“The name of Allenby fell upon the ears of the inhabitants of Jerusalem with singular force. To them it sounded like the blending of the Arabic words Allah (God) and Neby (prophet) – the prophet of God! To the people he was the 20th century prophet of God sent to deliver them from Turkish yoke. Jewish and Arab joy knew no bounds.” (Jerusalem, p.118)

A series of events which had already occurred in England would have bearing on what would happen to Jews in their liberated homeland. During the war, the First Lord of the Admiralty, Winston Churchill had sought the assistant of a brilliant Jewish chemist, Dr. Chaim Weizman for the production of acetone, a chemical needed for the explosive used in artillery shells, and this proved vital to Britain’s war effort. So when a grateful British government sought to reward Weizman, he asked nothing for himself, but only that Palestine be made a homeland for his Jewish people. Weizman was later to become the first president of Israel in 1948.

THE BALFOUR DECLARATION (1917). The British government on November 2, 1917 issued the famous Balfour Declaration, in the form of a letter from the Foreign Secretary, Arthur Balfour, to the English Jewish Leader, Lord Rothschild. The letter read:

“His Majesty’s Government views with favour the establishment in Palestine of a National Home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this objective, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done that shall prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.”

This was approved by various allied leaders, including U.S. President Woodrow Wilson. On June 30, 1920, the first British High Commissioner, Sir Herbert Samuel, a Jew, arrived in Jerusalem to assume his duties. He became the first Jew to exercise any real political authority over the Holy Land in more than 2500 years, the last one being King Zedekiah in 587 B.C. At first, the British, Arabs and Jews experience no real difficulty in living together. But trouble soon broke out. The British had made promises to both Jews and Arabs that they simply could not keep. In 1929 many Jews were killed by Arabs at the Wailing Wall in Jerusalem. A rumour had it that the Jews were plotting to destroy the Dome of the Rock and Mosque of Aksa in order to construct their own temple. In addition to religious problems, there existed economic and social fears. Arabs state rulers and land owners were disturbed over Jewish farmers paying Palestine Arab labourers higher wages than were being paid elsewhere in the Middle East.

In 1936, another outburst took place, led by the Arab leader of Jerusalem. During that year, Britain sent a Royal Commission headed by Lord Peel to study the Holy Land problems. The Peel Commission recommended the partition of Palestine between Jew and Arab. The Jews accepted their finding, but the Arabs would not hear of it. Finally, on May 17, 1939, Great Britain issued a White Paper to appease the Arabs (who represented the vast majority of Middle East people). The storm clouds of World War 11 were quickly gathering over Europe, and England did not  want to fight both Nazis and Moslem. The White Paper promised that Palestine would become an Arab state with a Jewish minority limited to 30% of the population. Jewish immigration would be cut down and the right of Jews to own land in Palestine would be restricted to a few areas. To the Jews this was a bitter betrayal of the Balfour Declaration; and they were especially opposed to the immigration restrictions in light of the growing danger of anti-Semitism in Hitler’s Germany.

During this time the famous Haganah (Jewish People’s Defence Army) was organised. In September 1939, German troops invaded Poland and World War 11 began. In spite of their conflict with Britain, the Palestinian Jews determined to side with the allies against the axis. David Ben-Gurion declared: “We shall fight the White Paper as if there was no war; we shall fight the war as if there were no White Paper.” And so they did. Over 130,000 Israelis enlisted in the army. Moshe Dayan, who would become world – famous during the Six Day War of June 1967, lost his eye during British war activities against Syria in the forties. But the Arab leadership, which had been favoured by the White Paper for a while sided with Hitler. Their Jerusalem leaders actually went to Germany to collaborate with the Nazis. After the war, Ben-Gurion visited the Nazi death camps at Auschwitz and Belsen. He came to Palestine more determined than ever to establish a national homeland for all Jews.

THE EXODUS (1947). Tensions between the Arabs, Jews and British intensified after the war. In July 1947, an incident of international scope occurred which helped formulate the British decision to leave Palestine in 1948. It is known as the Exodus Event. It began when a 4,000 ton wooden river boat named Exodus 1947 picked up 4,554 Jewish refugees from the coast of France and began the journey to Palestine. British ships soon spotted it and attempted to sink it for violating the White Paper law. But the ship was able to make it to Haifa harbour. Here all the refugees were arrested by the British, put on three prison ships and herded out to sea again, dropping anchor back at a French harbour. But this time the Jews refused to leave the ship and went on hunger strike. The tragedy made world headlines, and in desperation Britain scrapped their White Paper policy and asked the U.N. to partition Palestine between Arabs and Jews. This also marked the sixth and final aliyah returns, all which prepared for the new State of Israel. The Hebrew word aliyah means “to go up.” It can refer to one being called forward to read from the Torah in a Synagogue service, or may be used as a term for those returning to Palestine. The six Palestine aliyahs are: 1882-1903; 1903-1914; 1919-1925; 1925-1932; 1933-1939; and 1940-1948.

THE UN RESOLUTION: On November 29, 1947, by a thirty-three to thirteen vote (10 abstentions), the United Nations General Assembly passed a resolution for the partition of Palestine and the creation of statehood for Israel. Britain subsequently announced its intention to yield up the mandate and  at sunrise on May 14, 1948, the British High Commissioner, Sir Allen Gordon Cunningham, left the Holy Land for the last time amidst a seventeen-gun salute. The 30 year British rule was over!

DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE (May 14 1948): At 4:00pm that same day in Tel Aviv, Ben-Gurion called a meeting of 400 Jewish religious and political leaders including many representatives of the local and worldwide press to order. The assembly arose and sang the Jewish National Anthem, while in an adjourning room the Palestine symphony orchestra played. In Jerusalem, over 100,000 Jews listened to the ceremonies in Tel Aviv by radio,  unable to attend, being cut off and surrounded by Arab armies. Ben-Gurion rose, and in a firm, strong and emphatic voice read in Hebrew the Declaration of Independence of the new State of Israel. Israel’s first Prime Minister stood under a giant portrait of Theodor Herzl and read the historic 697-word document in seventeen minutes. Some of the key paragraphs in this proclamation of freedom read as follows:

“In the Land of Israel the Jewish people came into being. In this land was shaped their spiritual, religious and national character. Here they lived in sovereign independence. Here they created a culture of national and universal import, and gave to the world the eternal Book of Books.

