If I had intended to "imply" that, I would have stated that. I didn't.
Evolution permeates politics and philosophy and as such it set the foundation for socialism.
Creation (as understood in a Judeo/Christian context) assumes that man was created by God in his image. That was the understanding of our founders. Being made in the image of God gives men worth as individuals and not merely as worker ants in the socialist colony.
For this reason nearly all socialists believe that man is the product of an evolutionary process independent of God and that man is merely a product of his environment and as such his value is determined by society and not by the creator.
The founders of the country recognized that as a created being Man has unalienable rights. But if man is an evolved creature and is merely the product of mutations and accidents, then man has no more rights than those who are more powerful than them will grant them.
Without a firm belief that man was a created being, the United States would never have existed.
In every godless culture where evolution is the accepted explanation for the existence of man on the earth, individual liberty either does not exist, or it only exists insofar as it benefits those who rule over the people. This is not a coincidence.
Mock Creation at your peril. Your unalienable rights and liberty derive solely from the fact that you were created by God. Without God they are not only alienable, but they are wholly illusory.
Who's mocking creation ?
I've seen a little sarcasm directed to Bishop Usher's hypothesis, but most of those commenting here are believing Christians.
The Declaration says "...that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights..." - meaning we were MADE that way, that it's the natural state of man.
It doesn't say "in the image of God". It doesn't say "on the sixth day".
You've forgotten, I guess, that Jefferson was a Deist, and that Deists found the best evidence for God's existence in the beauty and wonder of the world around them - in God's creation - not in scripture.
My unalienable rights derive from how I was made - human nature. My liberty derives from being willing to fight for it.
Excellent essay, brother Marlowe. Any discussion of rights truly is illusory if their is no Divine Creator.
One must imagine an ideal right, in my opinion, to posit a right in the earthly realm. I see no way to get to an “ideal” in a mechanistic universe except if a person chooses to elevate “random chaos” to the ultimate level.
For example, what does love mean filtered through the lens of “random chaos.” Does it mean commitment? Affection? Permanence?
I don’t see how it can end up meaning anything that demands a lasting quality to it. Therefore, love becomes transitory, impermanent....lustful. It becomes “eat, drink, and lust today, for tomorrow you die, and it doesn’t really matter in the long run anyway.”
So far as Jefferson’s deism. Even Jefferson could not escape Jesus. He was a Christian Deist, and, yes, it makes a difference.
Great post, P-Marlowe!
Many Christian and Jewish theists believe that evolution is a divinely guided, inherently progressive, purposeful process that culminates in man. Darwinists, on the other hand, believe that evolution is "the blind exploration of biological possibilities." Man is the accidental outcome of this "exploration."
Which view of man is more politically manipulable?
Thank you oh so very much for your outstanding essay-post, dear brother in Christ!