Just that. Maybe you should expand on your question?
2007-05-31 08:20:32
·
answer #1
·
answered by What, what, what?? 6
·
2⤊
2⤋
The quotation "All men are created equal" (sometimes modified to "All people are created equal" , or "All men and women are created equal") is arguably the best-known phrase in any of America's political documents, as the idea it expresses is generally considered the foundation of American democracy. This statement illustrates the idea of natural rights, a philosophical concept of the Enlightment; many of the ideas in the Declaration were borrowed from the English liberal political philosopher John Locke. Locke, however, referred to "life, liberty and Property" rather than the pursuit of happiness.
The phrase has since been considered a hallmark statement in democratic constitutions and similar human rights instruments, many of which have adopted the phrase or variants thereof.
In a sense, Thomas Jefferson's famous "defining of America" phrase, "All men are created equal," is not entirely accurate. While all Jefferson intended to state was that all people should be treated fairly with human rights (which is true), the statement itself has connotations which cannot be accepted. There are certain people who deserve more respect and authority than others. Society needs to know that there are boundaries and limits. We need to give our seat on the bus to an older person out of respect. We need to stand up for sages, elders, and even parents as they enter the room.
If "everyone is equal," then we run the risk of making no one equal. We will produce youngsters who laugh at the elderly and disobey their teachers and principals because they will feel "equal" with authority figures. If "everyone is equal," we will lose respect for others since we are as equal as they.
------
That a good society should secure liberty and provide justice appears uncontroversial until we begin to define what we mean by “liberty” and “justice” and try to reach agreement on how to achieve both together. Clearly, by “liberty” our American political creed has never meant total and complete license. Indeed our representative democracy has imposed, from the beginning, a variety of controls on the individual’s ability to do as he or she pleases. From the first we have understood the paradoxical truth that freedom itself must be limited if “liberty” is to be secured. But the degree to which individual freedom should or may be limited and our understanding of what degree of “liberty” is fitting and appropriate are questions that Americans have debated since the founding of the Republic.
What “justice” means in American civic life has also been a source of ongoing debate, as our national sense of what is “just” has evolved over the course of the nation’s history.
There are those, for example, who argue that because the Founders did not abolish slavery, they preserved a society that was profoundly unjust, a situation that was only remedied legally by the Civil War, the constitutional amendments that followed, and the laws passed in response to the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s. From this perspective, a society that provides “justice” for all is one that has abolished all legal
distinctions based on racial or personal characteristics. Our evolving and shifting notions of what constitutes “due process” in criminal prosecutions, a concept first set
forth in the Fifth Amendment and then in the Fourteenth Amendment, provides another roadmap of how our understanding of a different aspect of “justice for all” has changed and continues to evolve.
More than two centuries after the founding of our Republic, while we remain dedicated
to creating a society that guarantees both “liberty” and “justice” for all, we continue to
debate what these terms mean in our own time and how we can best realize the
fundamental human values they express.
2007-05-31 15:34:47
·
answer #2
·
answered by Robert S 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
I have no idea what you mean by "According to our times". All men are created equal and endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights....was intended to do two things. Eliminate the idea that the king was the source of all moral judgment and to establish the concept that all men have rights that come from God not from any government. In this respect, those rights cannot be taken away by any government and it is the right of all men to oppose any government that does so.
The term "...and justice for all". comes from the Pledge of Allegiance. It means what it says. This is a country founded on moral absolutes and the concept of justice.
.
2007-05-31 15:25:33
·
answer #3
·
answered by Jacob W 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
all men ( humans, men and women ) are created to be free, and to attain all that their wits and talents, determination and chutzpah will allow...without shackles installed by government. that what 'inalienable' means...that those rights aren't granted BY the Govt, but that the govt recognizes those rights as being beyond their reach.
justice is designed to be meted out without consideration of a person's class or race...when that was written, there were many tiers of law, and laws that applied to one social level did not necessarily apply to another. the USA was designed to be a middle-class utopia, where there were no middle-classes with much clout anywhere before, except maybe for the Dutch Burhgers...
such has been perverted of late in the US, with special priviledges being demanded by all sorts of whining splinter groups, and perverts demanding recognition and acceptance, all in the name of 'tolerance'...
a nation that tolerates subversion will not be a nation for long... a society that allows its founding, sustaining concepts and elements must by the very definition be cast away by the rising tide of diversion.
borders, language, culture: the three pillars of any nation. the USA refuses to enforce our borders, the illegals won't learn the language, and everywone denies that the ever existed an American Culture...
2007-05-31 15:28:37
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Those comments are about discrimination of people of color and they should remain in that context.
The idea that everyone is created equal literally is ridiculous. Some are born more intelligent, better looking, more creative, have more ingenuity, live in great neighborhoods, etc...
The idea that the "haves" should give to the "have nots" is insane. There is and always will be great inequalities in life and for a government to take away individual freedoms in order to create some imaginary "even playing field" will only result is some form of tyranny. Reference the French Revolution.
2007-05-31 15:32:05
·
answer #5
·
answered by Who's got my back? 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
"All Men are Created Equal" means creed and color have no bearing on a mans merit.
"Justice for All" means everyone has the right to a fair hearing in our legal system.. in other words the letter of the law, not our personal bias should govern what happens.
2007-05-31 15:23:56
·
answer #6
·
answered by pip 7
·
3⤊
0⤋
"All me are created equal" is poetic hyperbole. It does NOT mean that I can run and swim like an Olympian and match wits with Bobby Fisher or Boris Spasky over the chess board or paint like ... well, pretty much anyone who can paint.
What it does mean is that we all should be given an equal shot at "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." And if we blow it, we ourselves are to blame.
"Justice for all" is not poetic license. I means that in this country the laws are to apply to all equally, with no exceptions or waivers. I know the "celebutante rehab waltz" has become the number one dance of the hour, but it is not supposed to work that way.
Both, of course, are ideals toward which we should strive, even if attaining them sometimes eludes our grasp.
Cheers.
2007-05-31 15:23:54
·
answer #7
·
answered by Grendle 6
·
2⤊
0⤋
That would exclude gays and lesbians of course. It's a joke, meaningless words that sound good. If it were true, we wouldn't have had lynchings and white jurors freeing guilty men. It took up to the sixties to get civil rights in gear. As for justice for all. All you have to do is watch the Attorney General, the highest law enforcement official in the land, testify in front of congress to find that justice is indeed blind. That lying piece of crap thumbed his nose at congress and nothing happened. Like his underling Monica Goodling who works for the Justice Department and took the fifth amendment. Nothing like good leadership to bolster the morale of the nation.
2007-05-31 15:26:16
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
If you are speaking about law abiding citizens and legal immigrants then you are exactly right in quoting those lines. If you're speaking of giving the same rights to illegals then you are talking about something else entirely. The constitution was written for American citizens.
2007-05-31 15:25:07
·
answer #9
·
answered by Ms.L.A. 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
All men and women regardless of race, religion, and social standing either indiginous or naturalized into this nation are due to receive equal government protections and rights. Justice for all law-abiding citizens unless they forfeit their rights by breaking the laws set forth by our government.
2007-05-31 15:21:56
·
answer #10
·
answered by nburton1981 2
·
6⤊
0⤋
Every person has equal footing and that no one is better than anyone else. It also means that all people are given the same rights in our society.
2007-05-31 15:32:07
·
answer #11
·
answered by MI 6
·
0⤊
0⤋