"Whenever any form of government is destructive of these ends [life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness] it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute new government in such form as to them shall seem most likely to affect their safety and happiness.” Declaration of Independence, 1776
Is it possible that, although this was used by our forefathers to justify their own rebellion, this was included to serve as a guide for later generations knowing that power corrupts and even in this new nation a time would come that the people would again need to do what is necessary to maintain liberty? This would certainly be further rationale for the 2nd Amendment.
Good question, but I see a huge difference. When the Declaration was written the colonies had tried every legal recourse for change. They had no vote to make changes. They had no voice. They felt like rebellion was their only option.
Under the Constitution Americans have legal recourse. All they have to do is vote people out of office. Until elections are cancelled rebellion is not an option.
Many people today believe they have done everything legally possible. They also believe the situation is very much the same, considering the fact that we have a government that does not really represent the majority of Americans.
It also does not mean that rebellion is automatically illegal, based on the their understanding of our founding documents. We all know that no government will consider rebellion legal.
Then why don't elections reflect that? The president, house, and a third of the Senate just came through an election.
It seems pretty clear that the majority is pretty content with things as they are.
Really? Then why all the clamoring for change? Why all the talk of secession and civil war? Why is the congressional approval rating in the tank? Why the call for real options to vote for?
No. People are not content. They may plug their nose and vote against the other guy. They may vote for the old guy because they are scared of what they'd get with a new one, to include having to start over gaining influence in key committees. They may want to vote third party but choose not to in the hopes of defeating the greater of two evils.
So if voting is not working the way any group wants it to it is time to talk of rebellion? The right of today are sounding like the left of the last 50-60 years. 'If we don't get our way we will rebel!'
Black Americans in the 40s, 50s, and 60s were truly disenfranchised. They were robbed of those 'certain inalienable rights.' They truly had no recourse. Were their protests and 'rebellions' justified by the Declaration of Independence?
The difference is the right is now seeing a direct attack on the Constitution.
The attack on the 2nd Amendment.
The attack on religious liberty.
The attack on economic liberty.
These are not attacks on one minority group but an attack on every citizen.
Yes, the ignoring of the Constitution and abuse of powers is a huge issue for the right and I wish it was an issue for the left too. The abuse of powers only benefits those in power.
Black Americans in the 40s, 50s, and 60s were truly disenfranchised. They were robbed of those 'certain inalienable rights' that Jefferson wrote about. 'All men are created equal' did not include them. They truly had no recourse. Were their protests and 'rebellions' justified by the Declaration of Independence?
I read, understand, and see through the liberal attacks and attempts at deflection. In this case you make a post with serious implications and when you are called on it you fall back to insults. This is dishonest, but expected.