Why Do Liberals Stand With T. Jefferson, and Other Founding Fathers on Certain Issues, BUT .. . .?

Question

NOT stand with them on others ?

I just asked a question about 'dissent and patriotism' . Several Liberals were oh so quick to point out that Jefferson, Payne and others described dissent as patriotic . And they of course included the whole 'FOUNDING FATHERS' thing.. .. OK.. . . So what did the founding fathers have to say about. . . .ABORTION. . . . . Women's Sufferage. .. . SLAVERY. . . . . need we go on ?????

EDIT* - GO AHEAD and read those answers . There's now 24 of them and the majority are liberals standing with the words as Jefferson and Payne . NO WAY OUT OF THIS ONE !!!

Tangerine that is not an answer to the question .

Answer 1

Good question. The only answer I can give is that the liberal mind is like a file drawer that was hit by a tornado. Some of the files are still there, some are missing, and some are there but are ripped up and need some guess-work to figure out what they were.

Answer 2

Society progresses, which is the root of progressivism and modern liberalism. It is a bit different from the time of the founders, but then, the founders didn't have Internet, television, radio, etc. However, I would suggest you look at Washington and Jefferson's personal opinions on slavery. They both hated the practice, but to be an upper-middle class gentleman, you couldn't afford to not have them as there was very little hired labor at the time. (People who demand pay have a hard time competing against free labor.) In fact, even the abolition of slavery on paper didn't really end the practice -- it was not until the invention of modern farm equipment that plantation slavery was truly done away with. (Look up "sharecropping" for more insight.) In fact, an interesting question is would slavery have ended anyway with the mechanization of farms? I would argue that indeed it would have.

Now that being said, I think you miss the point entirely with the premise of your question. Jefferson was a populist; he believed that if the people willed something to be, then it was to be. He distrusted over-reaching government and large corporations (both of which caused the American Revolution). Thus his firm belief with Madison, and others, that the Constitution was not to be inflexible but able to change over time. Jefferson and Madison both knew that society would continue to progress, and certainly the events occurring in the Old World at the time were strong reminders of this fact. That is why the most power in the Constitution was reserved for the Congress, and ultimately the people. This is also why we see so much resistance from conservatism today to Congressional power.

Answer 3

So you are saying we should be slaves to what these guys said? They were perfect Gods? Should I write a "Bible" for them and force people to teach it in science class? I generally like George Washington..thought he was a great guy but he owned slaves and I don't agree with that. So does that mean I hate him now?

Nothing about abortion because it didn't exist then, slavery was a compromise between North and South which helped created the US and keep us from drifting apart to be easy game for England to take over. HENCE some were for and some were against.

They were men who designed our country and what it stood for, but they were still men who had prejudice and flaws. The extreme right wing which controls the Republicans now likes to say they are conservative and into American values but they betray freedom by making laws which gives the federal govt the right to do anything they wish at any time for no given reason...that is something the founding father's would be against proven by the government they designed....a government that the increased polarization of the US has become exactly what the founders did not want....a central authority answerable to no one with unlimited power.

Answer 4

Payne called them patriots the British called us dogs and killers. We were terriosts my friend kill em stright away or ambush them. As far as womens suffferage well a good case in the late 1800s but not an issue in those days. Women expected themselves to do what women did. Strong women protested in there own way and a few were burnt for it the matraircial system was still strong but burnng out. Abortion. Not in very many minds, To populate was to be strong, run the farm, have many small workers the thought of abortion was a mile away except in a whores mind where babies meant loss of funds. Slavery, many hated it but it contained workers that were cheap and to large farm holders like the founding fathers a nessesisty sorry but it to was a fact of life for the times. Jefferson had many and had an on going affair with one who bore him children. Slavery to the founding fathers was a way of life maybe not to the slaves but to the founders yes it was. The glass ceiling will remain for women just as racisim will remain in the Americas it has lessend but its still there. Being liberal has nothing to do with any thing it was the mind st in those days most all thought the same its in books .. As far as your edit what are you looking for people to say it is what it is Liberals wanted what England did not want. You live her because you enjoy it i imagine so give credit where credit is due.

Answer 5

I saw your other question, and was about to answer, but others did so very eloquently, so I chose not to do so. But, "the whole founding fathers thing," as you put it above? As though the ideas and standards put forth by the founders are something to be dismissed. You are clearly dismissing their notion of dissent equaling patriotism as meaning nothing and seek to discredit it by pointing out they were wrong about what? Abortion? Not a concept back then that was discussed. Women's Sufferage? Women had precarious stature back in the 1700's - though they had far more rights here than they did in Europe. Slavery? The founders were clearly conflicted about slavery. It was part of what drove this burgeoning country's economic status. They were troubled by it and some expressed shame that they themselves had slaves, though they were loathe to free them. Conflict over slavery was part of the fabric of this country that wouldn't come to the forefront for years, long after the founders were dead. But dissent? This country was created from the basis of dissent. The founding fathers were the liberals of their day. So, if you wish to discredit the founding fathers to support your own notions, rave on. Myself, I appreciate the political nuggets of wisdom they left us, and I would never try to discredit them for using dissent to create this wonderful country we are privileged to live in - but then I guess that's just me.