Exiled by force, still the Jewish people kept faith with their land in all the countries of their dispersion, steadfast in their prayer and hope to return and here revive their political freedom.

Fired by this attachment of history and tradition, the Jews in every generation strove to renew their roots in the ancient Homeland and in recent generations they came home in their multitudes. It is the natural right of the Jewish people, like any other people, to control their own destiny in their sovereign State.

Accordingly we, the members of the National Council, representing the Jewish people in the Land of Israel and Zionist Movement, have assembled on the day of the termination of the British mandate for Palestine and, by virtue of our natural and historic right and of the resolution of the General Assembly of the United Nations, do hereby proclaim the establishment of a Jewish State in the Land of Israel – the State of Israel.

The State of Israel will be open to Jewish immigration and the ingathering of exiles. It will devote itself to developing the Land for the good of all its inhabitants. It will rest upon the foundations of liberty, justice and peace as envisioned by the prophets of Israel…

We call upon the Jewish people throughout the Diaspora to join forces with us in immigration and construction, and to be at our right hand in the great endeavour to fulfil the age-old longing for the redemption of Israel. We trust in the Rock of Israel, we set our hands in witness to this proclamation, at this session of the Provisional Council of State, on the soil of the Homeland, in the city of Tel Aviv, this Sabbath eve, the fifth day of Iyar 5708, the fourteen day of May, nineteen hundred and forty-eight.”

At 5.00pm on the same day in New York, a special emergency meeting of the U.N. General assembly was held to consider the war clouds of the Middle East which would soon certainly unleash their fury. They had little time to do something. Suddenly an amazing news bulletin from Washington D.C. – President Harry Truman had recognized the new Jewish State eleven minutes after it had come into existence! His message read as follows:

“This Government has been informed that a Jewish State has been proclaimed in Palestine, and recognition has been requested by the Provisional Government thereof. The United States Government recognises the Provisional Government the ‘de facto’ authority of the New State of Israel.”

Three days later, on May 18, Russia recognized Israel. Thus, for the first time since September 8, A.D. 70, the Holy Land by official Gentile action, belonged to the Jews!

In the final concluding Part 5 of the amazing history of Israel, we shall discuss the Independence Period (1948 –present day) including the War of Independence and other Wars.

I. L. SAMBO ESQ.

ATTORNEYS-AT-LAW, ARBITRATOR &

CAPITAL MARKET CONSULTANT.

Abuja – Nigeria.

EMAIL: ilsambo@yahoo.com

12/12/2011

1: Why did the Second Continental Congress write the Declaration of Independence?

            The reason the Second Continental Congress wrote the Declaration of Independence was to tell the world and mainly Great Britain that the thirteen colonies and future colonies of the United States of America were separating from their ruling country, therefore declaring their independence. They are declaring what made them be pushed to separate from Great Britain; the Preamble says “a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to separation”. Another reason why the Second Continental Congress wrote the Declaration of Independence was because King George III did not give the colonists certain obvious rights that every person should be given at birth and throughout their lives. The Declaration of Independence says that if the government is unjust then the people have the right to remove them and that’s what they did to protect their rights.

2: What rights do all men have? What is the purpose of government?

            The three main rights that all men and women have are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The right to live and prosper in this country, the right to a fair justice system, and the right to pursue the certain needs one wishes to gain happiness in life. The purpose of a government is to protect the rights of the people for the greater good of the country. Text from the Declaration of Natural Rights states “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”. Without a stable government, the country would be unorganized and unstable.

3: What do you think is the purpose of including a list of grievances in the Declaration of Independence?

            The point of including a list of grievances in the Declaration of Independence is to show the world what caused us to separate in the first place, including the usurpation’s of the Great Britain ruler King George III. Some of the specific examples of the misuse of power that King George III forced upon the original colonists from the List of Grievances include “He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good. He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them”, there are many more significant complaints about the King and the British governments ways throughout the List of Grievances section of the Declaration. Even though the colonists asked the King for a correction of wrongs in a very humble way he responded by enforcing injury and unwarrantable jurisdiction upon the colonists. Another reason why they included a list of grievances in the Declaration of Independence was to make sure that none of the complaints that the colonists had happen again in the future.

Document 2: The Constitution Handbook

1: How does the Constitution divide responsibility for governing? Be sure to include the idea of federalism as well as the separation of powers and checks and balances.

            The Constitution includes three essential ideas that are used to divide responsibility among our government, ideas known as Federalism, the Separation of Powers, and Checks and Balances. Federalism is the idea that our federal government and our states government have their own laws and powers, and share some of the same powers. Reserved powers are the powers that the states have the right to; “the Tenth Amendment says that all powers not specifically granted to the federal government are reserved to the States”, including the power to establish schools, pass marriage and divorce laws, and regulate trade within a state. The enumerated powers are laws made strictly by the federal government including the power to coin money, regulate instate and foreign trade, maintain the armed forces, and create federal courts. The concurrent powers are the powers that both the federal and state governments share including the right to raise taxes, borrow money, provide for public welfare, and administer criminal justice. The second idea is called the Separation of Powers and that idea was made to prevent the gaining of too much power and authority for one person or group of people. The three branches that are included in the Separation of Powers are the legislative, executive, and judicial branches. The legislative branch is consisted of congress members and they make the laws. The president is the head of the executive branch and he carries out the laws. The judicial branch consists of the Supreme Court and other federal courts and they apply the laws. The last idea is called Checks and Balances; which enables any branch of government to limit the power of the other branches. All three ideas are extremely significant to the fair division of responsibility among our government.

