Natural or Human Creation? Part I

On May 26, 2008, in a speech delivered before the graduating class at Wesleyan University, Barrack Obama revealed his position on the taming of a society’s natural state – that is one of individuality. In its place, he sought mold it into one of a communal state where equity would eventually bring about equality as provided solely by the federal government. “Our individual salvation depends on collective salvation.” In other words, instead of being recognized and accepted as a unique, conscience and free spirited individual, a person would be nothing more than an anonymous, faceless participant in a crowd of faceless participants. In contradiction of Obama’s assertion, a quote by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn is selected. “Human beings are born with different capacities. If they are free, they are not equal. And if they are equal, they are not free.” The extract is what the Founders sought for America’s future. A place where an individual would be free to chase after their own dreams, discover their own interests, and explore their own potential, though moderated by morality in which to guide them through a virtuous and fulfilling life.

To provide insight in understanding the founding of the United States and Americanism, there is a need for the People to know and understand what the People who lived in the 18^th-century, especially the Founders, sought for themselves and future generations of Americans. The Right to live as a free individual. The Right to pursue the things that motivate them, that benefit themselves and society as a whole. More importantly, they must recognize and know they have the moral duty to respect the absolute Rights of others and value their inputs towards the society. To realize the Right to acquire and own private property, is an authentic representation of their labor and liberty, both being inseparable.  Most of all, the People must come to know that Rights are self-evident. They are not bestowed upon them by an individual or group of individuals as privileges or entitlements granted by a government, however great or small. They are a birthright endowed to all by Nature’s Creator, Nature herself, or God, and they must realize the Constitution does not grant rights but restricts the authority of the federal government to place restrictions or sequester the Natural Rights of the People. But if Rights do not derive from Nature’s Creator, Nature herself, or God, then they must come from government.

If Rights are derived from a government, a legislature, a judiciary, or an executive, could they also be taken away? If the People do not believe “rights” come from Nature’s Creator, Nature herself, or God, where do they come from, will the People be left with the impression Rights do indeed derive from the authority of the organized leadership? Does this then make clear that organized leadership can grant or take away Rights? Will the People be able to pressure the government for them, or will the government cede them. But what are Rights? Are they something which only exists because the People will either fight for them or a government bestows them? If this is so, are Rights actually natural? Part II will address these questions and more.