Answer 6

Your first point is that our founding fathers believed in the right to bare arms and you are correct on that statement. But the 2nd ammendment states that an armed militia workign to secure a free state shoudl be well regulated. "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." Let me clarify, the 2nd ammendment grants the people the right to keep and bear arms, however it also give the federal government the right to regulate. There is no (logical) liberal that would like to take away everyone's right to own a weapon, however a large number of people do not see why citizens should have the right to own massivly destructive weapons, like assualt weapons, grenades, etc. I personally don't hear many liberals talk much about the fairness doctrine, which was repealed in 1988. But the point of the doctrine is that the airwaves were given to the television and radio networks by the government, in exchange for fair and accurate reporting of global events. I am actually not terribly familiar with this agreement between the networks and the government or the fairness doctrine itself but the fairness doctrine does nto infringe on the right of free speach to me it actually promotes the right of free speach by establishing equal airtime. But I am not a supporter of the doctrine itself. As for your thrid point I suggest you do more research into the founding fathers adn there religion. There was a lot of dispute in the role religion would have in establishing the country and in the end the consenus of the founding fathers was that religion would play little to no role in establishing the US. You state GOD being in our founding documents however there is no reference to GOD in the Constitution, The Articles of Confederation, etc. The only founding document where GOD or a creator is mentioned is in the Declaration of Independence, which established each state free and independant and did not acknowledge the United States of America. The reference to god on our currency was not added until 195. I hardly call the politicians of the 1950's our founding fathers, as our country was nearly 200 years old at that point. The Pledge of Allegiance was written in 1892 almost a 120 years after the establishment of the United States of America. And it was written by a baptist minister (and a socialist) as an advertisement jingle to help sell Flags. Also the pedge at that time did not include the word GOD. The word god was added to the Pledge of Allegiance in 1954. Again hardly near the times of our founding fathers. You comment that the founding fathers did nto establish any social programs but they did establish SOCIALIZED GOVERNMENT. How about the establishment of the Library system. If you seriously believe the founding fathers had no interestin socialism you really should read more into Jefferson. Who spoke constantly about education for all, a government by the people, and freedom of religion.

Answer 7

A very good question. Of course, it applies across the board. I often hear the founding father's cited by conservatives as well, both technically in original intent legal arguments and more broadly in arguments about, say, separation of church and state or the commerce clause. The apparent hypocrisy is similar; are we to respect them or take their lead on other issues while universally paying them no mind when they hold slaves or deny women the vote.

So why?

First, like everybody, we cite the founding fathers because they are rightly and widely respected as a source for American governing principles. It is common when arguing over something to cite others who agree, others with perceived authority. Liberals in particular don't expect conservatives to respect them if they argue "we believe dissent is patriotic." So we say, "if you don't believe us about dissent, read our founding fathers." Nobody agrees with the founding fathers about everything but it would seem a bit hasty to say that nobody should be allowed to invoke their authority ever again.

Second, dissent is different from slavery and abortion and other such stuff. Those other issues were things they had views on, but they did not build them into our republic. They held slaves, they mentioned slavery in the constitution, but they did not make it an institution of the new republic. They (I am just assuming from your question) disapproved of abortion, but they did not build that disapproval into the constitution. Indeed, conservative legal scholars are arguing constantly when criticising Roe v. Wade that the founding fathers intended to leave such issues to politics, not the courts, implying that the founding fathers, whatever their views, were leaving it up to us. This is not to say they didn't give a hoot (the constitution doesn't ban arson or embezzlement either) but that opinions of theirs about slavery, abortion, public education, the postal system or wig fashions for that matter, were not intended by them to bind us. Their opinions about the independence of judges, the right to trial, freedom of religion and the right to dissent were intended to bind their heirs. They were meant to be the pillars of the republic.

Third and last, I think the claim is one of group identity. It is who we all are. We do not all dissent all the time. But we all dissent some of the time. When one group is in the ascendent, others complain and argue. Sometimes (invading Afghanistan or fighting Hitler after Pearl Harbor) we nearly all agree, but we don't lock up the ones who don't. More often, though, some people disagree and when that happens they pipe up. When someone tries to shut them up, they get to say "We all come from a long line of dissenters. What did you expect?" The founding fathers were as much as anything dissenters, and for all the sedition acts and hounding of communists and nonsense since then, we inherited that from them. We all come from a long line of dissenters.

Answer 8

As a liberal I rarely find myself quoting the founding fathers. Not because I do not admire some of their stances but rather because the document they left behind is source enough for any argument I have encountered.

Any one mature enough to carry on reasoned political discourse should be aware of the fact that any historical figure had good and bad points. I cannot think of one person this does not apply to. It doesn't mean the good should be thrown out with the bad. It simply means we should be discerning when we consider these people.

Answer 9

Amendments were later added that outlawed slavery and allowed women to vote. However, there were no amendments added that outlawed dissent. Thankfully, the First Amendment still allows it.

The reason why I say this is because, although we may not agree with the Founding Fathers on every issue, they did lay the foundations for our government. And whatever we disagreed with, we passed amendments to change it.

Answer 10

Jefferson was a founding father of the Democratic-Republican party. Liberal or conservatives? Answer that.

Answer 11

You mean you're a selective moralist too?

What a hypocerite. Liberals learned it from people like you.

George Washington owned slaves. A true conservative christian.
America is too decently liberal to put up with that much hate now.

Need I go on Mr. Pothead?