2: Why does the Constitution divide responsibility for governing?

            The Constitution divides responsibility for governing because, like stated in the Checks and Balances idea, they did not want one branch or group of people to foresee and overpower the others. They did not want to divide the responsibility of governing unequally or it could lead to a possible dictatorship in a land we called free. It is also divided because the responsibility on one idea may be too much to handle; it could be easily make errors that would hurt the freedom and liberty rights.

3: What is the purpose of the Bill of Rights? 

            The purpose of the Bill of Rights is to ensure citizens of the United States of America that their god given rights are safe and cannot be interrupted by the government because our early ancestor colonists did not want us have to endure what the British did to them; which includes unjustly behavior against the people. For example, by making them have to follow a certain religion, be put in prison without a fair and speedy trail consisted of a jury of their peers, quarter and take care of soldiers in their private homes at any time, not them speak their minds without punishment, not letting them own guns to protect themselves, not letting them petition the government and many more outrageous acts against our nations earliest citizens. The colonists did not want to have an unjust government after they were independent because they knew what it felt like to have your rights violated in such a tremendous way.

4: What are the most important responsibilities of the Legislative Branch?

            The most important responsibilities of the Legislative Branch are to make the nation’s laws and to control federal spending. Congress is the one who has those main responsibilities. Congress is made up of both the House of Representatives and the Senate. The Legislative branch is also responsible for monitoring the executive branch to see if they abuse their power in any way. Another important responsibility that the Congress and the Legislative Branch have is bringing charges upon or charging and elected official with evidence that says they have abused their power or broke the law; they also act as a court if an official gets impeached, if they rule the official is guilty of the accused charges the official is removed from office. All tax and spending bills must be made in the House of Representatives and have approval from all of Congress before going to the President for his final signature; the government can’t use any money until Congress approves or sets aside funds. Congress can also declare war.

5: What are the most important responsibilities of the Executive Branch?

            The most important responsibilities of the Executive Branch are to pass or veto the bills and laws that Congress approved; even if the President vetoes the law only two-thirds of the House of Representatives and Senate needs to vote to approve the law so it becomes a law even without the President’s approval. The President has the roles of Chief Executive and Chief Diplomat, Commander in Chief, Chief of State, Legislative Leader; all of the roles main responsibilities go under the executive branches responsibilities. Examples of the Presidents responsibilities are appointing ambassadors, negotiating treaties with other nations, use to military to intervene or offer assistance in crises at home and around the world, send troops to other parts of the world, visiting foreign nations serving as an example of an American to other nations, electing Supreme Court officials, and presenting goals for legislation.

6: What are the most important responsibilities of the Judicial Branch?

            The Judicial Branch consists of three main categories of courts with their own responsibilities, some more powerful than the other. The first and most powerful court in the country is the Supreme Court; the only way to be a member of the Supreme Court is to be chosen by the President of the United States. The eight members of the Supreme Court handle the much bigger cases, mainly involving ambassadors and disputes between states. They also decide if what happened in a case violated the constitution. The Second Judicial Branch is called the Appellate Courts or Appeals Court; they review the losing side’s case which was ruled in a district court and their responsibilities involve deciding whether to overturn the ruling or order a retrial. The lowest level of the Judicial Branch is called the District Courts and these court’s responsibilities are to consider criminal and civil cases that come under federal authority such as kidnapping and federal tax evasion.

7: Identify 2 freedoms, duties, or responsibilities laid out in the Constitution that are most essential for democracy to work.

            A responsibility that I feel is most essential for democracy to work in our nation is our responsibility to vote for Congress and the President; even though voting is completely voluntary our ancestors fought and died for our freedom and democracy against the rule of Great Britain and succeed so that we could choose who we thought would be best to run for office. Not voting as an American citizen is like saying the colonists fought and died for nothing. Also you cannot have democracy without the simple act of voting and if you vote you exercise your right of self government. The definition of democracy is people voting for their government. Two major amendments that I feel are necessary and essential for democracy to work are the 15th Amendment which states that the government cannot deny a citizen the right to vote based on that citizen’s race or color and the 19th Amendment which says that the government cannot deny a citizen the right to vote based on that citizens gender. Both these amendments are significant for democracy to work because without them not every citizen would be allowed to vote; thus nullifying the definition of democracy which is that every citizen is able to vote.

The Civil War & Reconstruction Web quest

1: Identify and explain the differences between the North and the South that led to the Civil War.

            One of the most significant differences between the North and the South that led to the Civil War was that the North wanted to abolish slavery South wanted to preserve it. Another main difference between the North and the South is that the South wanted to be its own country; the Confederate States of America and keep their life style. The North wanted to unite with the South to form one large nation without the South’s way of life. Because of these two main differences the North and the South declared war against each other.

2: What caused the Southern states to rebel and eventually secede from the Union?

            The first seven Southern states to secede and rebel from the Union was due to the election of President Abraham Lincoln; they thought that under the North’s rule their life styles of plantations and relying on slaves would be destroyed. When President Lincoln refused to withdraw his federal troops from Fort Sumter in Charleston, South Carolina the South rebelled with force and fired upon the Fort. After this event 4 more Southern states seceded from the Union to join the Confederate States of America.

3: What are 2 words that you would use to describe the Civil War?

            One of the words I would use to describe the Civil War is “innovation” because the Civil War revolutionized war methods and new devices used in future wars. For example, the use of ironclads in the navy during the civil war made it clear that using steel and iron ships is the best way to have a stable Navy. One war method that was innovated from the Civil War was how the North blockaded the Southern port cities so they could not trade. I chose this word because it shows how one war can make such a difference in future wars to come. Another word I would use to describe the Civil War is gruesome because of how many people dying and fighting against their own country; also because of how many people were brutally killed or disabled/scared/maimed. I chose this word because it shows how much of a scar the Civil War left on our nation.

4: What was the Emancipation Proclamation and why did Lincoln issue it?

