Essay 3, Declaration of Independence — Unalienable Rights: Liberty, Life, and the Pursuit of Fulfillment

Before proceeding into this third essay, some personal reflections so far about this series. The first two essays generated many positive and supportive reader comments and with full transparency, one note of disappointment combined with a challenge.

The reader, a very good friend of mine who knows me well, thought it was too “academic” in style and content and he had difficulty seeing “me” in it. In response, I look at the academic approach as a personal and effective stylistic choice primarily due to the key sourcing of the content being AI generated which I also have been fully transparent about.

Several other readers were profoundly moved by these essays and there will always be some differences of opinion which I am grateful for and encourage knowing about since they provide opportunities for further understanding.

As far as my friends’ suggestion of seeing more of my heart in these essays, I plan on writing a preamble of sorts beginning as I am with this essay and continuing with future ones. My monthly email which this is attached to also adds some personal touches.

In another unrelated essay I wrote and posted last December titled ‘Change — A Personal Story of Transformation’ (see https://www.wewynneauthor.com/2024/12/24/change-a-personal-story-of-transformation/), I wrote the following:

‘So, who are the visible and invisible prophets or messengers, in my life who could possibly be considered “spirituality of change” influencers? They may not even be people … but things, circumstances, or events that provide conscious and subconscious messaging and whispers.’

Douglass, King, and Hughes are three examples of “messengers” in my life whose whispers resonate loudly in my social and racial justice work. Through listening to voices such as these, their whispers have introduced me to many hew friends and colleagues, including my commentator friend.

In closing, I offer a quote (and a “whisper”!) from another document he shared with me that I think profoundly relates to this essay as well as the entire series:

“Once again, as the U.S. and NY State celebrate the history of the Erie Canal, Indigenous perspectives and narratives are completely ignored. The education of our nation’s TRUE history remains our biggest challenge. May we, as allies, strengthen our kinship with the Seneca People – “Keepers of the Western Door “ – and move from good intention into ACTION. May we bring truth to our history. May we challenge dominant thinking. May we learn to live in harmony with one another and with the earth, the sea and sky. May this be our path forward.”

With knowledge of our true history under threat, ALL of history’s truths must be preserved!

I. Introduction: Rights That Cannot Be Taken Away

In the second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence—just after the claim that “all men are created equal”—comes a phrase that echoes through centuries:

“… they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

This line completes the opening triad of the American Creed: equality, rights, and self-government. Together, they form the philosophical architecture of American democracy. The idea of unalienable rights—those that cannot be given away or justly taken—asserts a radical proposition: that human dignity does not depend on law or king or wealth or birth, but is inherent.

This concept was not invented in 1776. It drew from centuries of moral, religious, and philosophical thought. Yet its placement at the center of the nation’s founding document made it a political principle, not just a moral one.

But just as with the Declaration’s claim to equality, its affirmation of rights was marked by deep contradiction. In 1776, the very men who insisted on the universality of unalienable rights systematically denied those rights to others. Enslaved people had no rights. Indigenous peoples’ rights were unrecognized. Women were excluded from civil participation.

This essay explores the principle of unalienable rights as both foundational and aspirational. We will see how Douglass, King, and Hughes each responded to this language—sometimes invoking it, sometimes interrogating it, always pushing it toward a more inclusive and truthful meaning.

II. The Enlightenment Roots of Unalienable Rights

The Declaration’s idea of rights comes from the Enlightenment tradition—especially the writings of John Locke. Locke argued that people possess natural rights simply by virtue of being human. These include:

• Life: the right to live and not be harmed arbitrarily.
• Liberty: the right to act and think freely within the bounds of others’ rights.
• Property: the right to the fruits of one’s labor.

Jefferson substituted “pursuit of happiness” for Locke’s “property,” adding a broader moral and emotional dimension. The pursuit of happiness implied not just wealth or safety, but the opportunity to fulfill one’s potential.

To declare such rights as unalienable meant that no government could rightfully infringe them. They preceded government and justified it. When governments violated these rights, the Declaration said, the people had a duty to resist.

This theory of rights was revolutionary in the 18th century. But it was applied selectively. In practice, the founders designed a government that recognized unalienable rights for the few, while denying them to the many.

III. Whose Rights? The Contradictions of Founding

If unalienable rights are self-evident, then the glaring question in 1776—and now—is: Whose rights are we talking about?

The answer, at the time, was clear and exclusionary:

• White, male, property-owning citizens were seen as rights-bearing individuals.
• Enslaved Africans were seen as property, not persons.
• Native peoples were treated as obstacles to be removed, not communities with rights.
• Women were excluded from political participation and legal independence.

The claim to rights was wrapped in a hierarchy of race, class, and gender.

This tension—between the universality of the language and the specificity of its application—set the stage for centuries of struggle. From the beginning, the idea of unalienable rights was as much a challenge as a declaration.

IV. Frederick Douglass: The Rights of the Enslaved

Few figures have more powerfully exposed the hypocrisy of America’s rights-talk than Frederick Douglass.

As a formerly enslaved person, Douglass knew what it meant to be systematically denied every unalienable right the Declaration claimed to protect. In his 1852 speech “What to the Slave is the Fourth of July?”, he ripped apart the illusion that America was a land of liberty:

“You boast of your love of liberty, your superior civilization… your sympathy with the oppressed. Yet you hold slaves!”

