. Why, you might ask? Well if all men weren't created equal, then no one would have unalienable rights because some believe they should have more rights then others and if that is the case then the government wouldn't do its job to secure and protect our rights. So if we didn't have this important principle then it would cause the downfall of two other principles. That's why I believe All men are created equal is the most important.
The main principle of the Declaration of Independence that is the most important is the one that states that “all men are created equal”. While this principle may not have been upheld by practices of earlier years, today it serves as the main reason behind many laws to ensure that every human, by race, gender, and other factors, is indeed equal to all others. In the 1800’s, only white men could vote. However, the 15th amendment extended suffrage by giving black men the right to vote as well. This was the precursor to the government taking action to back up its declaration’s statement of equality for all. Today, men and women of all kinds can vote, and laws are put in place to make sure that people are not discriminated against for any reason. One such law is the Fair Housing Act, which forbids discriminating against people who are applying for a loan. Even people with different sexualities, such as gay people, are getting laws to ensure that they too can be treated equally with the same rights as other citizens. Every person should be treated the same because we are all humans, no matter the slight physical, mental, and emotional differences. When all people are equal, the world will not have as much fighting between groups. Past conflicts, like the African Americans’ Civil Rights Movement, have persuaded the government and its citizens to try and make life equal not only to have peace, but because it is the right action as humans to take. If the equality of all persons was not a foundation of America, this country would be even more overflowing with violence, the mistreatment of others, and unhappy lives. It is clear that today’s society constantly revolves around and is built on the creation of this main principle, so it is the most important one.
I believe that the most important principle of the Declaration of Independence is that the governments power comes from the consent of the people. This is most important because with the peoples opinions and consent, then how will the government be respected by them? if the people do not agree with the government and the government refuses to hear the peoples problems, then people will slowly revolt(ex: hunger games). Throughout the class discussion, I still believe the fourth principle is the most important. To be honest, I don't know why everyone chose the first principle: all men are equal. Don't get me wrong, I believe all men should have equal rights and should be treated equally with respect but not every single man can be equal with the amount of money they, the amount of food they have, or any other tangible or intangible item that could be equal to them. This is why our society works because not every single man is equal and give the government their consent to make the nation better and stronger.
Having unalienable rights is what I think is the most important of the five. They give us rights that we are guaranteed to always have, and it is an insurance that certain parts of our lives can't be messed with by the government. In the beginning of the Declaration of Independence, it says that all men have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. I think of this as giving the people assurance that we can not be oppressed by our government in any way shape or form, unlike when we were under the ruling of the British monarchy; they will never be able to dictate every bit of our lives. The other four are important, but unalienable rights are the basic rights everyone should be given. In my mind, it is the most important.
Out of the 5 principles stated in the DOI, the third, A government's duty is to protect unalienable rights, is truly the most important.
This is due to the simple fact that if the government cannot protect this fundamental principle, the rest collapse, save for the the fifth; People have a right to revolt if the previous principles are not met. However, this principle is not relevant in my opinion(I'll explain later).
We'll start by examining the second principle; All people are given unalienable rights at birth, namely life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. While I support these unalienble rights, and the theory of them, "unalienable rights" are in fact only theoretical. These rights listed are alienable due to the fact that they can be alienated. This simply means they can be taken away. For an unalienable right to be truly unalienable, then they must have no possibility of being stripped, or not given, to ANY person, regardless of race, religion, sexual orientation, gender, or any other seperating factor. Throughout history we've seen governments take away these rights with examples such as the holocaust (Adolf Hitler killed jews (life), stripped them of citizenship and took away many fo their other rights (Liberty) and forced them in to ghettos and concentration camps(pursuit of happiness)). While there are thousands of other examples throughout history, this example alone proves my case that: If a government cannot protect these "unalienable rights", they are therefore alienable and do not exist. They can only exist in a society where the governing party supports and defends these rights.
This brings us to the first principle: All men(and women) are created equal. This principle is extremely important as well, and a fundamental aspect of all of our lives. That being said, however, this right lays on the foundation of "unalienable" rights. As I proved in my last point, "unalienable" rights do not exist unless a government supports and defends them. if a persons' "unalienable" rights are taken away, they are not equal to others who in fact have these rights. Therefore, equality of all human beings is just a theory as well and does not exist. These rights can be taken away and have been in the past (like... ya know... Slavery), showing us that without a general public or a government that supports and defends equality and "unalienable" rights, it cannot exist. This being said, the only way for it to exist is if a government supports, defends, and impliments it into society.