            The Emancipation Proclamation is an order issued by President Abraham Lincoln on January 1, 1863 that claimed the freedom of 3.1 million slaves, 50,000 of which were freed right after the order was given. The Emancipation Proclamation also ended the possibility that the South would receive help from Europe. This document made abolishing slavery the main goal of the war. Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation in hope that most of the slaves would run away or rebel and attack their owners; also hoping that they would flew to the north to join the union military.

5: What was President Lincoln’s vision for the period after the war? Why did some members of his party disagree with him?

            President Lincoln’s vision for the period after the war was that the Union and the seceded Southern states could have restored relations; but some of Lincoln’s party thought that the South should be punished and that they should guarantee the freedom and rights of African Americans. Some Union members disagreed with Lincoln because they thought that the South deserved to be dealt with in a punishing fashion due to what they have done against the Union and against the African Americans. President Lincoln just wanted to have one big nation that works together; unfortunately he was assassinated before he could see his dream come true.

6: What did the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments seek to achieve? Why did they fall short?

            What the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments all had in common was to seek rights for African Americans and those of all races. The 13th amendment was the first of the reconstruction amendments. The amendments wanted to achieve complete freedom within the nation’s citizens including those of other races. Where the amendments fell short was when they weren’t really enforced; there were extreme amounts of racism and unequal rights in the South during and after the reconstruction period. The amendments weren’t really recognized until the 1950’s and 1960’s era where African Americans were fully granted equal rights instead of the “separate but equal” saying that the southerners ran by, even though it was not equal at all and many blacks were killed, beating, and treated unjustly.

Today in the United States everyone is legally equal, blacks and whites, men and women, minorities and majorities, Hindus, Catholics, Taoists, Muslims, followers of any religion, belonging to any social or economic group, they are all equal— except immigrants. Immigrants to the United States without passports or visas or “papers” are treated and viewed as a social group that does not belong and that is less important or less deserving than the social group of people who were born in the United States, or who went through the proper channels to be legally allowed to live in the United States.

Legally allowed to live in the United States? To most everyone this is normal, if you want to come to the States from some other country you have to get permission, and if you want to stay, you need even more permission. But everyone who was born here can stay for as long as they like, they have the right to live here and pursue happiness. As the founders of the United States wrote, pursuing happiness is an inalienable right that every man, woman, and child has because they are a man, woman, or child, not because they were born some place, or because they are a certain color, speak a certain language, worship a certain god, but because they are people. Why is it then that people who are not from here, people who have a different social background than us, ​are not freely allowed to pursue happiness in what most Americans will tell you is the greatest country on Earth?

There are a lot of people who want to come to the United States, and some would argue that we cannot possibly let them all in, but why? Someone seeking a better life in the United States has just as much of a right to do so than anyone legally in the country has the right to buy a nicer house. What is the difference between an immigrant seeking a better life here and a citizen seeking a better life across town? Unlike all of my other questions, I will answer this one for you—they are not like us. Someone from another country belongs to a different social group; we do not share a culture with them. That is why people rally for stricter border control while they complain about the wait at US Customs. The United States has a long history of segregating people for being different, and it also has a long history of later realizing its mistake and granting equal rights to those people, but it has always overlooked immigrants.

However, America is not the only country to overlook immigrants. In June of 2009 some Kurds living in Japan were seeking to be granted the legal status of Refugee. The Japanese government was not cooperating and the Kurds staged a 72 day sit-in protest, which ended when they were forcibly removed.  In Japan  “citizens possess an exclusive right to political speech and action. Protests by refugees undoubtedly question citizens’ monopoly of this right” (Shindo).

The protesters were human, and the people who removed them were human, yet they were separated into the two mutually exclusive groups of “Citizen” and “Non-Citizen.” Even though Article 15 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states “Everyone has the right to a nationality,” and “no one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality.” Non-Citizens were denied basic human rights. As refugees without ​legal Refugee status these Kurds had no nationality, and were being denied the right to stay in Japan. On top of this it was popular opinion that, “in retaliation for the sit-in, the Kurd refugees might not only be denied recognition as ‘refugees’, but also be detained for a longer period than others” (Shindo). Because these people were not citizens, it was widely believed that they would receive punishment for doing something which all citizens of the country have the right to do.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is a document made by the United Nations, of which both Japan and the United States are members. By being members they agree to the rights granted by this document, yet because there is no United Nations enforcement agency, the rights are free to be trampled upon. In some regions of Mexico, living conditions could hardly be called “living” conditions, where necessities such as food, water, and shelter, are not met. People experiencing these conditions often pursue happiness in the United States, and are subsequently expelled. This occurs despite article 9 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, “no one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.”

It is easy for a powerful country like the United States to deny Non-Citizens basic human rights, such as those from Article 13 in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights concerning the freedom of movement, which is elaborated on by Human Rights Education Associates.

The right to free movement affects economic migrants, those who have fled their homes not in fear of persecution but in search of a higher standard of living, which would bring increased job and educational opportunities.

Immigrants are directly affected by this freedom due to the fact that ​they have entered a new nation intending to settle there. If they are not allowed into that nation, or the government in any way restricts movement within their new society, then clearly this is in violation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as well as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. 

All people have the right to be exempt from expulsion from their country of origin or nationality as well as countries they have immigrated to. This right applies to individuals as well as large groups of people.

It could be argued that merely putting up a fence between the United States and Mexico is denying passage between the two to those who seek it. And because there is no agency or military body to enforce the United Nations’ declaration the United States frequently ignores it.

If illegal immigrants manage to find work in the United States, it is often low paying work that legal residents and citizens do not wish to perform. Food harvesting is often done by illegal immigrants, at wages below state minimum, and it is because of this that the food can be sold so cheaply. Under article 23 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, sub-standard payment is forbidden.

Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work.

Everyone who works has the right to just and favorable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection.

