Obama Changes Declaration of Independence

During a speech to the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, Obama modifies the Declaration Of Independence” in an obvious attempt to strike God from his speech. At about 21:40 into the speech embedded below, Obama states that we are held together by our fidelity to our shared values. He then goes on to quote the Declaration Of Independence while omitting “Creator.”

The first upsetting item in the speech is that Obama believes we are held together by fidelity to shared values and not to the fidelity to the Constitution. America is a pluralistic nation and we do not all share the same values. I can tell you that I do not share the same values as Obama. The second upsetting item is that he purposefully and willingly modified our Declaration of Independence. This is not an off the cuff speech.

The abridgement was no accident, but rather the corruption of American political thought, beginning in the early 19th century, and known as ‘progressivism.’ Our President subscribes to this view.

1. “The rights which [an individual] possesses are…conferred upon him, not by his Creator, but rather by the society to which he belongs. What they are is to be determined by the legislative authority in view of the needs of that society. Social expediency, rather than natural right, is thus to determine the sphere of individual freedom of action.” The Claremont Institute – Leaving the Constitution

2. Wilson: “No doubt a lot of nonsense has been talked about the inalienable rights of the individual, and a great deal that was mere vague sentiment and pleasing speculation has been put forward as fundamental principle.” Woodrow Wilson: ‘Men are as clay in the hands of a consummate leader.?

3. Roosevelt, in his “New Nationalism” speech ” …maintains that every man holds his property subject to the general right of the community to regulate its use to whatever degree the public welfare may require it.” New Nationalism Speech by Theodore Roosevelt
Based on this view, there are no Creator-endowed inalienable rights.

One can see, of course, that one view values the individual, while the other, the collective.