Let Freedom Ring! The Declaration of Independence: A Transcription

Our early leaders, though war ached their hearts, stood fast against tyranny in favor of freedom. Do our leaders now have the same sober valor?

originally posted here: Let Freedom Ring! The Declaration of Independence: A Transcription

The Declaration of Independence: A Transcription
IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, 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 entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

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.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.
He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.
He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.
He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:
For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences
For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our Brittish brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The 56 signatures on the Declaration appear in the positions indicated:

Column 1
Georgia:
Button Gwinnett
Lyman Hall
George Walton

Column 2
North Carolina:
William Hooper
Joseph Hewes
John Penn
South Carolina:
Edward Rutledge
Thomas Heyward, Jr.
Thomas Lynch, Jr.
Arthur Middleton

Column 3
Massachusetts:
John Hancock
Maryland:
Samuel Chase
William Paca
Thomas Stone
Charles Carroll of Carrollton
Virginia:
George Wythe
Richard Henry Lee
Thomas Jefferson
Benjamin Harrison
Thomas Nelson, Jr.
Francis Lightfoot Lee
Carter Braxton

Column 4
Pennsylvania:
Robert Morris
Benjamin Rush
Benjamin Franklin
John Morton
George Clymer
James Smith
George Taylor
James Wilson
George Ross
Delaware:
Caesar Rodney
George Read
Thomas McKean

Column 5
New York:
William Floyd
Philip Livingston
Francis Lewis
Lewis Morris
New Jersey:
Richard Stockton
John Witherspoon
Francis Hopkinson
John Hart
Abraham Clark

Column 6
New Hampshire:
Josiah Bartlett
William Whipple
Massachusetts:
Samuel Adams
John Adams
Robert Treat Paine
Elbridge Gerry
Rhode Island:
Stephen Hopkins
William Ellery
Connecticut:
Roger Sherman
Samuel Huntington
William Williams
Oliver Wolcott
New Hampshire:
Matthew Thornton

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/declaration_transcript.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Declaration_of_Independence
http://www.bobdylan.com/songs/rolling.html

Like a Rolling Stone by Bob Dylan

If USA Is Attacked, John McCain Wins

Would an attack relatively close to the US Presidential Election in November ensure John McCain is elected?

Do Americans really have the confidence that either Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama are well-equipped with both conviction and skill-set to extract us from Iraq, and protect us here stateside? Both Clinton and Obama miss the professionalism mixed with experience and diplomacy McCain, and Ron Paul share.

While it appears we Americans are disinclined toward being in Iraq, we felt as we felt before 2004 as well, and yet elected George W Bush for a second term with record popular votes.

This is not 2004, and wannabe John Kerry cannot be compared to today's Democratic candidates. He misses the charm of Obama and the experience of Clinton.

And, also important, McCain is not as hated as Bush. McCain misses the personal, evil bitterness that many Democrats feel against Bush, but he also misses the easy-going "Let's get the bad guys," swagger our current president enjoys. McCain is harder to hate, and harder to love.

Where will it land?
As Al Qaeda pretends that they care about Muhammad (there is no peace upon him), or his teachings, and wipe their sacrilegious excrement across the world, they threaten Western Europe. Europe will barely be noticed by the USA, but the smallest burp in Punxsutawney, Pennsylvania will be returned with the fastest six guns in the western world.

See what CNN is saying.

Al Qaeda No. 2: Attacks on Western nations in works
CNN
CAIRO, Egypt (AP) -- Al Qaeda still has plans to target Western countries involved in the Iraq war, Osama bin Laden's chief deputy warns in an audiotape released Tuesday to answer questions posed by followers.

Religion and Politics: We are all hypocrites

Barack Obama's faith is, presently, an enormous issue, because, in his case, his faith is affiliated, directly, with a man who appears unapologetically race-focused. Obama himself makes no apologies, like Bill Clinton and George W Bush, when he says he is a born-again Christian.

Obama's pastor is under fire for two questions: is he racist, and, is he using the pulpit to promote a specific political candidate. One is wrong ethically, and the other is illegal, so the questions are valid.

The correlating question: is Obama the same as his pastor in matters of disrespecting those who are not black? The Wall Street Journal thinks so, claiming Obama's own white mother would not be welcome at his church.

