The Comparison of Two Declarations Thomas Jefferson and Elizabeth Cady Stanton fought for what they believed; which was being free and equal from unjust rule or unjust laws. In the “Declaration of Independence” By Thomas Jefferson; Jefferson writes about his concerns about current Government ruled by the King of Great Britain in the United States and proceeds to list conflicts that many people face in the United States due to the King’s unjust treatment towards its citizens. In the end of the essay he persuades that the United States should separate from the rule of Great Britain. In another essay written like the “Declaration of Independence” comes the “Declaration of Sentiments and Resolutions” by Elizabeth Cady Stanton, in Stanton’s essay she writes about issues that women face towards unjust laws. These laws were to prohibit and limit a women’s rights due to the fact they are married to their spouse; an example of these laws was “denied... the facilities for obtaining a through education” (149) to clarify this quotation women weren’t allowed to receive an education due to being married.
Patrick Henry was one of those famous powerful figures, patriots, who provided support for the antifederalists. Anti Federalists were in debt and they feared a strong central government who would make them pay-off their debts. They thought that it gave too much power to the national government at the expense of the state governments, and there was no bill of rights, thus, they opposed the ratification of the constitution. As shown on Document G, even in a political system, with checks and balances, a certain branch can be too powerful, which can lead to tyranny of the common people. This document was directed towards the Federalist by the antifederalist to explain a possible problem of the checks and balances system, after the drafting of the constitution and awaiting approval.
This amendment grants American citizens rights in many ways. If this amendment was not ratified and we stood today as Americans without this amendment our country would be crazy. In an opinion of ones own this amendment is probably the most important overall. The Sixth Amendment was created simply because the Founding Fathers wanted to protect the rights of the accused. The objected were too many of the ways the Americans were treated by the British in matters of both crime and justice.
Paine’s arguments simply set aside the doubts Americans had, and gave them the motivation to actually pursue freedom. His views on government, monarchies, and independence correlated with the rest of the country, however, his views on religion differed significantly. If I were to be a colonist in America at the time, I would feel anger towards the British crown as well as the idea of monarchy. I would want to fight for my independence from an unjust mother country that imposed years of unfair taxes upon my household. I agree with many of Paine’s arguments such as the problems with a monarchical government and America’s potential to obtain independence.
We may believe that Bush made a poor decision. However, what alternative did he have? What alternative does Obama have? If we simply say the threat is the fear of tyranny from a president swollen with power from foreign wars, we miss the perverse result our constitution has created. In no small measure, our fear of an overly powerful president waging war abroad has had the unintended result that the government has to become more powerful and intrusive because America will not resolve the constitutional issue.
Although, the creators of the Constitution were influenced by many previous documents the most influential documents were the Articles of Confederation, the English Bill of Rights, and the Magna Carta. These documents limited state power, allowed for government criticism, and protected citizen’s individual rights. The failure of the Articles of Confederation created the desire of a stronger federal government and limited state power. The Articles allowed the states to raise
He also mentions that the government should not “take away and destroy the property of the people” (Locke ¶ 3). When listing the many faults of the king Thomas Jefferson states that the king “has burnt our [the colonists’] towns” (Declaration of Independence ¶ 26). In including this statement, Jefferson is trying to emphasize the point that the king has infringed the right to property and therefore must be overruled. To conclude, Thomas Jefferson has derived many inspirations from John Locke’s Two Treatises of Government when drafting the Declaration of Independence. Locke’s treatises offered many reasons to explain the people’s right and obligation to overthrow the government, which the founding fathers used to prove their point on breaking away from the king’s rule.
While on the other corner of the ring, the Federalists believed that the newly founded country would run best if the national government was strong and powerful and in effect if the Constitution was loosely interpreted. This started a series of issues between the two opposing sides with the Federalists pretty much winning every issue. From the issue of funding the war debt, whether a bank of America should be created, to the Alien and Sedition Act; the two sides did not see eye to eye. However, when Jefferson became president, it could be argued that the same abuse of power that he criticized the Federalists to have done could be argued against his own presidency. It is more than fair to say that Jefferson was a hypocrite not only from a Federalist standpoint but also from the
Many philosophers believed that the government had too much power over the people and they began to work to change that. For example, John Locke believed that people should have natural rights such as life, liberty, and property and that the government should not take away these rights and instead should protect them. If the government did not protect these rights the people could overthrow the government. This idea changed everything because in the end it influenced the English to use this idea in their Declaration of Independence to break away from Britain. Montesquieu was another philosopher who helped make the Enlightenment a turning point.
The papers that they would write detailed how the Constitution would provide “a remedy for the diseases most incident to Republican Government” and to “secure the public good and private rights” (Fed #10) arguing over concepts that they felt were key to providing this security. One of their main objections against the Articles of Confederation was that the “Separation of Powers” maintained in the Articles was not an effective way to protect the public against potential abuses. The Federalist argues that each department should have a will of its own and have as little as possible to do with the appointment of members of the other branches; that each department should have enough power to carry out its mission an them limit its power so that it cannot become to tyrannical. The Federalist, argues that payments attached to the offices of each branch should be as independent as possible and that a system of checks and balances were necessary to thwart encroachments by other
The Declaration of Independence states, “Whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute new government”. The Electoral College (another words for as it stands) today, has become (another word for detrimental) to liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. As an American citizen, it is our (another word for duty) to (another word for fight) for our right to fair representation. In a fair democracy, everyone’s vote should be counted equally but he method that the United States uses to elect its president using the Electoral College violates the
They were to contradict what the anti-federalists were writing about the newly proposed constitution. That is why they were so crucial during this point in time. If these men had not come together, there is a possibility that the constitution would not have been passed. The men decided to explain what each part of the constitution meant in great detail. They did this so every American knew what the constitution truly stood for.