John Locke's Principles Of Government From The Declaration Of Independence

706 Words3 Pages

There are many principles of government from the Declaration of Independence that are still valid today. One principle is that all persons are rightfully sovereign over their own affairs, which do not infringe upon the rights of others. This principle is still valid because we should have rights and ownership to our own property, and no one should be able to take that property away. It makes sure that what you own doesn’t affect other people, and protects their property as well. The government created to protect the rights of the people, and is consented by the governed, is also an important principle. Government that consents to the wants and needs of the citizens, and is assembled for the sole purpose of protecting the people, keeps residents …show more content…

Locke’s ideas were used in the Declaration of Independence, explaining why Americans opposed British rule. The king of Britain did not acknowledge the rights of the colonists, and imposed taxes and formed new laws without the agreement from the colonists to do so. John Locke believed that the duty of a government is to protect the natural rights of the people. These natural rights were the rights to life, liberty, and property. If a government failed to protect those rights, the citizens would have the right to overthrow the government. Most of the ideas in the Declaration of Independence were also used in the Constitution, which was put into effect in 1789. John Locke’s ideas are what influenced the thoughts and ideas of the Founding …show more content…

Bakke (1978) stated that the supreme court struck down on certain types of race-based preferences in state college admissions as violating the equal protection clause. This made it easier for minorities to be accepted to colleges. Sixteen out of one hundred seats were reserved for minority applicants, which were Blacks, Asians, Chicanos, and Native Americans. A white applicant named Allan Bakke, was denied admission twice, despite having a higher GPA and MCAT score than some of the minority applicant who were accepted admission. This is discrimination because applicants were accepted just because of their race, which goes against the 14th amendment. Sure it creates diversity, but a student who is more deserving to go to a prestigious school shouldn’t be denied a spot because he isn’t a minority. Bakke won the case and a spot in the university, and the Supreme Court invalidated the school’s special admissions program. Now all students are equally likely to be accepted into a state

Show More
Open Document