The meaning of equality-constitutional vs. ethical
Equality-sameness in value, volume, mass or substance-not different.
The founders felt the importance of their statement in their declaration that 'all men are created equal'. They knew at the time that slavery had to come to an end in our country, and tried to help end it with Section 9 clause I as well as the Northwest Ordinance of 1787. Even though it would be almost another 80 years until slavery was abolished completely in December of 1865, the concept was seen as necessary but evil by many of our founders. (unconstitution.net/consttop_.slav.html)
But the real intent of the Constitution on the equality of man referred not to masters and slaves, but to kings and their subjects-or rather a republic and its citizens. The peoples who risked life and limb to get out from a monarch's rule feared that one day another one would rise to rule them or their children here in America, too. They did not believe that being born of certain blood gave you God's blessing as the ultimate ruler. They believed that leaders should be chosen, not born into power. They wanted leaders who got the post on merit, not simply de-facto by bloodline. And so we have Article I, sec. 9 clause 8 that deny any titles of nobility to any of our citizens, so we can never have a monarchy or an oligarchy. That is the equality stressed and explicitly spelled out in the Constitution.
The questions of equality when talking about morals are not as easily answered. Some of us believe we are all equal as souls-Mother Teresa and Hitler are sipping tea at God's table together right now. But if we don't believe that, if we think that would be wrong and unjust, we actually don't believe that all men are equal after all. Were little Adolf and Teresa born inherently equal, and only their actions during their lives turned them into different kinds of 'souls'? Or were they born with their intentions already predetermined, the two of them acting out a plan written with 'creation'? Either way we believe, the only conclusion we can agree on is that they were not the 'same kind of soul' by the time they died. (or were they?) Even if were are all 'the same' at our beginning, we quickly diverge our paths with individual life experiences.
Why is it not alright to label our fellow citizen's behavior as 'good or bad', like we've done with Mother Teresa and Adolf Hitler? Why do some of us think that we all deserve the same life, the same life-style, the same conveniences and comforts and luxuries-even though we do not act the same, persue the same goals, or place equal effort into our persuits? Dare I say the completely politically incorrect thing and claim that we are not born equal after all, that some of us are better prepared to handle what life has to offer than others and it has nothing to do with "learning"? Naw, I'd better not. The concept that mankind is still evolving mentally and intellectually and psychologically is one that is off limits to discussion in our world today.
Evolution of all kinds is delegated to animals, germs, and political parties. Mankind has elevated himself beyond that now-most of us feel that we have reached the apex of our intellect. This is so untrue for much of the world-keeping streets swept of debris and growing food in a jungle environment does not take extra dollars or NGO help-it takes the slightest of thinking and a bit more of doing on the part of the people who live there themselves. To sit and wait for someone else to come and remove piles of garbage or fallen bricks and dead bodies is not something you can 'unteach'-it is a state of mind, a state of soul. a state of BEING.
No, we are not all 'created equal'-not in nature, and that is a fact of life, like it or not. And we must be allowed to keep evolving, to keep trying and failing and learning from our mistakes. Keeping peoples like sheep and cattle will not help them to better themselves or their future generations-for man kind to become his best, to be truly enlightened to a better future on this planet, evolution must be allowed to take place, even if that means individuals suffer and die. The few should stop trying to elevate the rest to unrealistic and unreasonable hights, and admit that we are barely out of the proverbial cave and into the light-and global enlightenment is not emminent any time soon.
The founders felt the importance of their statement in their declaration that 'all men are created equal'. They knew at the time that slavery had to come to an end in our country, and tried to help end it with Section 9 clause I as well as the Northwest Ordinance of 1787. Even though it would be almost another 80 years until slavery was abolished completely in December of 1865, the concept was seen as necessary but evil by many of our founders. (unconstitution.net/consttop_.slav.html)
But the real intent of the Constitution on the equality of man referred not to masters and slaves, but to kings and their subjects-or rather a republic and its citizens. The peoples who risked life and limb to get out from a monarch's rule feared that one day another one would rise to rule them or their children here in America, too. They did not believe that being born of certain blood gave you God's blessing as the ultimate ruler. They believed that leaders should be chosen, not born into power. They wanted leaders who got the post on merit, not simply de-facto by bloodline. And so we have Article I, sec. 9 clause 8 that deny any titles of nobility to any of our citizens, so we can never have a monarchy or an oligarchy. That is the equality stressed and explicitly spelled out in the Constitution.
The questions of equality when talking about morals are not as easily answered. Some of us believe we are all equal as souls-Mother Teresa and Hitler are sipping tea at God's table together right now. But if we don't believe that, if we think that would be wrong and unjust, we actually don't believe that all men are equal after all. Were little Adolf and Teresa born inherently equal, and only their actions during their lives turned them into different kinds of 'souls'? Or were they born with their intentions already predetermined, the two of them acting out a plan written with 'creation'? Either way we believe, the only conclusion we can agree on is that they were not the 'same kind of soul' by the time they died. (or were they?) Even if were are all 'the same' at our beginning, we quickly diverge our paths with individual life experiences.
Why is it not alright to label our fellow citizen's behavior as 'good or bad', like we've done with Mother Teresa and Adolf Hitler? Why do some of us think that we all deserve the same life, the same life-style, the same conveniences and comforts and luxuries-even though we do not act the same, persue the same goals, or place equal effort into our persuits? Dare I say the completely politically incorrect thing and claim that we are not born equal after all, that some of us are better prepared to handle what life has to offer than others and it has nothing to do with "learning"? Naw, I'd better not. The concept that mankind is still evolving mentally and intellectually and psychologically is one that is off limits to discussion in our world today.
Evolution of all kinds is delegated to animals, germs, and political parties. Mankind has elevated himself beyond that now-most of us feel that we have reached the apex of our intellect. This is so untrue for much of the world-keeping streets swept of debris and growing food in a jungle environment does not take extra dollars or NGO help-it takes the slightest of thinking and a bit more of doing on the part of the people who live there themselves. To sit and wait for someone else to come and remove piles of garbage or fallen bricks and dead bodies is not something you can 'unteach'-it is a state of mind, a state of soul. a state of BEING.
No, we are not all 'created equal'-not in nature, and that is a fact of life, like it or not. And we must be allowed to keep evolving, to keep trying and failing and learning from our mistakes. Keeping peoples like sheep and cattle will not help them to better themselves or their future generations-for man kind to become his best, to be truly enlightened to a better future on this planet, evolution must be allowed to take place, even if that means individuals suffer and die. The few should stop trying to elevate the rest to unrealistic and unreasonable hights, and admit that we are barely out of the proverbial cave and into the light-and global enlightenment is not emminent any time soon.