Napa Valley College

Declaration of Independence

The Foundation for Equality

Sierra Rieken

Politics 120

Dr. Peter Zitko

November 22, 2020

Declaration of Independence: The Foundation for Equality

The Declaration of Independence was the first step in fighting for a modern democracy

that valued the rights of the masses over the ruling. Continental Congress Committee skillfully

stated the offenses against the states and their philosophy on proper governance. The concept of

popular sovereignty and the social contract theory pointed to the need for rule by the people, for

the people. The Declaration also introduced the concept of self-evident, natural laws. This

language laid the foundation for human rights and equality the United States is expected to

exemplify today.

In 1776, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, and John Adams, along with other

members of the Continental Congress Committee, gathered within the Pennsylvania Statehouse

in Philadelphia to put the finishing touches on the Declaration of Independence, which they

finally approved on July 4th. (Rakove) This bold document was addressed to King George III

and Great Britain, announcing the separation of the states from British rule. The committee

explained, “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”. The committee knew these truths and complaints were logical and valid to anyone who

read them. As such they proclaimed, “We hold these truths to be self-evident”, meaning they are

universal truths that any rational man would acknowledge as obvious and right. (Brown )

To demonstrate how their declaration was valid, the Continental Congress Committee

summarized the “self-evident” injuries and usurpations through a list of grievances. For example,

the King denied the approval of the law and the states the ability to create laws. Any semblance

of government was dissolved and refused to allow the election of local officials. The judicial
 Rieken​ 2

system was obstructed and only acted on the will of the king. Soldiers were sent to the states

during peaceful times resulting in harassment and stealing of local’s resources and homes. This

list of grievances pointed out specific issues of governing and the lack of representation in

decisions laid down by the British monarchy. These arguments lead decisively to the conclusion

that a declaration of independence would be required for a peaceful separation of powers.

The Declaration of Independence did more than just separate the states from British rule.

It set the stage for a modern government by embedding the overarching tenant of natural rights

into concepts like popular sovereignty, social contracts, and equality. Popular sovereignty and

the social contract theory focused more on how the new government should be in service to the

people. It guided the government to consider the good of people and ensure their values are

reflected in the way they are governed. The natural right of equality, that “all men are created

equal”, was the concept that designed not the “how”, but “who” would govern whom. This bold

statement may have been written for a specific group of “men” but has broadened through the

centuries, often as the result of war or protest, to include all races, creeds, sex, and sexual

orientation.

Popular sovereignty was a new concept of government at that time. It was a

governmental design where “the system could be imagined as having been voluntarily agreed

upon by rational human beings.”( Grimm and Cooper) This system was a contract that embodied

consent between the people and their rule of government. Historically rulers were the

government, There was no need to consider the masses, their preferences, or even their needs.

This idea of the government serving the people was modern and revolutionary.

If the revolutionary idea of popular sovereignty called the government to serve the

people, the social contract theory laid the groundwork of how to govern. The social contract
 Rieken​ 3

theory guides how to make decisions that would gain the approval of the governed. According to

the University of Illinois Press, “The States Social contract theory describes trade-offs people

face between freely pursuing their self-interests and becoming members of society. Granting

authority to civil society through its government should provide for systematic and consistent

enforcement of societal norms, which in turn should provide benefits to individuals.” (Kling, and

Stiehl) The novel idea was to use the consent of those being governed to ensure the protection of

the people themselves. This concept makes sure the government is upholding people’s values

and safety as a priority. These values, according to the Declaration of Independence, are rights

and include “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness”. These are known as natural rights, “the

rights that belong to all human beings by nature” (Berquist and Jensen) and were a concept that

was originally pushed for by John Locke as absolute and moral standards. (Forde) If the

government of the people was no longer upholding these truths and jeopardizing these rights, the

social contract would be broken and it was the people’s duty to destroy and rebuild the system.

The Declaration had many modern and notable ideals. Probably the most revolutionary,

and still controversial today, is the concept that “all men are created equal”. The concept of

equality was important to the Continental Congress Committee in light of the oppressive

hierarchies set by British rule. The King demonstrated absolute power and tyranny that extended

to his forces abroad. British soldiers could harass, steal, and even kill civilians without judicial

consequences due to their high rank and connection to the crown. In 1776, the Committee chose

words carefully and deliberately when drafting the historical document. The use of the word

“men” instead of humans or people was purposeful. It referred only to white, landowning men

since, in this time frame, these men were seen as superior. The term “men” did not include black
 Rieken​ 4

men or women, of any color or stature. Regardless of its original intention, the self-evident truth

that “all men are created equal” is at the foundation of how many see equality today.

Whether the ideal matches reality, America is seen as the beacon of natural rights and

equality for all races, creeds, sexes, and orientations. America has certainly made progress since

the days of the white landowning “men” ruled the colonies. 1776. The significant steps that

broaden the term “men” can be traced through history, including the abolishment of slavery and

the inclusion of non-landowning white, black, and female voters. In modern society, evidence of

further racial equality can be seen at the end of segregation, access to education, and the

appointment of ethnic government officials. Barack Obama, our first African American president

reminds us that inequality remains a deeply rooted problem that will be a challenging but

worthwhile problem to fix. (Starr) In recent years, recently racial inequality demonstrated

discrimination, and racially driven police brutality is being uncovered for all to see. It is no

wonder we are seeing an uprising. These inequalities are open threats against natural rights,

which under the social contract theory should be protected by the government.

