The Price of Liberty

The publisher: We are pleased to present this guest commentary by Don Moyer. Don is an evangelist, and while we here at TPOL may not fully agree with him, he wrote many important things about our rights. Part 1 of 2.

“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. — that to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men…” 

These are the profound words of the U.S. Declaration of Independence. The founders of the United States recognized some of the most important principles ever to be understood. These words show their understanding that all men (male and female) are created (Genesis 1). Mankind is not some perchance, randomly evolved race. But this recognition carries with it a deeper understanding that because we are created, we have been given, by our Creator, “certain unalienable rights.” That is, these rights are ours by virtue of the fact that we are humans created by God in His image, and no one can take them away from us but God alone. Human rights are ours because of our created nature and thus unalterable. 

People like to talk about their rights. We have a right to free speech, a right to engage in religious assembly, a right to a free press, a right to bear arms, a right to privacy, etc. etc. We are quick to point out when our rights have been violated; think of the cases that go before the Supreme Court that are based upon these rights. 

But why do we have rights? To answer this question, let’s look at a couple other points that are necessarily tied to this. First, when it comes to having rights, there are really only two possibilities*: either everyone has rights or only some have them. The fact is that at least some do have rights (i.e., it is not true that no one has rights – this is also self-evident). The question is, why do these “some” have their rights? Is it merely because they have been placed in a position of power? Are they somehow superior to everyone else in a way that they deserve rights while no one else does? Or do they have rights because they are human? 

If these “some” have rights merely due to some other human’s power and will, then those rights are not inherent in being human. It would be nonsense, then, to try to argue about our rights, for they would be solely at the whim of those in power. There would be no such thing as “certain unalienable rights” endowed by a Creator. They would be endowed only by lawmakers and tyrants who could just as easily take them away and decide who gets the privilege of “personhood.” 

However, if these “some” have rights because they are human, then logically every human has the same rights because they are also human. To argue that only some have rights is to dehumanize everyone else. And the criteria for establishing why only some have rights would become quite arbitrary and subjective. But if the criterion for having human rights is that one is human, then every human has those same unalienable rights regardless of status. 

The point is that humans have human rights because they are human. But why does this matter? The problem is that some apparently think that people have rights only because they have been given those rights by other humans who are in power. That is, might makes right, and might bestows rights on those whom the empowered ones choose (usually themselves). The founding fathers of the United States were fighting against this very abuse. They recognized that humans have rights because they are human, and when a government begins to abuse those rights, then that government becomes illegitimate. 

The founders recognized that the purpose of the government was to secure human rights, not to grant them. In other words, the purpose of those in power is not to decide who should and who should not have rights. The purpose is for those in power to protect the God-given rights that belong to all people on the grounds that they are humans created by God with those rights already in place. Government is not the giver of rights, and if those in power think that’s what government is about, then they have misunderstood their role and should not be in that position. A government established with this in mind is in a position to fight tyranny. A government that forgets this will deteriorate into a tyranny. 

What happens when people lose their bearings regarding who they are? What happens when God is pushed out of the public picture? Our country is now coming face to face with this very problem. The problem is that, while trying to argue for our rights, people are denying the source of their rights (God). They essentially want to turn the granting of rights over to the government, and this will increasingly turn us into a “might makes right” society. Then our rights will be at the whim of those in power. They will decide what “rights” are and what “rights” mean. And those rights can change once the powers change hands. By then we will have become the image of the country from which the founders were trying to break free. People cannot consistently argue for their rights when they fail to establish the source of their rights and the purpose of government. In this country, we are in grave danger of failing on both counts. 

Part 2 will be next, together with some comments from TPOL.