Thomas Jefferson said: " It is error alone that needs the support of Government, Truth can stand by itself. " What do you think he meant by that? I'm thinking he was talking about imposing our will on the general public. The purpose of Government is to govern after all. To govern means to throttle back, control, to keep from running away. When people start doing what is wrong, government needs to step in. The irony is government, law, often supports that which is in error. It does so by a majority vote of the people, at least in America that is the way it is supposed to work. Law and moral judgement, different entities.
Another irony is that law delineates the moral fabric of society. Yes, laws say what is allowed and what is not. It could be argued that in America the first laws where the Bill of Rights. Those ten items were guarantees to the people, rights that couldn't be infringed upon.
The Declaration of Independence was an explanation to the King. We credit Jefferson with the authorship of that document but in reality it was drafted by a committee including four other men. For that reason I think we can call it a consensus of ideas. It includes this passage " and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of Nature's God entitles them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they declare the causes which impel them to separation " Noteworthy to me is the explanation of the separate and equal station to which the laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitles them. I believe Jefferson is saying that God empowers the people to right and moral action. A decent respect to the opinions of mankind implies that we should listen to others, their wants and needs. The Declaration went on to say we weren't getting that and so we feel compelled to separate ourselves. That the founding fathers, the authors of those documents felt justified, by Nature's God, to act in the manner they did goes without question. Note they say, Nature's God purposely, not defining what God that may be. They believed that men would act according to the laws of nature.
The reality is that man all too often acts contrary to nature. As a result Government is required to support those actions. The problem, simply put, is to get mankind to act in accordance with nature, with what we all know to be inherently correct behaviors. Think the golden rule. If all mankind followed that natural law government would not be necessary. But that isn't going to happen. I know it, you know it and Jefferson knew it as well.
What do we want from Government? Is it life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness? No, we just want government to prevent others from interfering with our concept of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. You could say, enforce our morality. For do we not all act in accordance with our individual moral code? We do, as we search for justification to deviate from the laws of nature. It goes easier the more we deny nature's laws exist in the first place. That is the reason for so many different religions and religious practices throughout the history of mankind. It has always been man's desire to please whatever god or gods he adopts in the hope of reward. Whether it was just to get rain, food, or recover from an illness, our God has control over that Nature's God. The supreme being. Then man began writing down the rules that governed nature's God. It's undeniable that many bad things have happened over the centuries as a direct result of those " rules. " Indeed they were labeled Commandments! We tend to think of only ten but scholars tell us that the Torah contains over six hundred commandments. My point is simply the use of the word commandments, you could substitute that word for laws. The Bible is not the only religious text in the world. I did a Google search and found a listing of the top ten! Not having read any of those I can still assume they are instructions. Isn't that what religious texts do?
In the concluding portion of the Declaration Jefferson wrote: " appealing to the Supreme judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions. " So who is the Supreme judge of the world? Well depends upon who you ask. But I think a fair question would be, what is the supreme judge of the world, not who. I say that because each of us has to define that supreme judge for ourselves. As for the rectitude of our intentions what does that mean? Rectitude is morally correct behavior or thinking. In other words doing what we feel is right, justified, and pleasing to our God. In the end we do not appeal to government, we appeal to the supreme judge of the world. Error requires the support of government, rectitude does not.
Another irony is that law delineates the moral fabric of society. Yes, laws say what is allowed and what is not. It could be argued that in America the first laws where the Bill of Rights. Those ten items were guarantees to the people, rights that couldn't be infringed upon.
The Declaration of Independence was an explanation to the King. We credit Jefferson with the authorship of that document but in reality it was drafted by a committee including four other men. For that reason I think we can call it a consensus of ideas. It includes this passage " and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of Nature's God entitles them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they declare the causes which impel them to separation " Noteworthy to me is the explanation of the separate and equal station to which the laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitles them. I believe Jefferson is saying that God empowers the people to right and moral action. A decent respect to the opinions of mankind implies that we should listen to others, their wants and needs. The Declaration went on to say we weren't getting that and so we feel compelled to separate ourselves. That the founding fathers, the authors of those documents felt justified, by Nature's God, to act in the manner they did goes without question. Note they say, Nature's God purposely, not defining what God that may be. They believed that men would act according to the laws of nature.
The reality is that man all too often acts contrary to nature. As a result Government is required to support those actions. The problem, simply put, is to get mankind to act in accordance with nature, with what we all know to be inherently correct behaviors. Think the golden rule. If all mankind followed that natural law government would not be necessary. But that isn't going to happen. I know it, you know it and Jefferson knew it as well.
What do we want from Government? Is it life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness? No, we just want government to prevent others from interfering with our concept of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. You could say, enforce our morality. For do we not all act in accordance with our individual moral code? We do, as we search for justification to deviate from the laws of nature. It goes easier the more we deny nature's laws exist in the first place. That is the reason for so many different religions and religious practices throughout the history of mankind. It has always been man's desire to please whatever god or gods he adopts in the hope of reward. Whether it was just to get rain, food, or recover from an illness, our God has control over that Nature's God. The supreme being. Then man began writing down the rules that governed nature's God. It's undeniable that many bad things have happened over the centuries as a direct result of those " rules. " Indeed they were labeled Commandments! We tend to think of only ten but scholars tell us that the Torah contains over six hundred commandments. My point is simply the use of the word commandments, you could substitute that word for laws. The Bible is not the only religious text in the world. I did a Google search and found a listing of the top ten! Not having read any of those I can still assume they are instructions. Isn't that what religious texts do?
In the concluding portion of the Declaration Jefferson wrote: " appealing to the Supreme judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions. " So who is the Supreme judge of the world? Well depends upon who you ask. But I think a fair question would be, what is the supreme judge of the world, not who. I say that because each of us has to define that supreme judge for ourselves. As for the rectitude of our intentions what does that mean? Rectitude is morally correct behavior or thinking. In other words doing what we feel is right, justified, and pleasing to our God. In the end we do not appeal to government, we appeal to the supreme judge of the world. Error requires the support of government, rectitude does not.
No comments:
Post a Comment