This brings us to the fourth principle: Power comes from the consent of the people. Once again, we have seen this right stripped from the people many times in the past (Namely the countless dicatorships/monarchies/Anything that really didn't get consent from the people, yo). Consent from the government can only truly exist if a government supports it and can defend this right from those who seek to destroy it.
Finally, all of these are more important that the right to revolt. I believe this simply because people do not need a specific right to revolt. If needed, people will revolt regardless of whether or not it says "yo u gis kan do dis" on a piece of paper.
GG m8's. #Rekt
Before the discussion, I thought that the principle of unalienable rights was the most important in the constitution. However, since participating in the discussion, my opinions have swayed to the principle of the governments job to protect our rights. Without government protection of our citizens' rights, the rights would just be writing on a paper. Laws and regulations are needed to ensure everyone can enjoy their unalienable rights, and without this security rights can be easily infringed on, or forgotten. Furthermore, if the government does their job right, there will be no need to revolt.
In my opinion, the principle that all men are equal is the most important because it sets a standard for how the country will run. Without this simple statement, the government would run unfairly and inefficiently. Only the concerns of some would be heard while others would suffer in silence.
If it were not stated that all men are equal, then the statement of unalienable rights would be irrelevant. Some people would have more unalienable rights than others. There is no point in having rights that “cannot be taken away” if not everyone is respected equally. The rights of some would not be taken as seriously as others.
If not all men are equal, what makes the government protect the rights of the less equal? They can make loopholes in order to avoid protecting the people who are seen as lesser. Thus, this statement would be null.
The government supposedly gets its power from the people, but with inequality, only some would be heard. The rich and powerful can shift the system to where the less fortunate have no say in what happens. Elections would be pointless because only the concerns of the higher class would be brought to attention. The system of democracy would crumble.
This government would obviously be inefficient and most people would want to change it for the better but they would not be able to for their voices would not be heard. They would most likely be forced to violence in order to change anything.
Without the principle that all men are equal, the government would not run effectively and would ignore the concerns of the people as a whole.
Out of the 5 main principles of the Declaration of Independence, the right of the citizens to revolt and to abolish government is the most important. This is the one principle that gives power directly to the people who are being governed, as it allows people to revolt and take the power away from the government if the government does not uphold the promises made to the governed people. All of the other principles are just stating the duties of the government. For example, the first principle, which states that all men are created equal, cannot be the most important because the government has the power to change the definition of what a "man" is. This principle is an original statement from the document, yet minority men and all women were not considered equals for many years. All the other principles including the first, which are just statements that the government is expected to uphold, and these principles are weak because the government can find loopholes to modify them (as they did by excluding blacks and women from the "all men are created equal" statement). The right to revolt and abolish government is a power that is directly given to the people, and thus it is the most important of the principles.
I believe the most important principle of the Declaration of Independence is the proclamation that everyone has the unalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. I believe this because it is so true. I believe that people in this world should have these rights listed. Further, these rights are even more important because they determine the determine the limit of the government in our basic, fundamental human rights. By respecting these rights, gov should have the consent of the people and therefore have no need to be abolished. And on the argument of all men being created equally, I believe this idea is a bit miscommunicated. I don't think everyone is exactly created equally: some people are smarter, more athletic, better looking, etc. So everyone isn't technically created equal, but i do everyone should be treated equally, both morally and by the law. So overall, I see the belief that everyone has unalienable rights and respecting them is the best way to keep people happy and keeps a fine boundary between the gov and the people in the nation.
I believe that the most important of the five points in the Declaration of Independence is the first, that all men are created equal. I believe this despite the actual meaning it was written with, which was that all white men were created equal. This is mainly because of how the meaning has changed over the years to all people, more or less, are created equal. I feel that this point encompasses all the other points by giving a guideline of who receives the rights and privileges listed. It is most important because it makes the main point of the Declaration of Independence, the people are angry because the king has all the power. Then by making it clear that as a part of their new existence they will all be equal it is very powerful.
The second principle of the Declaration of Independence, stating that all men are born with unalienable rights, is the most important of the five. If this principle were to be removed, the other four would surely collapse, simply because without this principle, the other four would hold no reasonable meaning. Stating that all men are equal, the first principle would be shallow without the rights that the second principle entails. These unalienable rights enable men to be made equal, because they all share the same rights that belong to them naturally, and they must be treated equally without infringing upon those rights. The third principle, stating that it is the government’s job to secure the unalienable rights of everyone, would be rendered useless if there were not any unalienable rights to be protected. Along with principles one and three, principle four would be ineffective as well, because without natural rights, the will and consent of the people for government would not matter. The government would just do as they please without regards to the population, because a population without basic, natural rights has no influence. Finally, the fifth principle, stating that the people have the right to revolt or abolish their government if it tries to revoke their rights, is an unalienable right in itself and would not be an effective principle if there were no natural rights to stand as its foundation. Each of the first five principles of the Declaration of Independence would be inept without the second principle, declaring that all Americans are born with unalienable rights that can not be taken away.