Obama tried to address all of this yesterday. He may lose the presidency through this issue, or win triumphantly. His speech might be the edge he needed to win over whatever remaining delegates or super-delegates, or sink him entirely. The issue gave him a platform to do what he his famously strong for, and famously criticized for: giving powerful speeches that have nothing to do with public policy or international issues.

Meanwhile, Republicans, often be courted by various faith-based groups and people of faith, have taken hits for letting this dominate their platforms and affiliations, and have, along the way, have been accused of the same thing Obama's pastor is being accused of.

Hillary Clinton, in the middle of it all, is, for all intents and purposes, a humanist. She has though, in Little Rock, been a Sunday school teacher and hob-nobs with the leadership of the United Methodist. However, she has not known, nor has been suspected of, being a person who makes decisions from her Christian perspective. She's laying low on this issue, having just ousted Geraldine Ferraro from her campaign for pointing out that Barack Obama is black. Hillary is happy no one is talking about this.

John McCain, meanwhile, is Baptist, yet clearly does not claim to be born-again. As with Hillary, though, no one looks at him and suspects a deep man of faith has walked by. He is happy because he has nothing to do with this issue, and is able to actively campaign without putting out religious or racial fires.

Obama, for all the heat he is taking for the irresponsible comments his pastor has said, is playing the "I'm a Christian" gambit the loudest. And, in my observations, Christians who otherwise disagree with him on his moral issues, are buying it. I don't know if this is nationally true, or merely my small circle.

In other words, if the claims of the candidates are true as to what they believe, atheist candidates who vote for one of the two major parties, no matter who wins the Democratic nomination, for a self-claimed Christian. Each of these three of the remaining candidates has gone out their way to be visible as Christians, and each has gone out of their way to hob-nob with their church's leadership.

Christian Republicans. Cliche? As long as Democrats are playing this concept up, but themselves doing speeches in pulpits, it is not only cliche, but disingenuous.

All of this leads to the fundamental issue: religion in politics. What of it? It, in America, is all over the place, from Reverend Jesse Jackson to Barack Obama's pastor to Mike Huckabee's former job.

We say we do not want religion as a motivator to vote, but then, we vote against a guy because of what he, or his pastor believes. Or we vote for the same person. Religion, or the absence of it, motivated us, and intrigues us enough to explore the candidates and what others are saying about their faith.

If it didn't, you wouldn't be reading this post. :)

Planned Parenthood Runs for President (For or Against Ron Paul?)

Everything is political, even the life of a child. Whomever Planned Parenthood supports should cause a shift in perspective. Their choice can no longer hide under the guise of "I wouldn't do it, but support the legal choice of those who do." No, no, no. Not that at all.

In fact, Planned Parenthood is doing pro-life voters a service. They are flushing out candidates they think are the most pro-abortion, and most worthy of their support. It clears things up. While we'll hardly know who is most likely to spare the life of a child the mother does not want, a few of the candidates will be winnowed away.

Remember that Planned Parenthood will not just be looking at the most pro-abortion candidate, but they have donor dollars to think about. Those donating to them do not have bottom-less wallets, but, just like pro-life organizations, like Focus on the Family, have a budget requiring efficiency.

That means the candidates Planned Parenthood supports are the ones who also are viable in a national or other main election. They might give a nod to third tier choices, but the big money and big speeches will go to the person with the skill set and popularity to do the most damage to human life in the womb.

Planned Parenthood to Push Candidacies
Wall Street Journal
By BRODY MULLINS WASHINGTON -- For the first time, abortion-rights advocate Planned Parenthood Federation of America Inc. is launching a major effort to elect pro-abortion-rights candidates to Congress and the White House in November.

John Edwards? Joel Osteen? Peas of a Pod?

Speaking styles of two successful Southerners. Ron Paul talks straighter than either. Not putting down Christianity here, just not quite sure Osteen is telling the whole story, and am amazed at how similar Edwards is to him.

Ya'll got thoughts on all this?

JOEL OSTEEN /LAKEWOOD CHURCH


10/14/2007 - Joel Osteen, pastor of Lakewood Church in Houston, Texas


John Edwards' latest campaign ad airing in New Hampshire.


John Edwards fixing his hair before an interview. With appropriate music.