But because this group of people is segregated by the Citizen/Non-Citizen line,​ citizens feel that they can treat the illegal immigrants in this manner. That because they belong to this other group they are inferior people. This is very similar, if not identical, to the views that were held about women and African Americans in the United States until they were legally defined as being equal to all others.

In the United States it is a well established more that immigrants apply for citizenship and not stay illegally. This more is so strong that it is even fashioned into a law, becoming a formal norm. It is from this law that the term “illegal immigrant” derives. A very interesting term, as it labels a person as illegal. It is not their actions or their possessions that are illegal, but their presence. Treating a group differently for demographics they cannot change is discrimination. The only thing that these people have done wrong is having been born in another country, much like African Americans were discriminated against for merely the color of their skin decades ago.

One thing that is very different between immigrants and African Americans however is the law, the formal norm that allows others to inhumanly treat this group of people. African Americans have all the same legal rights as every other citizen, but illegal immigrants are not citizens, and do not have any of the rights of citizens. By keeping this group of people legally distinct from others, it only enforces the more that keeps them from being welcomed into the country.

Referencing back to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights yet again, Article 5 states that, “no one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.” Often the first part of this article is cited in cases of prisoners of war, or suspects of treason being tortured and dehumanized into revealing some information that their captors seek. But all too often the rest of this article is left out. It is a human right to be treated as ​human, something that is easily derived. Yet what it means to be treated as human has gray areas, which is why the article adds that no one should be subjected to degrading treatment or punishment. Degrading, while not of perfect diction itself, is a much more defined term. Few people would argue that being deported is not degrading, or that performing labor for a lower wage than a citizen would be given is not degrading, yet the United States government and its citizens continue these practices.

A functionalist approach to this situation would state that the lower earning illegal immigrants are crucial for the economic development of the country, as they enable the cheap production of raw goods. An extended look at this could include the goods produced from the immigrant-harvested food. Something simple and seemingly insignificant can play a large role in the functioning of society. Non-Citizens produce food for the Citizens, and in return the Citizens offer a stable job and some financial compensation, though the two groups often do not interact directly, they rely on each other intensely. Citizens and Non-Citizens are far more likely to be around people of their own group, and it is because of this that Citizens may never know someone who does work for a degrading sum, which brings us to the interactionalist perspective.

Interactionalists would see this as a separation. The two groups hardly interact with each other, a Citizen may only see a Non-Citizen if they are the person who hires them. Often, it is the case that the two groups will not speak the same language, so their interactions would be even more limited. Hand gestures and facial expressions would have to go a long way for these communications. Approval and disapproval may only be expressed as a thumbs-up or thumbs-down. On top of this the Citizen group interacting with the Non-Citizen group may very well view themselves as superior, leading in to the ​feminist view.

Not only are the illegal immigrants treated poorly because they belong to the Non-Citizen group, but also because some of them are women. When it comes to picking oranges, anyone can do it, but employers will often view jobs as suitable for certain genders and selectively hire employees based on that view. This is something which is illegal in the United States, gender discrimination is not allowed in the work place, but when an employer is hiring someone who is an undocumented illegal immigrant, they can be as discriminating  as they want. Feminists would view this as an inequality between genders, as the males pick oranges, their female counter parts clean houses, and without an equal balance of genders doing both jobs it certainly is an inequality. The Non-Citizen group struggles to find work, and is even faced with gender discrimination if work is found. The Citizens and Non-Citizens conflict, taking us to the Conflict view.

From the Conflict perspective, the Citizens are the Haves, and the Non-Citizens are the Have-Nots. The Non-Citizens struggle to increase their quality of life, while the Citizens take advantage of their cheap labor.

Historically, conflict always leads to rebellion, and perhaps one day the illegal immigrants will rebel in large enough numbers with a loud enough voice that the Citizens may feel their plight and realize the extreme discrimination and violation of human rights.

​Works Cited

Shindo, Reiko. “Struggle for Citizenship: Interaction between Political Society and Civil Society at a Kurd Refugee Protest in Tokyo.” Citizenship Studies 13.3 (2009): 219-37. Print.

Gees, Sarah. “Freedom of Movement.” Hrea.org. Human Rights Education Associates, 2003. Web. 20 Oct. 2010.

            To analyze Progressivism and its effects on today’s world we must first; as always, look at its beginnings, its first principles. Any endeavor to clear the intellectual field of virtual and theoretical debris is a complicated process, for clarity more often than not is lost to emotional meanderings, mismatched definitions, philosophical dissociation and of course the more self-involved agendas that look only to obfuscate any path that does not hold them at its center.

            To put it succinctly Progressivism is a philosophical subset of Relativism, that process of thought whereby any point of view has no absolute truth, that all values are subjective according to ones perception.  From this view any social morphism i.e. ethical or moral constraint become malleable to any human need or want.

            This is a rather simplistic definition or description, but I’ve found that concise, but simple definitions do inherently describe basic principles.  Confusion occurs more frequently when we attempt to describe first principles as a function of our agenda driven rationalizations, or we find ourselves incapable of being objective in the process of understanding the nature of the lesser or greater emotional bias we all have.

            When we talk of Progressivism we naturally have to look to the roots of what the movement and its associated followers are progressing from.  In brief Progressivism is the action of rejecting the philosophical idea that the nature of man has any rights other than those that man himself can render from the world around him.

            Dewey the most strident of Progressives defined his arguments against the Bill of Rights, specifically as it concerned the ‘Rights of Freedom’; he promotes the idea that Freedom is not an individual right, but one dependent on the social aspects of a society.  He writes:

“Thus, for Dewey, these rights are ‘natural’ in some sense, although not in the frequently advocated sense of being a series of fundamental human powers that were inherent in individuals prior to their entry into civil society.  While this sense of rights was historically progressive and contributed greatly to the power of the American Declaration of Independence and Constitution’s Bill of Rghts, it became a drag on social progress when these specific formulations were decreed inalienable.  In Dewey’s view, rights should not be “defined as inherent in an original and native fixed structure, moral or psychological,” nor, relatedly, should their definition feed a political stance that is required on the side of institutions and laws is to eliminate the obstructions they offer to the ‘free’ play of the natural equipment of individuals.”[i]

            This is in opposition to what Thomas Jefferson laid out in the Declaration of Independence where:

“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.”

The Declaration of Independence was a brilliant expression of John Locke’s work where:

“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.”

                The expositional history of ‘Natural Logic’; that logic, that defines the rights of man, closely parallels the cooperative evolutionary biology of all human beings in general, where the specific challenges to man from his environment; while Darwinian on the individual, collectively forced him to work together with others of his kind to survive, the strength of the one that survived, became the strength of the many of the ‘Republic’ we now hope to save.

            When Dewey, like so many others of the day, expounded on their political theories they did so with the innocence of the times, scientific thought was developing rapidly in its applications to the world, so it’s understandable that the nature of their Newtonian thoughts, would give them the idea that explanations of how the world worked would extend itself into workable theories of the mind.

            Darwin for many was the link that catalyzed a new age of thought, whereby science would become the harbinger of understanding where we came from, and from that, an understanding of where we could go.

            For Progressives it was a misunderstanding into the nature of man, where the concept ‘survival of the fittest’ was taken to have more of an individual application to man, where the thought of ruthless disregard for their fellow man was seen as strength, instead of the weakness it inherently is.

            Dewey among many made the mistake that the individual ‘Rights of Freedom’ are socially dependent; that is, intellectual achievements i.e., rational theories could not move beyond the biological template from which our innate logic springs.  He had no way of knowing that the patterns of life we see all around us, from the individual components of our cells, viral and bacterial vectors to the largest animals are all intrinsically dependent upon one another within the biosphere we inhabit.

Just as our biology is dependent on the Darwinian mechanisms of adaptation, so to are the social patterns we develop to stabilize our society.  Progressivism is a rejection of the evolutionary crucible that over time created a set of first principles that connected the individual rights of man to the cooperative nature of our biology; natural law, and from this defined a social formula that does not just work as a list of sterile rights, but as a formulary process that when actively used, creates a social fulcrum whereby even one individual can change the mechanism of their minority over that of the collective majority.

            This is the United States Constitution; a document that the Founding Fathers believed gave power to the concept that all men were created to be equal with certain self-evident or inalienable rights that as universal, hold true for all humanity regardless of the diversity of their background. 

            This is the document that Progressives, by the nature of their actions, reject.  It started as such things started, with intellectual elites in the Universities after the Civil War.  The rage of German Hegelianism had imprinted itself on much of academia, budding itself into the minds and spirits of the American youth of the day.  Something we see happening today templating the nature of its rebirth from the still-born liberalism it created to begin with.  

            Hegelianism is the philosophical ideal that all of reality can be described through the rational mind, and that ultimately it would provide us with the ability to create our world within the context of Kant’s Transcendental Idealism.  In essence the argument does come down to the understanding proposed by Kant, that reality is defined by the manner of our perceptions, the opposing view, the thought that the things of reality around us exist in and unto themselves independent of the human mind.

            This may seem overly complex and superfluous, but at its core how we approach any problem with success is defined by our ability to objectify our perceptions, to understand its limits and too cooperatively meld our perceptions into a more coherent picture of reality more accurately then we could possibly do by ourselves.

            The argument comes down to the “tale wagging the dog” or the “dog wagging the tale” concept in our endeavors of how we approach a problem.  The bastardizaton of Hegelianism and its sedge-way from Relativism to Progressivism and Liberalism that our own native born academics rendered from it, tells a story of an agenda driven logic of the day more than the analysis of reality independent to the subjectivity of the rational mind.

            In truth that is the trap of rationalism, the loss of objectivity to egocentrism, the thought that the emotional aspects of humanity are of no consequence when compared to the intellect, the calculating aspects of ourselves.  It is the emotional, spiritual and physical aspects of ourselves that give the practical test of virtual concepts of our mind.

            While we use our intellect to calculate, to process an analysis of the data we collect from our world, it is a conscious process of assumptions that are Newtonian based, that lose their significance in our calculations.  The emotional and spiritual aspects of our nature, are the mechanisms by which the syllogistic aspects of our reality are formed in the subconscious, feeding our conscious mind the context to the problems we solve.  It is the art of our success in our calculations that builds the wisdom we gain over the years of our life.

            For when the confusion of our thoughts becomes the nature of our actions, and our actions fall short of the nature of our hearts, and we’ve lost that center or balance of ourselves that defines the essence of any objective truth, then we have no recourse; but to look at those basic truths that define the nature of the path we have come to walk. 

            Progressives seek to find these truths in the rational mind, a rational mind that is wholly dependent on our ability to know the truth of our assumptions, and where those assumptions can be tested, argued over, and supported in an open society.

            The Founding Fathers and the Declaration of Independence were the evolutionary end-result of man’s cooperative need to find the power of the individual expressed collectively to the benefit of each.  Progressivism removes the power of the individual to the group dynamic, whereby the committee animal eventual rules only for itself.

[i] ssss

Image via Wikipedia

Image via Wikipedia

Moses went off on Mount Sinai to deliver guiding principles to his people.  Our Founding Fathers met in a Continental Congress.  Beginning a new tradition is never easy or without risk.  Loyalty to the principles and that which has freed you from enslavement is paramount. 

In today’s culture, I can just see the Founding Fathers at their realization that the Bill of Rights, the first 10 amendments to our Constitution created to protect and preserve the rights of the citizens, have been held in every bit as little respect and reverence as were the guidelines set by Moses as he went off to construct or receive the 10 commandments.

In my conversations with people, I have been called “exaggerated” “impractical” “selfish” and many other adjectives because I hold true to the founding principles of this nation.  I have also been told that the Founding Fathers created a system based on compromise, and I was completely going against what they stood for.  Somehow, I fail to see how they were willing to compromise their inalienable rights to Mad King George.  As I recall, they pledged their lives to one another to ensure that their individual liberties would be fought for and preserved. 

Oddly, I have also heard someone mention that it is everyone’s duty to preserve our natural rights in the same paragraph that he said that the needs of the many will always come before the needs of the few.  Forgetting for a moment the gross lack of ability to conceptualize that this contradiction represents, how is it that people within 300 years of a Revolution founding the first nation on earth on the idea of individual rights can so bastardize the foundation of these concepts that not only are they not held dear but they are scoffed as something negative and annoying?

What caused them to clamour around modern day golden calves?  What is so frightening about taking the responsibility of one’s own freedom and preserving that of others?

Since they have met with a similar fate, I will be interposing the Declaration of Independence, the Bill of Rights, and the Ten Commandments.  Please understand that this by no means insinuates  a desire to hold to one religion, or even a religion.  I merely believe that there are parallels which can be insightful when drawn.

“When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

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, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence…” – The Declaration of Independence

‘1 And God spake all these words, saying, 4-5 The Lord talked with you face to face in the mount out of the midst of the fire … saying, Pre 1 — 2 I am the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. 6 I am the Lord thy God, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage.” – The Ten Commandments

In both of these instances, the starting point is similar:  you were enslaved, and you have been set free.

The Bill of Rights:

“1. Freedom of Speech, Press, Religion and Petition
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

“You shall have no other gods before me.”

Basically, this would mean that the government has been delegated to the role of servant, not God.  It is there to serve the preservation of individual rights, not their subservience or destruction.

“2. Right to keep and bear arms

A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”

“You shall not make for yourself any carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them nor serve them. For I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and fourth generations of those who hate me, but showing mercy to thousands, to those who love Me and keep My commandments.“

This basically underlines who is in charge.  It is the people, or, rather, the individual, who is served by the government which exists to protect their rights, not whom they serve.

“3. Conditions for quarters of soldiers
No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.”

1. “You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain, for the Lord will not hold him guiltless who takes His name in vain.”
    

The army of the nation is not the source of the power of the government.  It is the consent of the governed.

“4. Right of search and seizure regulated
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

1. “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God. In it you shall do no work: you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your manservant, nor your maidservant, nor your cattle, nor your stranger who is within your gates. For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.”
    

The home is hallowed and sacred, as is the Sabbath day.  It is not to be violated by anyone who would seek to enslave.

“5. Provisons concerning prosecution
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.”

“Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be long upon the land which the Lord your God is giving you.”

Honor the roots of the Constitution – Individual rights.

“6. Right to a speedy trial, witnesses, etc.
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.”

“You shall not murder.”

You shall not unjustly condemn any man.

“7. Right to a trial by jury

In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law”

“You shall not commit adultery.”

You shall not hold someone accountable for the same accusation in another court.

“8. Excessive bail, cruel punishment
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.”

“You shall not steal.”

You shall not take financial advantage or physical advantage of an accused.

“9. Rule of construction of Constitution
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”

“You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.“
The government shall not create laws which clash with the rights of the people.

“10. Rights of the States under Constitution
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

1. “You shall not covet your neighbor’s house; you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor anything that is your neighbor’s.”

The goverment shall not look to covet the rights of the people.

Now, for anyone out there reading this who is smacking their lips at my usage of Judeo Christian analogies and saying “right wing religious zealot”  let me advise you that the parallels could possibly be found under any spiritual doctrine.  The Buddha said that all true spiritualities have the same feeling: that of freedom.  I will also  state for the record that I was a happy, contented athiest for most of my life.  I am drawing parallels as I see them.

The most remarkable parallel to me, though, is that just as the people of Moses were quick to forget their deliverance from slavery and sold their freedom to the first calf of gold they could make and worship, Americans of today similarly forget their deliverance from a totalitarian dictatorship and are just as quick to melt their Bill of Rights down into a socialist nation they will worship and be happily enslaved by.

While not the first words of the Declaration of Independence, these stirring words have that kind of prophetic power that anyone who hears them in immediately inspired by the beauty, the poetry and the deep truths that were so beautifully expressed in that historic document.

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.

This one statement from that famous declaration so beautifully demonstrates some core principles that show why this document has such a deep impact on the American mind and heart.  The statement that the truths in this document were indeed truths is a profound statement in its own right.  The Declaration of Independence does that suggest that what is being declared in those pages are theories, possibilities, even political ideology.  These are truths which puts them on the same value as statements of values as often taught in a religious setting.  Truths are eternal values and values that are not changed by circumstances, by whomever or whatever is handling the government of the land or by the whim of lawmakers.  These truths exist above those temporal earthly ideas and live on that plain of the eternal. 

“Self evident” is a powerful phrase and it reflects on the founder’s belief in what was called natural law.  Natural law is the belief system that there are laws that are part of our natural state of existence and that they cannot be taken away (inalienable).  These laws are our rights as creations of the almighty and any government system must recognize these laws because they are above government.  It is a basic belief system of the American system that ALL people are entitled to these rights and that they cannot be taken away.

The mention of a creator in the declaration of independence is very important because there are those who would maintain that the separation of church and state tells us that the government is at heart a secular institution.  Clearly the founders did not lay the foundation of our country on that groundwork.  They saw the inheritance we as Americans have in our rights and freedoms to be part of our legacy from God and as such, above the government and something the government must back off and leave alone as well as prettiest and defend.

The Declaration of Independence is truly an amazing document especially when you consider the “primitive” state of the nation when it was written by Thomas Jefferson and signed on July 2, 1776 to become the backbone of our American system of government.  It became an often referenced and quoted document, even becoming a part of President Lincoln’s famous inaugural speech when he said with such deep conviction…

Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.”

Because these words are such a deep part of our American heritage, American history and the American spirit, they are often a crucial center part of any study of history in the schools in this country.  That is why school children in every state are so familiar with these words. 

But it would do us all well to take some time once a year or so and take our copy of the Declaration of Independence and read it either as a private moment of reflection nor with our families.  What a wonderful fourth of July tradition that would make.  Then as you watch the fireworks celebrating the birth of the country and its independence, you will have those words fresh in your heart to remind you that it was our creator that gave us our freedoms and independence and nobody has the right to ever take them away.

PPPPP 734

The Enlightenment the period 1680-1780; was a time when there was a great deal of new philosophical ideas forming. These ideas challenged centuries of traditionalism, epically the British Monarchy. It is from this that the ideas of what we today know as liberalism, freedom and the right to your own beliefs were formed. This had a great deal of influence on the Declaration of Independence, and Thomas Jefferson who wrote the majority of it, as he grew up during this period and these ideas formed a huge part of his thinking (Web ref 1). The key ideas that came out of the enlightenment of liberty, freedom and liberalism formed the basis of the main arguments in the Declaration.

Thomas Jefferson’s main influence was John Locke. John Locke was famously known as the father of liberalism, he was an English philosopher and one of the key thinkers in the enlightenment period. He believed in the separation of church and state. One of the key phrases in the Declaration of Independence is “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”, this first came from John Locke who said “Life, liberty and property” (Web ref 2) Locke was also the first main to suggest the three branches of government which Thomas Jefferson turned into the bill of rights.

“Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” is a phrase that today has become a definition of human rights. Life being that every human has the right to life, to have the power over their own lives. Liberty refers to every person having the right to freedom. The pursuit of happiness meaning that every citizen has the right to be happy, to fulfil their dreams and strive for happiness. That the government will not stop anyone in their pursuit for happiness. “All men are created equal” this phrase was meant to be the idea that everyone is equal in America, however in reality this was a time when a large amount of the white population owned slaves. Even Thomas Jefferson was a slave owner, so what they really meant by this was that every white person was equal (Web ref 3). The line “All men are created equal” has been used in must civil rights campaigns to defend that America is meant to be the land of the free for everyone, that everybody is equal regardless of skin colour. 

Bibliography

Websites: 

Web Ref1: http://usgovinfo.about.com/cs/historicdocuments/a/bldechist.htm (30th November 2010)

Web Ref 2:  http://thinkexist.com/quotes/john_locke/  (30th November 2010)

Web Ref 3:   http://www.american-history-fun-facts.com/declaration-of-independence-text.html (30th November 2010)

Image via Wikipedia

Independence Hall is located in

Thomas Jefferson wrote most of the letter. He was helped by John Adams. Thomas Jefferson spent a long time writing the letter. It was important that it looked nice. It was printed by a person who did that for a job. This person is called a printer. It had to look nice for the King. The letter went to the printer on July 4, 1776.

In the letter, they gave three reasons. The first reason they gave was that they believed all people were equal. The second reason they gave was that they believed everyone was given some rights by God. They then went on to list three of those rights. They chose to use the words life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. It took until August 2, 1976, for all the men to sign the letter.

They knew that the letter would make the King angry. When he read the letter, he was very angry. This started the American Revolutionary War. It was then that America became a country. The war lasted until 1787.

After the war, a group of men traveled to Independence Hall. These men were from each of the states. No one came from Rhode Island. The men spent 4 months talking about what the new government should look like. The men finally agreed on a plan. Then James Madison wrote the United States Constitution. The last person did not sign the Constitution another year for everyone to sign the Constitution. Many of the men had returned home before they signed the Constitution. Just like today, not everyone could agree. Many people protested on the street. These protests were broke up by a horrible disease, yellow fever.

The building is now owned by the United States. People can visit the building, but they must have a free ticket. The building is open all day. The building is open every day. Kids visiting the building receive free trading cards. These cards tell more about the men. Kids can also see the rooms where these meetings were held.

The best thing about the Fourth of July has always been spending it with family and friends- those people who are the most important in our lives.  It’s a celebration of the rights we’ve been given as a result of many discussions, battles, men and women lost to war, disabled veterans trying to make sense of what they’ve witnessed, and much time and energy spent in other parts of the world.  This is our protection and our cause.  The people in our lives must be able to walk freely down the street, drive from state to state without showing documents at guard stations, choose where to live, decide their life’s work, and have the family dynamics they so desire.  Many other countries do not have what we have and the people want it.  They crave freedom like we crave ice cream.

Those of us in St. George were treated to a very different fireworks show this year.  Normally, I spend my Fourth in Richfield, because they put on a really well planned, thoughtful show.  Since I didn’t get to go up there this year, I decided to go down to the city center parks here in St. George and watch the fireworks with my sister-in-law, my niece, and my little nephew.  At first, I thought that the city center park, which is located behind the library in the same block as the Tabernacle and the water park.  The new carousel has also been placed at this location and was busy from the time we arrived, about nine o’clock in the evening, until the fireworks began. 

Although there are many well established, tall trees in the area, all of the star-spangled explosions could be viewed easily from our vantage point.  It went off like the “Dueling Banjos”, with a few minutes from The Sun Bowl on Flood Street and then a quick change and a few minutes of wondrous lights and sounds from Dixie Hill on the scenic drive above town.  Seeing each outburst and watching the reactions of not only the children around us, but also those of the adults (including myself) brought a smile to my heart.  It never ceases to amaze me that there is a child in everyone, no matter their age, no matter their career, lifestyle or station in life.  

When the finale had concluded, we all milled around for just a few moments, probably to make sure that it truly was the finale.  It was a spectacular evening, with a slight breeze and cooler temperatures than we’d been having for several days before.  Even though our fears of many challenging flare ups in back yards or surrounding drier areas were confirmed by the sounds of fire engines and rescue vehicles every few minutes, it truly was a night of celebration and family fun.  Clapping, laughter and the sounds of true enjoyment from the crowd gave a real sense of joy- the very reason our forefathers met to sign The Declaration of Independence on that day so long ago.  Enjoy your freedom!