Prior to the discussion, the most significant principle in the DOI was the unalienable rights. However, based on what was said in class and the comments on here, I have concluded that there is no one principle that is the most important. Whilst deciding, I constantly asked myself which principle could stand alone if the others weren’t present. Based upon the comments before me, it appears that people are split between unalienable rights the government’s job to protect those rights, and with the idea of standing alone in mind, it is certain that neither of these principles could exist without the presence of the other. Unalienable rights wouldn’t mean a thing if the government didn’t protect them. Like many people before me said: they would simply just be rights on a piece of paper. Nothing more, nothing less. On the other hand, the government’s job to protect these rights would not exist if the unalienable rights did not exist, For if they didn’t, the government would have nothing to protect and therefore no true job. Now, although people may argue I am missing the point of this assignment (pick the most important), based on Chazen’s instructions (pick which principle would force the others to crumble if it wasn’t there) there is simply no one principle that is the most important.
Out of the five main principles of the Declaration of independence, I believe the most important one is the Right to revolt or even Abolish Government. I believe this because if this right was not present, then the other four wouldn’t have to be completed to the full potential by the Government. One big obvious example of this right being or not being practiced by our own U.S. government was the black civil rights movement. For a better part of 300 years, Black people/African Americans were 2nd class citizens in the United States. Even after slavery was abolished by Abraham Lincoln in 1863, rules and regulations against Black people were still present. That is until the Late 50s and 60s, when Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. led a peaceful revolt to end segregation and discrimination in the United States. It took them a little less than a hundred years to successfully stand up to their own government. Who knows what the world would be like if those people didn’t do what they did? Same goes to our forefathers. What would the world be like if they didn’t revolt against the British? The government needs to have a certain fear of the very same people they govern. Not the fear that makes them worry for their lives, but the fear that the people will fight back if you try to push them down. Without this fear, the government would not feel as obligated to execute the other principles because no one would tell them otherwise. That is why I think the Right to Revolt is the most important principle out of the five.
The most important DOI principal is the unalienable rights. If the government takes these away then naturally the people will revolt so why do you have to write the right to revolt down if it's something people will do whether the government allows it or not. Also With out those rights, why does the government have to protect and what makes you think the citizens can be a part of the government? These are all of the questions I have to the people who are against my viewpoint. I think all of the principles are important but the foundation of human/unalienable rights is the most important.
The most important principle of the five principles stated in the D.O.I, is the principle that governments derive their power from the consent of the people. If a government can only be as powerful as its people allow it to be, government corruption is thus minimized which lowers the importance of the last of the five principles; right to revolt and abolish government. Also, as time has passed, certain ethnic groups have been under minded and thus accomidated for but how would the government be made aware of the issues without the consent of the people? From where could the government receive the power to pass laws to aid and secure these "unalienable rights"? Through the peoples consent is how. Plus in todays society, certain people who reside in the united states arent even provided with the same unalienable rights as others, such as convicts and immagrants. So how could this principle be that important, but its not provided for all people
I believe that the right to the unalienable rights is the most important and significant principle in the Declaration of Independence. Without the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, a citizen would have no rights at all. If these rights were to be removed, one would not be able to live life and have the freedom that comes along with these rights. Although I believe that all of the DOI rights are very important, without the freedom to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, all of the others do not matter. I also believe that this principle is broad enough to cover so many topics, and so many freedoms can be considered a part of this principle, which increases the amount of freedom citizens would have with just one rule. By having the rights of life, liberty, and happiness, this would also secure ones rights and prevent the complete domination of one specific group or person. Overall, I believe the unalienable rights principle is the most important for giving people the basic rights and freedoms of life, and protecting the citizens rights to happiness.
I believe that the most important principle is the right to abolish. The government is given the job to make sure that our rights are preserved; however, the government could potentially act in ways that challenge whether or not our rights are being upheld. Issues that challenge this in the eyes of some include forcing people to have photo ID's while voting and the death penalty to name a few. While these issues don't necessarily warrant a revolution against the government, they are still things in our society that can be logically argued that these are things put in place by the government that impede on our rights given in the first part of DOI. The only group that truly know if the government is oppressing them are the people, not the leaders or policymakers. The right to abolish gives citizens the ability to take matters into their own and restore their own rights if absolutely necessary.
