The glaring inconsistency of The Declaration of Independence.

dadjunk said:
That "All Men" phrase provided the basis for future generations to abolish slavery which is exactly what Jefferson intended. At the time he had to compromise but did his best to project his desires for the future. The very questions raised here regarding the hypocrisy were asked repeatedly after the revolution and led to the civil war. I am proud that the founders laid the foundation for abolition as best they could given the alternatives.
Click to expand...
Although Jefferson did express a desire to eliminate slavery, and took some measures to do so, he continued to own them till his death and profited from the endeavor. It seems like a bit of a love/hate relationship.

As for the other founders (Continental Congress), they removed Jefferson's comments denouncing slavery before approving the finished work, so I wouldn't say they did the best they could. However, I do get your point that they were looking down the barrel of a civil war, and a fair portion of them saw nothing wrong with slavery anyway, so it was decided to just not get embroiled in their differences and focus on independence.
 

fuzzybuddy said:
I'm no historian, but in the 18th century, the phrase "all men are created equal" was just that. First, only males are equal. Secondly, in most of the colonies, at the time, that meant only men, who owned land. Blacks were considered to be subhuman. Blacks were trainable apes or childishly mentally inferior to whites. There was little difference in owning a horse or a slave. And quite frankly, most of the colonists agreed with that. There was no stigma to owning either, as slavery was common through out all 13 colonies, as in most of the world.
Click to expand...
I think it was a concept of convenience for colonists to hold that view. To benefit from slavery, they had to frame it in their mind that slaves were property, and not people, even though there could be no way to escape the obvious truth that they were indeed humans. They possessed all the characteristics that classified them as humans. It was absurd to conclude otherwise, unless of course, that you needed to live at peace with your conscience.

In the early years of slavery, if any slave had been a Christian in his or her previous country, they could be free, simply because they were a Christian. Once potential slaves learned of that, it became a way of escape from a life of slavery. However, that ruling was taken away because it endangered the valuable resource. It seems that money trumped God in the end.

It appears you can persuade a great many of anything if you can convince them that it in their best interest to do so.
 
Fortunately, in official matters, The Constitution is the law of the land. The Declaration was pended as a propaganda document to raise sentiment against King George and gain support for the revolution.
 
Shadowman said:
Fortunately, in official matters, The Constitution is the law of the land. The Declaration was pended as a propaganda document to raise sentiment against King George and gain support for the revolution.
Click to expand...
Having recently read it I am reminded that about 1/2 of the Declaration is a long list of the wrongs the colonists were suffering from due to the King and his governors and magistrates who ran things.
 
gruntlabor said:
Well, the holiday is over. Congratulations, Bobcat. You've invited flies, long-tailed rats, and U.S.A. haters on the Fourth of July, and as expected they came arunning.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure all of those participating in this philosophical discussion will take kindly to being called those insulting names.
Perhaps you could help yourself to a bowl of bran flakes and relieve yourself elsewhere. šŸ˜µā€šŸ’«
 
gruntlabor said:
Well, the holiday is over. Congratulations, Bobcat. You've invited flies, long-tailed rats, and U.S.A. haters on the Fourth of July, and as expected they came arunning.
Click to expand...

There are things to be proud of in the US but slavery in the time of the Founders isn't. The Fourth isn't a protected holiday during which we're blinded with red, white and blue glasses.
 
AnnieA said:
There are things to be proud of in the US but slavery in the time of the Founders isn't. The Fourth isn't a protected holiday in during which we're blinded with red, white and blue glasses.
Click to expand...
Thanks Annie. I wanted to say something, but waited for someone else and you did a lovely job. We don't live in a bubble. We live in Reality, and the world, or USA, doesn't stop when a holiday comes along like a kid's party. A kid may need protection, but there are no kids on the forum.
 
I see bitter self-hatred and a determination to tear down our institutions. These threads are shameful. Get off this path of destruction before it is too late, your mental and physical heath are at risk.
 
I spent the 4th being thankful for my life here in the Good Old US of A.
Think most Slave owners thought well of their properties, treated them
well and helped them learn USA life. Remember most came to this
country handcuffed to long ropes. Basically little verbal English skills.

The method of importing labor has changed, thatā€™s all. For every group
of families in the towns there are an army of workers to fulfill all those
needs. Biggest worry is supply and demand. Here is where Ai will be
most useful. But then it will get rights too. Sure strike for more brain! ā€¦. :ROFLMAO:

We forget what the advent of the Cotton Gin meant. The needs of Europe for Cotton.
Then the Harvestor and Combines. The time of huge families numbers to do the chores
of the family farm. You still see groups of laborers in the fields carrying for the
crops.

The past industries where men loaded the products manually, be it 100 lb sacks
of grain or Frozen beef carcasses. The armies of employees all burdened with
hard work. Things for the most part are a whole lot easier today. But if?
 
Last edited:
Outrageous assumption based on nothing. Meanwhile, the slaves told a different story. Shocking thing to say, tiger.

Why are there so many colors of black skin? It wasn't consensual when one is a slave.
 
Timewise 60+ said:
At the time, slaves were not considered to be equal to whites during this time. The concepts of racism were not part of their consideration. Ignorance is/was bliss! Throughout history man has made many mistakes or assumptions that in today's world would be consider immoral and wrong based on Christian teachings. Yet it happened and most of the people who were doing these things were just ignorant about it.

