Certain Unalienable Rights

Consider these words as it applies to our country today. 

“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 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, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”

These words are Thomas Jefferson's and are from the Declaration of Independence, the document that told the British Monarchy that the Colonists wanted their autonomy and freedom. Fast forward to today where women, the LGBTQA community, and many others are wanting to maintain their hard-fought freedoms. Fundamentally, should any government be able to dictate how any of us chooses to live and the choices we make for ourselves? I ask this as a straight, white man who has it especially easy relative to the women, the BIPOC, and the LGBTQA communities. I ask this as a person who may want to choose when my life will end (as I regard what happiness means to me in a state of physical or mental decline) while progressing into later life.

The universal human rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness have been argued as sacrosanct and yet, are regularly trod upon to serve "the greater good." But who should really have the authority to deny a person their fundamental rights to appease others and their ideas of what is right and wrong? We may argue when a person has the maturity to know what is right for them, but even that is presuming that adults somehow have special knowledge that children lack or that the "normal" possesses over the "abnormal." When what we as individuals choose to do is identified as self-harming by others, do we not have the ability to be able to judge for ourselves whether it is actually the pursuit of happiness that we are engaged in? If, for instance, a person is in excruciating pain for which no medical procedure nor medication gave relief, could not the reality of death releasing them from that pain authentically be seen as the pursuit of happiness? When a person needs to make a decision about whether to carry a fetus to term, shouldn't that be solely their decision to make? Likewise, if a person is happier inhabiting a body of the sex not assigned at birth, shouldn't that also be their call? And if a person serving time for malicious murder should choose to want themselves euthanized, shouldn't that also be their choice?

Whatever the rest of us may feel because of our religious upbringing, personal philosophy, or beliefs, should we really be able to wield our will over anyone else but ourselves or by those we choose to do our bidding? The one-size-fits-all model of what our forebearers ostensibly thought and fought for is pointless to try to come to a consensus about. The very particular choices of the words: life--that thing that we all share in common, liberty--the freedom to do with that what we see fit, and pursuit of happiness--the mode in which we choose to exercise liberty/live our lives is an ideal to ascribe to, but it is also a personal choice of how to attain.

What a different world we would be a part of if we all could be assured of our own self-determination. As individuals, we always have that right. However, the sounding board of living as part of society gives us adequate pause to learn, engage, and ultimately decide what to do as it relates to our own choices. 

With regard to Mr. Jefferson and his thoughts on the consent granted to the government by the governed, I think he'd find our lawmakers to be rather self-aggrandizing and corrupt in their efforts to legislate around morality for the sake of power. I think Jefferson would wonder why we have allowed our government to have so much say with regard to personal rights and liberties and perhaps, wonder why we put up with "despotic" state governments as our "Safety and Happiness" count on it?