Replies

Confederates failed the "light and transient causes" test, as well as several others.

You seem to fail the understanding of what the word "should" means, as in "Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes;"

"Prudence"? "Should not"? Do you see a command in there? I see suggestions. I read it as saying throwing off your government for "light and transient causes" is a bad idea, but I don't read it as saying that it is forbidden.

Not being forbidden, it is therefore within their rights if they so choose to throw off their "Government long established." It is their right to do so if they think it necessary. (Which they did.)

And who gives you the right to claim *THEIR* reasons are light and transitory? Their independence would have netted them between 200 million and 700 million in additional yearly profits, and that is a considerable sum of money in their day. Who are you to be able to say that wasn't a good enough reason for them to want out of the Union that favored the Northeast?

Diogeneslamp: ""Prudence"?
"Should not"?
Do you see a command in there?
I see suggestions.
I read it as saying throwing off your government for "light and transient causes" is a bad idea, but I don't read it as saying that it is forbidden.
Not being forbidden, it is therefore within their rights if they so choose to throw off their "Government long established."
It is their right to do so if they think it necessary.
(Which they did.)"

Well, first, consider the words, "you should obey the laws, if you wish to avoid going to jail."
How optional is "should" in that case?

Second, and most important, there is nothing "should" about the following:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident:

...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...
...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."
"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."

So, all you have done here is apply your own definition of "should" to everything in the Declaration that you disagree with, and therefore, you declare the document to mean something entirely different from what it actually says.