This went on for many years and it was not just in America, but all over the globe. You can deny this and try to demonize it, but with research you will come to understand that the people in power at this time just did not think about it. It just was the way it was...
Click to expand...
True. As far back as recorded history goes, people enslaved other people. Moreover, most people enslaved their own people until several centuries ago. Asians enslaved Asians, Africans enslaved Africans, etc. Through most of history, it wasn't about race, it was about enslaving weaker people and smaller tribes.

When people all over the world started enslaving Africans almost exclusively, and the practice started getting controversial, then it became racial...that's when slavery was justified by saying Africans were an inferior race.
 
Most everyone got whipped for breaking the rules back when.
Some beheaded, some put afire, most hanged. Tidier if done
correctly. Why are injection needles sterilized for lethal injections? Why do LEO carry pump shotguns? Swat team
Stormers. Russia kill its Czar and family & become communists.. Why did Germany believe Hitler? Mental illnesses/
Why all the recent past history of African killings in Africa by Africans?
 
Most likely asking oneself why is better than thinking to know
all the answers.

Why does ones son or daughter keep asking why and, ā€œMommy or daddy,ā€œ __. ā€œdo this for me.ā€

Slavery still exists, it just has changed. My kids grown up, their
Kids adults and having children. I am a slave to my pets now.

Meow, Meow, Bark, Bark. ā€œTreatsā€. Haha. (y)
 
Last edited:
Most likely we all are slaves to our Cell Phones, IPads and Internet.

The Pain, Oh the Pain of it all.
 
TennVet said:
I really don't think this is a topic worth being bated into discussing. One of the freedoms enjoyed in the US is to leave it if you don't like it.
Click to expand...
Not if you're poor and every nation in the world has immigration laws. You can visit Canada but you can't get a job there unless you go through all their legal steps. Emigrating to another country is a big deal everywhere, with rare and few exceptions.
 
papa tiger said:
I spent the 4th being thankful for my life here in the Good Old US of A.
Think most Slave owners thought well of their properties, treated them
well and helped them learn USA life. Remember most came to this
country handcuffed to long ropes. Basically little verbal English skills.

The method of importing labor has changed, thatā€™s all. For every group
of families in the towns there are an army of workers to fulfill all those
needs. Biggest worry is supply and demand. Here is where Ai will be
most useful. But then it will get rights too. Sure strike for more brain! ā€¦. :ROFLMAO:

We forget what the advent of the Cotton Gin meant. The needs of Europe for Cotton.
Then the Harvestor and Combines. The time of huge families numbers to do the chores
of the family farm. You still see groups of laborers in the fields carrying for the
crops.

The past industries where men loaded the products manually, be it 100 lb sacks
of grain or Frozen beef carcasses. The armies of employees all burdened with
hard work. Things for the most part are a whole lot easier today. But if?
Click to expand...
They were not well-treated. Most lived in shacks with dirt floors and zero privacy.

Their children and spouses could be sold at-will. Imagine having your 9-year-old kid sold and there is nothing at all you can do about it.

The women were regularly raped on some farms. The owners felt they had a right to that.
 
Technically, there isn't an inconsistency in the Declaration of Independence. The inconsistency is that what the Declaration of Independence states was not actually practiced until many years later. Centuries, really.
 
It would of been impossible to construct a document that was all things for all peoples. As it wasā€¦the document reflects what we wish we were. Just like ā€œone nation, under Godā€ does not offer room for all Americans, the Declaration of Independence was probably a stretch in many ways. Stillā€¦it is rousing and could be unifying if we choose to let it represent who we wish to be.
 
The first paragraphs of the DOI are based heavily on the Virginia Declaration of Rights - which my ancestor (5x g-grandfather) wrote. He was an interesting man and full of contradiction. Held over three hundred slaves yet never freed a single one. But, he wanted a clause in the constitution specifying when slavery would end. He also refused to sign the constitution unless it contained a bill of rights - he was one of three holdouts. It cost him his friendship with Washington. He was heavily influenced by the writings of John Locke.

His relief sculpture is above/behind and to the right of the Speaker of the House dias and Jeffersonā€˜s is to the left. I often wonder what he would be thinking If he could watch the present goings-on!
 
Last edited:
Murrmurr said:
Technically, there isn't an inconsistency in the Declaration of Independence. The inconsistency is that what the Declaration of Independence states was not actually practiced until many years later. Centuries, really.
Click to expand...
I think I get your point Mur, but I would still contend that there was a stark contrast between the assertion that all men were created equal and deserved life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, meanwhile, denying a significant portion of the population those very rights.

I think I understand the reasons why they were turning a blind eye to the reality, but to proclaim that you adhere to this esteemed virtue and then live otherwise still stands out to me as inconsistent.

Perhaps the intent of the DOI was to get the message across to their mother country oppressor that they deserved to be free and live their own lives, apart from dominance by England, but I don't think they were as aware as they should have been that they were doing the very same thing to their fellow man. JMO
 
bobcat said:
to proclaim that you adhere to this esteemed virtue and then live otherwise still stands out to me as inconsistent.
Click to expand...
That's what I said...The inconsistency is that what the Declaration of Independence states, was not actually practiced until many years later.

I just added a comma. Maybe that's better.
 
Would we be having this discussion if it had been written, "From the beginning all men by nature were created alike".
The DOI was a unifying document for a nation in it's infancy and written by young patriots.
It wasn't a document intended to correct moral ills ... that would come later on 01JAN1863 with Proclamation 95
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top