The Declaration of Independence
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal..."
Within the first line of the declaration of independence, is a statement of faith.
The 13 colonies, who were fighting a war to be free from british rule, had as their foundation a theological understanding which served as the basis of their existence and rights that they could claim in opposition to the decrees of any monarch.
The religion that provided this framework? Biblical christianity.
Today however, the same nation who recognised and acknowledged the sovereign and living God, Christ Jesus, so many centuries ago, has been seeking to remove this foundation of their most basic freedoms.
While a certain amount of damage to this foundation has been self-inflicted, what with the sinful hearts of the christians of a bygone era blinding their minds to the clear biblical teaching on man stealing (kidnapping), enslavement, and hatred of neighbor being disregarded for mammon (wealth/power) - this has emboldened many to attack the religion that those backslidden men claimed to represent.
They now openly, and with reckless abandon, seek to remove the basis of their freedom from themelves and replace it with that which is self-evident to not provide the same freedoms - as its self-refuting.
- There are plenty of religions that teach that we all weren't created equal at all.
Hinduism, Mormonism, modern-day Judaism (which is pharisaism), and Islam being famous examples of this.
- If you remove religion from the table, saying that we weren't "created" anyway, this makes it worse, as then there is no basis to assume we have any value at all much less have equal worth.
As a matter of fact, there are many celebrated scientific minds that champion that we aren't equal.
One of the most famous being Charles Darwin.
Outside of a religious foundation, that is to say, without the existence of a being such as God who created everything and everyone, we lose all claims to any inherent "right".
There is no such right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness that could be called upon to trump the authority of a monarch, dictator, etc.
After all, rights are determined by those who are in power/who have authority.
If there is no ultimate authority... i.e. God - who sets a universal standard for all, there is no authority one could appeal to in order to overthrow the authority of those currently in power.
There wouldn't even be any morality because there is no universal authority that could declare what is morally right or wrong.
As the bible puts it, everyone would simply do what's right in their own eyes.
Ones personal preference as to what ought to be done and what ought not to be done can not, in and of itself, trump the personal preference of another.
What would have to happen is that one would go to the authorities to rule - and whatever the authorities decide is the correct moral action - as there is no other standard than what the authority decides.
Many people today are happy for this society until it turns against them.
And there are many examples of this doing just that.
- Authorities once determined that black people weren't fully human. They were literally placed in zoos at one point. This was morallt correct because the authorities deemed it so.
- Authorities once determined that jews weren't fully human.
- In China, the authorities determined whether or not a mother could carry a child to full term. The mother had no inherent right to make that decision.
There are many more examples that one could pull from recent history.
Those who take umbrage with a person's claim to live a certain way that affects people around them/that they interact with... solely on the basis that its religious in nature... become hypocrites.
They love and enjoy the freedoms and rights that come from the establishment of that religious position, hate the actual position itself, while bemoaning the fact that they are losing the freedoms and rights that the position that they are tearing down gives them.
They are a walking contradiction.
The famous anti-religion evolutionary biologist, Richard Dawkins, has been quoted as saying that he is glad that the countries he's lived in had a christian foundation.
The reason? Because if it was an atheist foundation, or another religion, he would have been silenced.
Mr. Dawkins has also been quoted as saying that christianity is what stands between the west and islam.
Richard is outspokenly anti-religion. Although he claims to he an agnostic rather than an atheist, he goes to many lengths to disprove the existence of a god.
Even if that isn't enough to display his hypocrisy, he is even quoted as saying that his position does indeed mean that there are no objective morals. That there is no good or evil... while at the same time telling people religion is evil and what he does is for the good of the people.
He is indeed a walking contradiction.
In times past, the writers of the declaration of independence, and many others like them, were not all christians.
However, they recognised the hypocrisy in holding to practical atheism while trying to claim that there were inherent rights, good, and evil.
So a number of people held to deism.
Now deism doesn't actually deal with the morality issue, but at least they knew and vocally declares that a god not only does, but must necessarily exist.
Many today who claim to be "woke" or "inclusive", openly cast off and ridicule the religiously held beliefs of the bygone era.
They gleefully curse the roots of the tree they live in, and proudly seek to detach themselves by sawing off the branch that they are sitting on, while expecting not to fall.
Those who call out their folly are labelled as haters and bigots. They are more than happy to remove rights of the religious. Their voices should be drowned out. Their businesses shut down.
In their minds, they are truly not equal. And those who hold to a religious belief that bucks against their non-religious practice should be treated with utter contempt for not obeying when they are told to contradict their god.
