We hold these truths to be self-evident: That all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
These are words every American is probably familiar with and something every child reads in school. But what are “unalienable rights”? The Declaration of Independence provides some insight to them in the text that follows, that among them are “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”, but if these are only part among others, what are the rest?
Perhaps the first best place to look is the primary author of the Declaration of Independence itself, Thomas Jefferson. Thomas Jefferson said, “Bacon, Locke and Newton. I consider them as the three greatest men that have ever lived, without any exception, and as having laid the foundation of those superstructures which have been raised in the Physical and Moral sciences”1. Francis Bacon influenced on separating religion and philosophy, Isaac Newton influenced him in science, but it was John Locke who influenced Thomas Jefferson on the Natural rights most.
So what is “Unalienable”? It simply means it cannot be alienated, or separated. These Rights can not be taken or separated from a person. They always belong to the individual, and never to anybody else. So what rights cannot separated from a person?
John Locke: Two Treatises of Government
John Locke discussed Natural Rights most predominantly in his books Two Treatises of Government, with the second treatises on Civil government in particular discussing Natural rights. It was Chapter II of Book II, the State of Nature that Locke talks about Natural Rights in 11 parts, this what Thomas Jefferson would later call the unalienable rights in the Declaration of Independence. Locke starts off with this statement,
TO understand political power right, and derive it from its original, we must consider, what state all men are naturally in, and that is, a state of perfect freedom to order their actions, and dispose of their possessions and persons, as they think fit, within the bounds of the law of nature, without asking leave, or depending upon the will of any other man. (sic)
John Locke is talking about the most basic concept of Natural Law, the origin of them in their natural state is the freedom of man in their actions and use their possession as they feel fit, without the permission of any one or the need of any other. This is to say “free will” to do as they wish within the bounds of the law of nature, with their actions and possessions, and requires the permission of nobody or the assistance of anybody to do so.
Charles de Secondat, Baron de Montesquieu would also echo this in his Spirit of Laws,
Antecedent to the above-mentioned laws are those of nature, so called, because they derive their force entirely from our frame and existence.
Locke also cite Richard Hooker, another writer of Natural Law of the same era in Section 5 of Chapter II;
This equality of men by nature, the judicious Hooker looks upon as so evident in itself, and beyond all question, that he makes it the foundation of that obligation to mutual love amongst men, on which he builds the duties they owe one another, and from whence he derives the great maxims of justice and charity. His words are,
The like natural inducement hath brought men to know that it is no less their duty, to love others than themselves; for seeing those things which are equal, must needs all have one measure; if I cannot but wish to receive good, even as much at every man’s hands, as any man can wish unto his own soul, how should I look to have any part of my desire herein satisfied, unless myself be careful to satisfy the like desire, which is undoubtedly in other men, being of one and the same nature? To have any thing offered them repugnant to this desire, must needs in all respects grieve them as much as me; so that if I do harm, I must look to suffer, there being no reason that others should shew greater measure of love to me, than they have by me shewed unto them: my desire therefore to be loved of my equals in nature, as much as possible may be, imposeth upon me a natural duty of bearing to them-ward fully the like affection; from which relation of equality between ourselves and them that are as ourselves, what several rules and canons natural reason hath drawn, for direction of life, no man is ignorant. Eccl. Pol. Lib. 1. (sic)
The significance of this passage, is basically as Hooker (and by extension Locke) view it, that it is part of Natural Law, to do unto others as you would have others do unto you, a phrase many children learn growing up. It is to mean respect the Rights of those around you, you have free will you can do as you wish, but do not abuse this Right and deprive others of their ability to do the same.
John Locke continues along with this though, and expands upon it in the next section.
But though this be a state of liberty, yet it is not a state of licence: though man in that state have an uncontroulable liberty to dispose of his person or possessions, yet he has not liberty to destroy himself, or so much as any creature in his possession, but where some nobler use than its bare preservation calls for it. The state of nature has a law of nature to govern it, which obliges every one: and reason, which is that law, teaches all mankind, who will but consult it, that being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty, or possessions: (sic)
Even though we have the right of free will, and domain over ourselves and our possessions, does not mean we should or do have the right to be destructive about them. Each person needs to be responsible with what they have, and take care of themselves, their liberty and possessions. An example of this may be, a farmer with a bountiful crop, because he is the owner of the crop, it does not necessarily mean he should destroy it for no reason after he has taken what he needs. This also does not mean he has to give away the rest, but to simply destroy is would not be responsible, since it may be useful to “preserve” it, for future or other use. This same parallel can be drawn upon any other possession one may have for various reasons, the point of it is simply to not be destructive of yourself or what you have without reason.
If even natural law had no limits on personnel conduct and behavior, natural law could not exist since one would inevitably infringe upon another’s right at some point and may even deprive them of their rights. So limits must exist as to how far natural law can go.
§. 7.
And that all men may be restrained from invading others rights, and from doing hurt to one another, and the law of nature be observed, which willeth the peace and preservation of all mankind, the execution of the law of nature is, in that state, put into every man’s hands, whereby every one has a right to punish the transgressors of that law to such a degree, as may hinder its violation: for the law of nature would, as all other laws that concern men in this world, be in vain, if there were no body that in the state of nature had a power to execute that law, and thereby preserve the innocent and restrain offenders. And if any one in the state of nature may punish another for any evil he has done, every one may do so: for in that state of perfect equality, where naturally there is no superiority or jurisdiction of one over another, what any may do in prosecution of that law, every one must needs have a right to do. (sic)
The limit of these natural rights is up to the point where they infringe on or deprive another of theirs rights. So in order to preserve these rights, a jurisdiction must be put in place to preserve them. This leads back to the Declaration of Independence,
that, to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.
Conclusion
The Natural or Unalienable Rights are the Rights that we all possess for simply existing, given to you by nature or God. They are the things that we need nobody else to support us for, they rely on nobody else to do anything to possess and use. As Thomas Jefferson said, “among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness”. But these are not the end of our Natural or Unalienable Rights, but just a sample. Others would be to Speak your mind, assemble with whom you chose (provided they also do as well), grown food, walk down the street, defend yourself, own property and on. Anything we can do on our own without the assistance of others would be a Natural Right, but these Rights have limits and obligations. These Rights ONLY extend to the point where the inhibit another equal Right. It is at this point the Declaration of Independence states a government is instituted among men, to secure these rights, along the lines as John Locke stated in his Second Treatises. Also they come with responsibility, to not abuse them to be destructive.
What is not a natural Right, is anything that must be provided for by another person, persons or group. This is not say that others are forbidden from helping another person or persons, but that assistance is not a natural right or guaranteed entitlement.
Though this is a very short examination of the whole concept of Natural Rights, and it has been written about in length by both Locke and Montesquieu, but the basic premise can easily summed up as this.
- They are given to all people by their Creator or by Nature itself.
- It is the ability to conduct yourself and your things as you wish
- As a collective group it is the determination of how they are to be protected
- No permission is required to use them
- They are not for anybody else to take
- They require nobody else to do anything to have or use them
- They are absolute up to the point where they may interfere with another's right
- They should be used responsibly and not be destructive
Anything that does not meet these is not a Right, but a grant or other sort of entitlement. The Foundation of our Nation was based on these notions, and Government was instituted for the sole purpose to protect the individual and people from other individuals, groups or governments who may attempt to infringe on these most basic of Rights.
1: http://www.let.rug.nl/usa/P/tj3/writings/brf/jefl74.htm
No comments :
Post a Comment