"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wi
In the Wikipedia article, I came across an interesting concept:
"Thomas Jefferson first used the phrase in the Declaration of Independence as a rebuttal to the going political theory of the day: the Divine Right of Kings"
What is the "Divine Right of Kings"?
Wikipedia says:
"The Divine Right of Kings is a political and religious doctrine of royal absolutism. It asserts that a monarch is subject to no earthly authority, deriving his right to rule directly from the will of God. The king is thus not subject to the will of his people, the aristocracy, or any other estate of the realm, including the church. The doctrine implies that any attempt to depose the king or to restrict his powers runs contrary to the will of God and may constitute heresy."
and then:
"The theory of Divine Right was abandoned in England during the Glorious Revolution of 1688–89. The American and French revolutions of the late eighteenth century further weakened the theory's appeal, and by the early twentieth century, it had been virtually abandoned."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wi
So Thomas Jefferson was trying to liberate himself and entire nation away from the concept of Kings just deciding that they could rule the world, just because "God's will" supposedly made them "worthy of the crown."
I, personally, do not believe that "all men are created equal:
According to my research in Psychology, Sociology, and Anthropology, as well as in many personality theories, most people have accepted the notion that just because you are a human and there things you have in common with every other human (Usually physical things such as the fact that we all have bones and skin... but even some people have less or more appendages because of unfortunate events), there are many Fundamental ways in which people have things in common with only SOME people and then characteristics, beliefs, perceptions, and judgments that separate them from every other human being that has ever been (often referred to as "Personality").
When people say "All of us are people, therefore 'All men are created equal'" they are putting us back with the issues that lead Jung to create his theory of disambiguation between types in the first place:
“This work sprang originally from my need to define the ways in which my outlook differed from Freud’s and Adler’s. In attempting to answer this question, I came across the problem of types; for it is one’s psychological type which from the outset determines and limits a person’s judgment.” ~C.G. Jung
I believe that many times, although people may realize that there are vast differences between themselves and others, the reason people support and will argue the concept of "All men are created equal" to the death is that what they want to say is "All men should be treated with equality".
And here is a fundamental difference:
"All men are created equal" says that fundamentally we are all a huge "=" sign.
"All men should be treated with equality" says that although we may have diversity in Age, Religion, Sex, Gender, Sexual-orientation, Ethnicity, Culture, etc. there should be a perceptual continuance in how people are being treated.
"Playing with Perception" can be a fascinating game.
One movie example of this is the musical "My Fair Lady", you should watch it if you haven't already.
Near the end of the movie, Eliza, tells us how our perception of things and people can change the labels that we give those things or those people:
"You see, Mrs. Higgins, apart from the things one can pick up, the difference between a lady and a flower girl isn't how she behaves, but how she is treated. I'll always be a flower girl to Professor Higgins because he always treats me as a flower girl and always will. I'll always be a lady to Colonel Pickering because he always treats me as a lady and always will."
I don't think that the concept of "All Men are Created Equal" or "The Divine Right of Kings" got it right... it's sort of a mesh of the two (as it is with most cases taking two extreme sides of perception):
I agree with the last part of the sentence in the Constitution regarding Men's equality: "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness" being something that people should all be able to have... but I think there are times at which people "lose" the right to live, lose their liberty, and the ability to pursue their happiness: If they are killing or harming others, we do KILL them, TAKE their liberty away, thus thwarting their ability to pursue their happiness! It happens. It's been happening since the beginning of time.
So, in summary:
Although, idealistically speaking, it would be great if we lived in a world where everyone would be treated equally, we do not, and I don't know if you can ever truly treat issues that contain "diversity" in an equal and unbiased manner.
There is a clear difference between saying "There is no difference between White People and Black People" and "White People and Black People should both be treated with dignity and respect" because there are obviously differences in our skin color, our anthropological and sociological backgrounds, just for starters, however, there is something to be said that our Diversity does not need to Divide us.
The sooner we admit we are all NOT equal, the sooner we see differences as strengths (Like the X-men have different powers... they're not the same but the work together as a team!), the sooner we can all Live our Lives, have our Liberty, and Pursue our Happiness.
No comments:
Post a Comment