Women's equality is another natural right that has been fought for throughout time. As a

society, the United States has made much progress with women’s votes, rights, and health.

However, there remain inequalities in wage gaps, safety, reproductive rights, and career

opportunities. The United States Constitution “is the only major written constitution that includes

a bill of rights but lacks a provision explicitly declaring the equality of the sexes'', whereas the

French, German, Canada, and South Africa declare equality between sexes within their

constitutions. (Sullivan) But equal rights for sexes is not just a male/female distinction. It should

also extend to sexual orientation and discrimination against the LGBTQIA+ community. Only

recently in “the first decade of the twentieth century witnessed profound changes in the social
 Rieken​ 5

and legal position of gay and lesbian couples. The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in ​Lawrence v.

Texasi​ n June 2003 struck down sodomy laws in those thirteen states where they remained”.

(Kimberly) This broadened equality and allowed for same-sex marriage to be legal in all fifty

states.

The members of the Continental Congress Committee were very brave with pioneering

minds. They were able to use words to convey their disgust and break free from tyranny. These

words also did much more. It defined natural rights, self-evident truths like the right to “Life,

Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness”. The specific language written into the Declaration of

Independence went on to set the stage for, not only democracy but for the idea of government

rule by the people, for the people. The Declaration set the foundation for modern government by

declaring to the world that popular sovereignty and application of social contract theory would

bring peace and prosperity to all, not just the ruling class. If the government does not protect

these rights, the people have the power to change or create a new government. The idea that “all

men are created equal” may have originally been meant for the privileged but embedded the

realization at these rights belong to all people no matter their station in life, the color of their

skin, sex, or sexuality. This realization has brought both progress and turmoil. The

acknowledgment that this country was built on people willing to fight for their rights, can be

paralleled to the fight for equality today.

Works Cited

Berquist, Richard, and Steven J. Jensen,“Natural Rights.” ​From Human Dignity to Natural Law:

An Introduction​, Catholic University of America Press, Washington, D.C., 2019, pp.

185–212. ​JSTOR​, www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctvr7fck0.17. Accessed 22 Nov. 2020.

Brown, Richard D.“The Declaration of Independence and the Mystery of Equality.”

Self-Evident Truths: Contesting Equal Rights from the Revolution to the Civil War​, Yale

University Press, NEW HAVEN; LONDON, 2017, pp. 1–27. ​JSTOR​,

www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1kgqwsc.5. Accessed 22 Nov. 2020.

Grimm, Dieter, and Belinda Cooper. “Sovereignty in the Constitutional State.” ​Sovereignty: The

Origin and Future of a Political and Legal Concept,​ Columbia University Press, New

York, 2015, pp. 33–76. ​JSTOR​, www.jstor.org/stable/10.7312/grim16424.7. Accessed 22

Nov. 2020.

Forde, Steven. “‘Mixed Modes’ in John Locke's Moral and Political Philosophy.” The Review of

Politics, vol. 73, no. 4, 2011, pp. 581–608. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/41345994.

Accessed 22 Nov. 2020.

Kimberly D. Richman,“The Road to Same-Sex Marriage: The Beginning.” ​License to Wed:

What

Legal Marriage Means to Same-Sex Couples​, NYU Press, New York; London, 2014,

pp. 20–50. ​JSTOR​, www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt9qfddj.6. Accessed 22 Nov. 2020.

Kling, William C., and Emily Stiehl. “Social Contract Theory and the Public’s Health:

A Vital Challenge Past and Present.” ​Remaking the Urban Social Contract: Health,
 Rieken​ 7

Energy, and the Environment​, edited by MICHAEL A. PAGANO, University of Illinois

Press, Urbana; Chicago; Springfield, 2016, pp. 91–114. ​JSTOR​,

www.jstor.org/stable/10.5406/j.ctt1hfr0bc.9. Accessed 22 Nov. 2020.

Rakove, Jack N., editor. “Introduction.” ​The Annotated U.S. Constitution and Declaration of

Independence​, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts; London, England,

2009, pp. 1–72. ​JSTOR​, www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctvjk2xzn.4. Accessed 22 Nov. 2020.

Starr, Paul. “Achievement without Credit: THE OBAMA PRESIDENCY AND INEQUALITY.”

The Presidency of Barack Obama: A First Historical Assessment​, edited by Julian E.

Zelizer, Princeton University Press, PRINCETON; OXFORD, 2018, pp. 45–61. ​JSTOR,​

www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctvc777dh.8. Accessed 22 Nov. 2020.

Sullivan, Kathleen M. “Constitutionalizing Women's Equality.” ​California Law Review,​ vol. 90,

no. 3, 2002, pp. 735–764. ​JSTOR​, www.jstor.org/stable/3481236.

Accessed 22 Nov. 2020.