Have we misunderstood the Declaration of Independence? Princeton professor claims

[mystery-ak]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3674425/Have-misunderstood-Declaration-Independence-extra-period-historic-document-change-understanding-role-government.html#ixzz4DVLlGI1b

Have we misunderstood the Declaration of Independence? Princeton professor claims rogue period in official transcript DOESN'T appear on original - and massively changes our understanding of government's role

    'Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness' is often followed by a period
    That separates it from the next line about the institution of government
    And that implies government is less important than 'unalienable rights'
    Historian Danielle Allen says the period after 'Happiness' shouldn't be there
    If so, government could have been regarded as important as those rights
    Allen looked at more than 70 versions of the Declaration of Independence
    The original document may now be re-examined to see if she's right

By James Wilkinson For Dailymail.com

Published: 19:24 EST, 4 July 2016 | Updated: 23:25 EST, 4 July 2016

Has America spent the last few hundred years misunderstanding the Declaration of Independence? That's what Danielle Allen, a professor at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, NJ, believes.

According to Allen, the paragraph beginning 'We hold these truths to be self-evident' has been misinterpreted thanks to a rogue period that was not in the original document.

And that could completely transform our understanding of how the Founding Fathers viewed the role of government, The New York Times reported.

more

[driftdiver]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3674425/Have-misunderstood-Declaration-Independence-extra-period-historic-document-change-understanding-role-government.html#ixzz4DVLlGI1b

Have we misunderstood the Declaration of Independence? Princeton professor claims rogue period in official transcript DOESN'T appear on original - and massively changes our understanding of government's role

    'Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness' is often followed by a period
    That separates it from the next line about the institution of government
    And that implies government is less important than 'unalienable rights'
    Historian Danielle Allen says the period after 'Happiness' shouldn't be there
    If so, government could have been regarded as important as those rights
    Allen looked at more than 70 versions of the Declaration of Independence
    The original document may now be re-examined to see if she's right

By James Wilkinson For Dailymail.com

Published: 19:24 EST, 4 July 2016 | Updated: 23:25 EST, 4 July 2016

Has America spent the last few hundred years misunderstanding the Declaration of Independence? That's what Danielle Allen, a professor at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, NJ, believes.

According to Allen, the paragraph beginning 'We hold these truths to be self-evident' has been misinterpreted thanks to a rogue period that was not in the original document.

And that could completely transform our understanding of how the Founding Fathers viewed the role of government, The New York Times reported.

more

Yes lets ignore ALL of the other writings from our Founding Fathers and base our decision of their intent on this suspect period.

[EC]

The Declaration of Independence is written in clear, plain English. The only ones who can possibly misunderstand it are lawyers and professors.

[andy58-in-nh]

The Founders' understanding of the document they crafted was informed by years of having studied the works of such men as Edmund Burke and Adam Smith, as well as Biblical and Classical sources for the philosophical underpinnings of the Rights of Man.

Additionally, John Jay, James Madison, Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson all wrote extensively not only about the basis of human liberty, but of the foundational authority of government, the limits of its powers, and of its proper relationship to the people.

Anyone with the title of "professor" ought to be at least generally aware of the history upon which they seek to comment, as opposed to indulging in the dishonest modern practice of "deconstructing" language and history in the pursuit of nakedly political preferences and conclusions. 

But such is not the world we now inhabit, where anti-intellectualism pretends to be its opposite, while seeking to employ power in and out of government to silence all dissent.

[geronl]

The Professor is a moron. The founders wrote a LOT about that subject and their views are in no way misunderstood.