President Obama Edits the Declaration of Independence

By Peter J. Colosi, Ph.D
10/25/2010
American Thinker (www.americanthinker.com/)

The recent speeches give powerful evidence that from the inauguration on, this has been deliberate and calculated

President Obama has taken to referencing the language of the Declaration of Independence while omitting key words. Although the practice has garnered attention of late, it dates back to the beginning of his presidency. In his inauguration speech, President Obama gave up "created," "Creator," and "Life." Is this true to our founding documents, or is it the work of a skilled rhetorician bent on the deconstruction of those documents by stealth? Dr. Peter Colosi argues that the President knew precisely what he was saying and that the failure to cite the entire passage was deliberate and calculated.

Notice that in President Obama's speech, the words 'created,' 'Creator,' and 'Life' are conspicuously missing. Why?

Facebook Delicous MySpace

Twitter Stumble Digg

More Destinations

WYNNEWOOD, PA (American Thinker) - President Obama has taken to referencing the language of the Declaration of Independence while omitting key words. Although the practice has garnered attention of late, it dates back to the beginning of his presidency.

An October 19 article at CNSnews by Penny Star noted that "For the second time in little over a month, President Barack Obama stripped the word 'Creator' from the Declaration of Independence when giving a speech." These speeches have generated much debate concerning whether the president's omissions were deliberate or mistaken.

The answer, I think, can be found in President Obama's inauguration speech, which is perhaps the most striking example of this phenomenon, yet no one seemed to notice it then.

Toward the beginning of President Obama's inauguration speech, he said,

"America has carried on not simply because of the skill or vision of those in high office, but because We the People have remained faithful to the ideals of our forebearers, and true to our founding documents".

A few paragraphs later, he said,

"The time has come to reaffirm our enduring spirit; to choose our better history; to carry forward that precious gift, that noble idea, passed on from generation to generation: the God-given promise that all are equal, all are free, and all deserve a chance to pursue their full measure of happiness".

These opening lines are obviously meant to remind the listener of the Declaration.

A little later, in the same speech, the president called on the Founding Fathers, the documents they wrote, and the ideals those documents contain. He said that we will not give up those ideals:

"Our Founding Fathers, faced with perils we can scarcely imagine, drafted a charter to assure the rule of law and the rights of man, a charter expanded by the blood of generations. Those ideals still light the world, and we will not give them up for expedience's sake."

But what does the Declaration actually say? It says this:

"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."

Notice that in President Obama's speech, the words "created," "Creator," and "Life" are conspicuously missing. Why?

Notice, also, how he utilized three terms: "equal," "free," and "happiness." He removed the term "Life" from the list of the three rights and then replaced it with the term "equal," which occurs earlier in the Declaration. By retaining three terms and by replacing "life" with another word from the same document -- namely, "equal" -- Obama succeeded in generating in the audience a vague recollection of the Declaration while at the same time rewriting it. With well-crafted sophistry, he did precisely what he said we would not do: he gave up the original ideals for expedience's sake.

To say "all are equal" is not to say "all are created equal." To say that there is a "God-given promise" is not to say that there is a self-evident truth that we are all endowed by our Creator with unalienable rights. To leave "Life" out of the list of rights, is, well, to delete the first term in the original list of three.

To paraphrase one of his recent predecessors, I wonder what President Obama's meaning of the word "all" is. By removing the term "Life," who, one wonders, is included in "all"?

In the very same speech, right under our noses, Obama said that we would not give up those ideals and then promptly gave them up. He did it in such a way that no one noticed. Why?

In his inauguration speech, President Obama gave up "created," "Creator," and "Life." Is this true to our founding documents, or is it the work of a skilled rhetorician bent on the deconstruction of those documents by stealth? Is it a deliberate attempt to take the opportunity of a presidential inauguration to make major headway at deconstructing the Declaration in the minds of people, or was he just waxing eloquent, but inexactly?

The recent speeches give powerful evidence that from the inauguration on, this has been deliberate and calculated.

-----

Peter J. Colosi is assistant professor of moral theology at St. Charles Borromeo Seminary in Wynnewood PA. This article first appeared in American Thinker.

- - -

American Thinker is a daily internet publication devoted to the thoughtful exploration of issues of importance to Americans. Contributors are accomplished in fields beyond journalism, and animated to write for the general public out of concern for the complex and morally significant questions on the national agenda. This article is used with permission.

