"...to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
Easy, right? The Declaration of Independence (not the first sentence, which begins, "When in the course of human events..."), Thomas Jefferson, the Enlightenment, all that good stuff. They were passionate on these things called "rights" at that point in time.
We still care about them. It only makes sense. But in my final year at William and Mary, I began to ask myself the simple question: from where do rights originate and for whom do they exist?
The Declaration of Independence states quite clearly that the rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness come from a higher authority and exist for everyone. Okay. Most people would agree on the first count: you have the right to life unless you do something awful enough to forfeit it. Now people will define "life" differently and have different ideas on what might cause forfeiture, but there's general consensus to an extend. For example, most people do not consider shoplifting as forfeiting right to life. Same thing goes for liberty, with more nuanced ideas about what causes forfeiture. Pursuit of happiness... I don't have a 100% firm grasp on what good ol' TJ meant by this, so I'm going to leave it for a moment.
We recognize rights outside those three. Freedom of speech, assembly, religion; the right to a speedy trial; freedom from torture; racial, gender, etc non-discrimination. Here, it's less clear where they originate. God? The government? The UN? Common consensus?
I started asking these questions in relation to my immigration courses, because of the related question: Who holds these rights? Citizens? Human beings? Resident aliens? Native-born citizens? Adults? People?
I found myself asking the same questions about social rights in a different contexts. Unlike the political and human rights listed above, social rights are more disputed in US society. Do we have a right to health care? It's a hot debate. What about an education? I would argue that we more or less recognize the right to an education. Hence, all these public schools.
Working at a school filled with children from low-income homes, the question of who holds the right to an education becomes crucial. Enrollment in the school depends on payments; payments depend on Mama and Daddy. Success in school depends on regular attendance. Transportation to and from school depends on Mama and Daddy. In getting ready for the school year, I kept thinking about a hypothetical child who wants this education very badly, but whose parents don't put in the same effort.
Who has the right to an education? The parent, or the child? Especially when it comes to scholarship money -- who should be awarded the scholarship and given the responsibilities necessary to maintain it? Does this change public versus private? (We're a "Catholic" school.)
(On a slight side note, this pertains to the question of immigration a little too -- should we care about a child's parents to enroll the child in school? Should there even be a question of "do the children of undocumented workers get to attend public school?)
It's interesting that you are writing about these three things: life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Essentially, these "self evident truths" were the foundation of my final paper for the history class I took this summer. I have been thinking a lot about these things. I will try to send you an email later this week discussing some of the "discoveries" I made while mulling over these things.
ReplyDelete