As Independence Day 2025 faded into history, I stood in the backyard watching fireworks, recalling the words of Francis Scott Key as he stood on a British warship in the Baltimore Harbor watching their bombardment of Fort McHenry: “And the rockets’ red glare, the bombs bursting in air, gave proof through the night, that our flag was still there.” And 211 years later, the flag still flies, and the nation still stands.
This year’s celebrations launched the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, upcoming in 2026. We’ve been taught that the Declaration not only established American independence from Britain but also set forth, in eloquent terms, the self-evident truths of equality, unalienable rights, government by the consent of the governed, and resistance to tyranny.
The coming year will bring numerous conferences and special events focusing on the Declaration, its meaning, and its influence (I’ve already agreed to speak for five). As we study history and ponder its lessons, we can certainly gain valuable insights.
But there will be chaff among the wheat. The “hate-America” crowd, secularists, cultural Marxists, as well as some with nobler motives, will advance alternative interpretations of the Declaration. Unless we are well-informed and astute, their well-financed presentations may seem convincing, falling into two seemingly opposite categories.
First, we will be told that the Declaration is a reactionary, hypocritical document. It speaks of equality, but roughly a third of the 56 signers owned slaves. (True, some did, but many did not.) It speaks of unalienable rights, but denies those rights to slaves, Native Americans, and women. It speaks of consent of the governed, but only a privileged few were in positions to give consent. It spoke of resistance against tyranny, but for many, the new government was just as tyrannical as that of Britain. The Declaration, then, was a reactionary document of privileged, wealthy, white males to preserve their status at the expense of their countrymen.
Second, we will hear a seemingly opposite view that the Declaration’s framers were radical disciples of the Age of Reason, men of the so-called Enlightenment who revolted against monarchy, Christianity, and everything that smacked of the Old Order. They intended to create a new order for the ages in which property, aristocracy, religion, and all things familiar will be passe. We will then be free to indulge in all forms of “liberty” and “pursuit of happiness,” by which they mean every form of self-degrading vice that ultimately enslaves.
These two approaches seem opposite, but they have this in common: They both reject the Declaration for what it actually is according to its plain wording: a godly document setting forth in eloquent language the American philosophy of government. Let’s look at the actual meaning of that language.
First, it says we are entitled to independence by a higher law – “the laws of nature and of nature’s God.” It adds that “a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.”
Second, it declares the “self-evident” truth that “all men are created equal,” and that the only firm basis for equality is creation by a Higher Power. If we have resulted from an evolutionary process, what prevents the conclusion that some may have evolved faster or higher than others?
Third, it recognizes that “they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights,” and the only basis for truly unalienable rights is that they are endowed by a Higher Power than government. If the government is the source of rights, it can remove those rights, and unalienable rights become nothing but negotiable privileges.
Fourth, the Declaration appeals “to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions.” Once again, the Declaration recognizes that no action is justified if it is contrary to the Higher Law of God.
Fifth, they express “a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence.” The delegates knew that they could only succeed in the struggle with Britain, as well as in the even greater struggle of forming a new nation and government, with the help of God. “Except the Lord build the house, they labor in vain that build it.” (Psalm 127:1).
This is the philosophy of government set forth in the Declaration: God has created all of us in a state of equality; by His Higher Law he has given us unalienable human rights, delegating to mankind the authority to establish governments; and we the people retain the God-given right to alter or abolish those tyrannical governments that become destructive of those ends.
True, they didn’t fully practice these principles. But they sowed the seeds, and it remains for future generations to bring those seeds to full fruition.
During the coming year, let us carefully study the Declaration. Let us be open to new insights, consistent with the fundamental abiding principles that made the Declaration – and the nation founded through it – what it was and is.
And let us remember the words of Samuel Adams, often called the Father of American independence, upon the signing of the Declaration:
We have this day restored the Sovereign to Whom all men ought to be obedient. He reigns in heaven…. From the rising to the setting sun, may His kingdom come!
Colonel Eidsmoe serves as Professor of Constitutional Law for the Oak Brook College of Law & Government Policy (obcl.edu), as Senior Counsel for the Foundation for Moral Law (morallaw.org), and as pastor of Woodland Presbyterian Church of Notasulga, Alabama (woodlandpca.org). He may be contacted for speaking engagements at [email protected].
The views and opinions expressed here are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the policy or position of 1819 News. To comment, please send an email with your name and contact information to [email protected].
Don't miss out! Subscribe to our newsletter and get our top stories every weekday morning.