Douglass insisted that enslaved people were fully human and therefore inherently entitled to the same rights proclaimed by the Founders. Their bondage was not only immoral but a contradiction of the nation’s most sacred text.

“Am I to argue that it is wrong to make men brutes, to rob them of their liberty, to work them without wages?”

Douglass rejected the notion that the rights enshrined in the Declaration belonged only to some. His argument was simple and devastating: either America must abandon its creed or make it true for all.

He called the Constitution a “glorious liberty document” not because it was perfect, but because it could be interpreted in light of the Declaration’s ideals. For Douglass, rights were real only when enforced—but they could never be morally denied.

V. Martin Luther King Jr.: Rights and the Architecture of Justice

A century later, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. approached the idea of unalienable rights through the lens of civil and human rights. In his “I Have a Dream” speech, he described the Declaration and Constitution as a “promissory note” to all Americans—a check marked “insufficient funds” when presented by Black citizens.

“We refuse to believe that the bank of justice is bankrupt. … So we have come to cash this check.”

This metaphor captured King’s view: the rights proclaimed in 1776 must be honored in practice—not merely declared.

King’s activism was based on the conviction that rights are not granted by governments, but recognized by them. Civil rights legislation was necessary not to create rights, but to protect rights that were already unalienable.

He believed that when government failed to protect life, liberty, and dignity, the people had a moral responsibility to resist—nonviolently but forcefully.

In his “Letter from Birmingham Jail,” King answered critics who claimed he was disrupting order. He replied that injustice itself was disorder:

“We know through painful experience that freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed.”

For King, unalienable rights included not only legal freedoms but also the right to education, employment, health care, and dignity. He expanded the scope of what life, liberty, and happiness meant in a modern society.

VI. Langston Hughes: Rights Denied, Dreams Deferred

Langston Hughes viewed the American promise of rights with a poet’s sensitivity to contradiction. In “Let America Be America Again,” he speaks from the voice of those to whom unalienable rights have always been theoretical:

“There’s never been equality for me,

Nor freedom in this ‘homeland of the free.’”

Hughes does not speak abstractly. He names the violated rights of farmers, workers, immigrants, Black Americans, and the poor. His poems are filled with longing—not for a new country, but for the true America that has never yet been.

In “Harlem,” Hughes asks:

“What happens to a dream deferred?

Does it dry up like a raisin in the sun? …

Or does it explode?”

Here, the unalienable rights become dreams delayed and distorted. Hughes warns that rights denied for too long result in despair, rage, or rebellion.

Yet he always returns to hope:

“O, yes,

I say it plain,

America never was America to me,

And yet I swear this oath—

America will be!”

For Hughes, as for Douglass and King, rights are not just legal entitlements. They are the moral measure of a society’s soul.

VII. Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness: What Do They Mean Today?

Each of the three rights named in the Declaration deserves closer scrutiny:

1. Life

The right to life goes beyond mere survival. It implies safety, dignity, and the absence of violence. In a nation with vast disparities in health, mortality, and exposure to violence, this right remains elusive for many. Police killings, environmental racism, and preventable deaths due to poverty all challenge the claim to life as an unalienable right.

2. Liberty

Liberty means freedom from tyranny—but also freedom to live. True liberty is undermined by incarceration, surveillance, voter suppression, and the criminalization of poverty.

King warned against a shallow freedom that leaves people technically free but structurally constrained. Hughes understood that liberty without justice is a lie.

3. The Pursuit of Happiness

Jefferson’s replacement of “property” with “pursuit of happiness” widened the moral frame. It suggests not only security but the freedom to become, to grow, to flourish. It demands access to education, meaningful work, culture, and care.

In today’s world, this right is contested in debates over housing, wages, health care, and student debt.

VIII. Rights as Struggle, Not Gift

What Douglass, King, and Hughes all understood is this: rights are not handed down by benevolent rulers. They are claimed.

The history of American rights is the history of struggle:

• Abolitionists
• Suffragettes
• Labor organizers
• Civil rights workers
• LGBTQ+ advocates
• Immigrant defenders
• Native tribal champions

Each group had to fight to be recognized as bearers of unalienable rights. This struggle continues, especially in moments of backlash or retrenchment.

IX. The Fragility and Power of the Ideal

The idea of unalienable rights remains both powerful and fragile.

It is powerful because it affirms universal human dignity. It is fragile because it has been so often betrayed.

Yet as King said, the arc of the moral universe bends toward justice—if we pull it. The idea that everyone has a right to life, liberty, and happiness is a promise that demands action. It is not a guarantee; it is a call.

X. Conclusion: Making Rights Real

The Declaration of Independence proclaims that human beings possess rights that are unalienable—that no government can justly take away.

But history has shown that rights must be:

• Named
• Claimed
• Fought for
• Protected

Frederick Douglass demanded that a nation built on liberty abolish slavery. Martin Luther King Jr. demanded that civil rights be honored as human rights. Langston Hughes demanded that the American promise be fulfilled for the poor and the dispossessed.

All three understood: the Declaration is only as good as our willingness to make its words true.

Unalienable rights are not just ideals. They are moral obligations—on citizens, on governments, and on each generation. They ask:

• Who has life?
• Who has liberty?
• Who gets to pursue happiness?

The answers to these questions define who we are as a nation.

And they determine who we might still become.

Share post: