/liberty/ - Liberty

>>19296

They are talking about moral equality, not material/physical equality.

All men are created with moral equality before God, and (assuming free will) either choose to do bad or good.

Therefore until they do something bad that deserves intervention, all men should be equal before the law and enjoy the same liberties.

Except niggers, of course. ;-)

Pretty much this >>19297

Historically, it has been commonly believed that men are not born equal. It was believed that people born into slavery should continue to be slaves, simply because slaves were seen as a natural product of the human condition. Lifespans were short and slavery existed in basically every culture around the world, so the idea that freedom was bestowed upon only certain individuals was very common.

The constitution was apart of a huge societal reaction to this idea of inequality. This idea that some people are naturally in bondage or are naturally able to rule. As the other poster said, it's not about physical equality. And it's definitely not about equal benefits or equal wealth. It's about equal opportunity, because opportunity is not given, it's natural. Humans don't grant humans with freedom, it's something that is with us when we are born. Our creator gives us freedom, and proof of this is that somebody has to forcibly take my freedom away from me to make me a slave. A removal of freedom has to be enforced. Infringement on freedom isn't natural, it's something that has to be executed by someone.

>>19297

>They are talking about moral equality, not material/physical equality

this

>>19296

All White men are created equally

>>19308

/thread

Also reminder niggers are not constitutional considered whole men so they don't count

>>19310

>What is the 13th amendment

>>19310

Technically speaking, slaves were considered inequal for the sole purpose of voting. Freed niggers were still one whole vote.

>>19296

It's pretty clear, but the next line makes it even clearer. "That they are endowed by their creator…" etc, etc.

>>19297

>Except niggers, of course. ;-)

Actually free black men had the vote into the 1810s and 20s, until it was stripped from them State by State as racism (as one of the main excuses for slavery) spread throughout the country.

The more you know.

>>19298

>Historically, it has been commonly believed that men are not born equal.

Hit the nail on the head. Romans, and Greeks before them, believed those who had been enslaved had lesser spirits than those who were freemen. This idea, that slaves are morally and spiritually below non-slaves, was the norm throughout all of human history, including slavery in the American South. Each society invented its own form of "lesser-ness" to apply to the enslaved, and when faced with a lack of "visible" (not immaterial) differences they would invent metaphysical inferiority for the enslaved.

After all, if you like having slaves, you need an excuse to tell yourself that it's alright that you're not the slave here and that that poor guy is, that something concrete separates the two of you and your status.

>>19310

Te hnically speaking ammendents are part of the constitution.

That doesn't mean I don't reject the 16th as unconstitutional

>>19506

Parts of the constitution can't be unconstitutional.

Equal under God*

>>19296

See >>19298

It's about the ideal that in spirit and in social standing, we are all equal, even if we are not in wealth or physical condition.

I think it's best represented by movie theaters, honestly. When movie theaters first became a thing, the price to see a movie was a nickel whether you were super poor or super rich. You'd have the elites and lowest-rung crooks sitting next to each other watching the same movie, despite being of different social standings, and they'd probably react positively to one another while discussing the show.