To me, the most important principle is that all men are created equal. This is because, ideally, if all men are equal, there is no need for the rest of these principles to be written down in a document, they will all just simply exist. Now I understand that this is a flawed system, but if we were to put more time into making sure equal rights were distributed to all, the rest of the principles would be ensured. Without equal rights for all, the government would crumble because citizens would all be vying for power against each other, causing the country to become chaotic
I agree with Helen and Nicole because if people have their unalienable rights than, the other principles of the Declaration of Independence will fall into place. If everyone has their rights, than people will be technically equal because they would all have the same rights. Next, without this principle, the government would have no rights to secure for the people and the principle would be worthless. Also, the principle that government rules with consent of people goes along with unalienable rights. For instance, it is our right to vote freely and citizens will elect who they want to help govern them and that is a form of consent of the people. The other principles can be derived from this one principle, therefore this is the most important.
I believe that the most significant of all principles of the Declaration of Independence is that all men have unalienable rights. You can say that all men are created equal or that people have the right to abolish government yet people will believe what they want to believe and if they truly desired to abolish the government they surely wouldn't ask for permission. People care about their freedom more than anything, without that what do we have? A peaceful world where we're held captive in our society? The consent of the governed is important but you can't always do what the people want versus what they need. If everyone got what they wanted we wouldn't be here today. The government should be able to do as it sees fit at times. The cost of freedom is more than worth the price to pay for the other principles. If need be people could secure their own rights stated by the government. When things would go too far from people taking power into their own hands, eventually the government would secure their rights for them. The natural rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are most important parts of the Declaration of Independence, enforced or not, the rights are stated and clear for all to see.
A representative democracy, such as conceived in The United States, no matter how dependent of elected officials it has become, none the less finds its roots in the consent of the governed. Political change is always the after-effect of social change rather than the other way about. The government cannot and will not take precautionary measures to instill the political rights of a certain group for example, minorities, unless there is vehement social backing; as principles made on the basis of moral ambiguity lack the force to become laws. The people, and only the people possess the ability to drive said policy measures, at which point it becomes clear that it is no longer the government’s job to secure rights associated with the policy, but rather of society’s to obey them. The power of any legislation is found in the people's best interests, which prone to change at any point in time, respectively redefines the political and social meaning of equality, rights, and the form of government to regnant standards. Equality and the unalienable rights clauses of the Declaration of Independence in specific are in historical retrospective the most contorted points, and least enduring in time. The ability of the people to abolish the government, while important need not be specifically noted if the consent of the governed is obeyed in its respective range. There have been instances in which the wish for change was indeed so great as to cause the collapse of a governmental institution, however the recovery measures were not redefined, and the pool of officials in these instances was often limited to those who have held positions of authority under the previous moral era, thereby uncannily creating a similar government to before the revolution.
Unalienable rights are what make us intrinsically human, and are the basis of what makes us equal to one another on the most basic levels. The right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness give us a reason to keep getting up in the morning; without those, we may as well be heartless robots, rather than content and active participants in politics. While it is also the government’s job to make sure rights are protected, if the rights did not exist themselves, there would be nothing worth protecting. The people are also more likely to give their consent for the government to move forward if they are pursuing happiness, looking to make the best of the life they were given. Without liberty, the idea of revolt would not exist.
The principle that is most important in the Declaration of Independence is that the governments job is to protect the rights of the people. We could set up a nation where people have full rights and all are equal, but if the government doesn't protect those rights, they will more than likely disappear. As for the right to revolt, rebelling often does more damage then it is worth, it would be better to change the government in ways that are possible through our current constitution. Besides if the government takes away the right of privacy, freedom of speech, and peaceful assemble, it would be almost impossible to organize any revolution.
The most important principle in the u.s. Constitution, is the power of government, because the government must have limitations. It cannot do whatever it wants without the consent of the people. So, a limited government is a government that , again, doesn't do whatever it wants, and that is a good thing, because that way they can't take away the rights of the people. All the other principles of the constitution are just arguable made to ensure that the government cannot dictate/ tyrannies us. For example, the first amendment explicitly prevents the government from depriving us of our freedom of speech. There are many other areas in the constitution, in which the government may not interfere (eg. 2nd and 4th amendments). We also have popular sovereignty which allowed us to control the government so that it will not abouse us. We have separated powers of government between the various branches and we have given them checks and balances over one another, including the power of judicial review. All of these thing are devices to make the government powerful, just not too powerful.
Post a Comment