Keywords: Obama, Declaration of Independence, Life, Liberty, Creator, God

NEWSLETTERS »

Rate This Article

Was this helpful to you? Very Helpful Somewhat Helpful Not Helpful at All

Would you be interested in more articles like this? Yes, I am Interested No, I am not Interested

Rate Article

1 - 10 of 48 Comments

Mary
2 years ago
No matter how much most of you try to deny it, Obama is alergic to God, the sanctity of life, the Institution of Marriage and the moral fibre of Society. That does not paint a picutre of a person who means well for your country. No doubt, my dear Americans, you will wake up to the reality of who exactly Obama is when it is too late.
Pam
2 years ago
The picture is there with the Cross. So the Obama-ites, will just have to live with a Religous reminder even when Obama tries to ignore it. The way history gets twisted no one can prove much anymore. Even the History channel does not dipict history accurately in many cases. When it comes to killing humans, Obama has 1.3 million baby deaths notched on his belt in just the USA in 2009 alone. - He will be ranked as one of the worst.
vance
2 years ago
Andy Holland, LOVE YOUR COMMENTS!!! Bulbajer, Grimes, Everett, you guys need to sit down, relax, and go have a tall cold glass of Liberal Kool-Aid. Obama needs to fire the guy that operates his teleprompter.
Bulbajer
2 years ago
Pam, Chris Columbus is not the best example of a Christian. Actually he is (unfortunately for him) one of the worst. He was not evil; rather, he was apathetic. And so he let thousandsupon thousands of Native Americans be slaughtered by his sailors.
Pam
2 years ago
Go into the Capitol Building in DC. In the domed lobby you will see a huge painting of Christopher Columbus with a Cross in the background, and another of an Indian being baptised. Read - "Original Intent -the Courts, the Constitution, & Religion" by David Barton.which includes documented references and the Constitution. True Christianity gets in Obama's way of his political ideology, and that of his main financers - atheist George Soros, Peter Lewis of Progressive Auto Insurance, Drummond Pike and Wade Rathke (formerly of ACORN) of TIDES, etc.
Nicholas
2 years ago
Meh, I don't see this as particularly important. It isn't like the Founding Fathers were super religious people. Many were deists. That was the stype of the speech of the times.

Besides, the truth of God, his relationship with human beings, etc. is not in any way helped or hindered by linking it to guys like John Hancock, et al.
Everett Mann
2 years ago
Andy,
"Dreams from my Father" means what exactly? That his father had dreams of not being under british rule? What exactly is wrong with that?

ALL AMERICANS ARE- or AT LEAST SHOULD BE- ANTI COLONIALISTS. We are the Colonists not the Colonialists. There is a difference.
Andy Holland
2 years ago
President Obama has the mindset of an African Colonialist, not an African American. His father was an African. Why do you think he wrote a book entitled, "Dreams from my Father"?
John D
2 years ago
All I can say is this: While Obama was a state senator in Illinois (and unknown on the national scene), he stood in the way of legislation (Born Alive Infant Protection Act) protecting infants that were accidentally born alive as the reult of botched late term aborions. On many occasions, babies defied the odds and were born alive instead of stillborn. These babies were discarded like trash. Obama heard the eyewitness testimony and refused to enact a law to stop this. And now we have people pooh poohing the fact that he left out the word "creator". Open your eyes. This man, as evidenced by his stubborn opposition to a common sense law intended to enforce basic human decency, opposes our most basic beliefs as Catholics. We should all be praying for this man!! Read about it here: http://www.jillstanek.com/archives/2008/02/links_to_barack.html
Sam
2 years ago
See "OBAMA'S COUNTERFEIT CATHOLICS" by RealCatholicTV on the internet. It also includes written documentation.

Prev12 3 4 5 Next

Comments submitted must be civil, remain on-topic and not violate any laws including copyright. We reserve the right to delete any comments which are abusive, inappropriate or not constructive to the discussion.

Though we invite robust discussion, we reserve the right to not publish any comment which denigrates the human person, undermines marriage and the family, or advocates for positions which openly oppose the teaching of the Catholic Church.

This is a supervised forum and the Editors of Catholic Online retain the right to direct it.

We also reserve the right to block any commenter for repeated violations. Your email address is required to post, but it will not be published on the site.

We ask that you NOT post your comment more than once. Catholic Online is growing and our ability to review all comments sometimes results in a delay in their publication.

Name *

Email *

Comment *

Send me important information from Catholic Online and it's partners. See Sample

Post Comment