As we approach the end of our semester, I find myself pondering the words that Thomas Jefferson penned in the Declaration of Independence. Borrowing his ideas from John Locke, Jefferson asserted that all people were born with three unalienable rights—“life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”. The establishment and protection of these three rights became the primary objective of both our political and economic systems. It was, in fact, no coincidence, that the same people who declared their independence from Britain and set up a democratic government also embraced the writings of Adam Smith—the father of capitalism—who had published in 1776 his book entitled The Wealth of Nations. Of those three rights, the most intriguing to me is Jefferson’s idea of the “pursuit of happiness”—not property, as John Locke had written in his Treatise on Government. As the American democratic political system and capitalist economic system evolved, many came to believe that Jefferson’s idea of pursuing happiness was nearly synonymous with Locke’s principle of property rights. After all, didn’t Adam Smith state that capitalism was a free market economic system rooted in private property and self-interest? In order for an economy to flourish, Smith advocated for a limited government—laissez-faire were his words—to insure government would keep its hands off our economic pursuits. If left alone, Smith argued that the “invisible hand” would self-regulate the economy and would enable citizens to pursue their happiness by acquiring wealth, profit, and property. This “profit motive” would be the engine that drove the capitalist economy. So it seemed logical that Jefferson’s “pursuit of happiness” was just another way of saying that citizens should be free to pursue that “American Dream” and acquire property and material possessions. Did Jefferson believe that that the pursuit of happiness was found in the acquisition of property? Did our founding fathers establish a Constitution to reinforce such a principle? I don’t think so.
I believe that Jefferson and our other founding fathers would have taken exception to some of Smith’s ideas of “limited government”. Smith felt that the only legitimate role of government was to provide for the national defense, establishment of a national currency, protection of patents and copyrights, and the construction of roads and bridges. In these roles, government would need few tax dollars and would mostly exist to protect our individual pursuit of happiness (property). If our founding fathers supported such ideals, why did they reject the Articles of Confederation and replace it with a Constitution that clearly strengthened the national government? The founding fathers witnessed the near collapse of our fledgling nation under the Articles of Confederation. That government had allowed so much liberty and pursuit of happiness, that chaos like Shays’s Rebellion had become all too commonplace. So a Constitution was written that gave the national government the power of the sword (military) and the purse (the ability to tax). On top of that, the writers of the Constitution included an “elastic clause” which gave the national government the authority to “stretch “its powers to fulfill its constitutional responsibilities. Some of those responsibilities are found in the Preamble. Our founding fathers stated that two of the purposes of our national Constitution were to “insure domestic tranquility” and “promote the general welfare”. Applying the elastic clause to these principles, the implications of the government’s role in our pursuit of happiness is obvious. There seems no doubt that our Constitution rejects the idea of laissez-faire. Our founding fathers empowered the government to intercede on our behalf to protect our pursuit of happiness. How does the government play a role in our pursuits of happiness? The fourteenth amendment to the Constitution was added to insure that all citizens would be guaranteed “equal protection under the law”. The government cannot sit idly by while corporations mistreat workers, gouge consumers, wreck the environment, and produce faulty products. Government must insure that one person’s pursuit of happiness does not prevent another from attaining his/her own happiness. In the end government must serve as some sort of social conscience. It must discourage selfish, destructive pursuit of materialism which is eroding away our national spirit. Government must encourage social responsibility and promote the common good. If government can do these things Americans might be re-discover their own humanity and remember that true happiness is not rooted in property, it is found in community. That is what I believe Jefferson meant by the pursuit of happiness. That happiness cannot be just for some. It cannot be a selfish, personal pursuit. It must be a collective, national pursuit that will serve to strengthen our American identity.
77 comments:
I think that the government needs to do a better job in assuring us that we have the right to "pursuit of happiness" or property. With all of the issues going on with the economy all the government has done is focus on getting money from the people and have forgotten that we as well are going through this hard economic time and need the money just as well to provide for ourselves and our families. It seems that what our founding fathers have fought for us to have is being forgotten by those who are leading us today and should stand as a symbol for our founding fathers.
In what way? Do you agree or disagree about what the pursuit of happiness means? Is it property or is it more about the common good?
I think the idea of pursuing happiness was more focused about the common good. The pursuit of happiness wasn't meant for Americans to become selfish and greedy, but to pursue our own dreams while benefiting others around us. We should do what is in our best interest, but at the same time we should not cheat others or steal their joy. If everybody thought this way about the pursuit of happiness, I think our economy would be in a better position than it is today.
The pursing of happiness I believe is both the common good and your own self interest. I believe thomas jeffereson stated his commit like he did and in that order because of how important the ideas are. Without life you cannot have liberty and with out liberty you cannot have the pursit of happines. So we owe our ablity to pursue happiness to life and liberty. Based on those two ideas you must pursue your happines because life and liberty was given to you as a right for you to behold. In the end I believe we behold this right because we were given life and liberty in order to either benfit the common good or your own self interest. Based on your freedom given to us by our founding fathers we are allowed to believe under what cirumstance these rights were given to us. Based on what you believe which is your right under the constitution you are able to choose how you want to use this freedom. In conclusion I believe this is what thomas jefferson believed about the pursit of happines: it is yours to do what you want with it. Expaination: don't take this the wrong way I do not in any way shape or form believe that you can do absolutly anything with the pursuit of happiness such as do crimnal acts. but I believe when Jefferson said what he said what he said he knew that government was their to regulate to what extreme you can do what with it.
And when the private pursuit infringes on another's happiness then the government can stop that pursuit?
the pursuit of happiness really means what it says, the pursuit, only the people that strive to pursue happiness will obtain it even though they may fail but this teaches the people to stay strong and the ones that fail and keep trying to pursue their happiness are the ones that deserve hapiness. I also believe that they shouldn't of seperated the Articles of Confederation completely, but i do disagree with some of its rules. I think they should of merged some of the bills into the constitution but i understand why it was seperated.
i believe that the pursuit of happiness was meant for someone to be able to do what they want and have freedom over their life without much government intail. i think that it means you can decide how you want to live and what you want to do in life but i think with this also comes responsibility of dealing with the consequence of what you decide whether good or bad. If you decide not to work and thats your "pursuit of happiness" well then you deal with not having what you may want and what you do need. i think another thing that goes along well with "pursuit of happiness" is the quote shoot for the moon cause even if you miss you will land among the stars if you try your hardest and you want your pursuit of happiness bad enough you can achieve it!! so i think we should keep shooting for the pursuits which make us happy!! i kinda agree and disagree i agree that the community means alot and your decision could help that but i disagree because i think you should do what you want! :)
So as members of the American society--what do we owe each other? SGFVS, think how your personal convictions have taught you to answer this question. Knowing what you aspire to do with your life, don't you think your answers contadict your core beliefs?
I think we should be able to have the right to "pursue our happiness" I think the government should back off a little for citizens to be able to choose what they want to do and see where it takes them. It was created to give people a chance to acheive their dreams not take it for granted.
Did I say anything differently? I am just against personal pursuit without regard to community. You didn't really address that issue.
Well I do think you should put people before yourself. Helping others leads to good things for yourself. However, if there is something that you must close yourself off from the world comes along to make you better I think you should go for it. If you didn't there would be the "what ifs" in your mind. Then, if what closed you off turns into something great you can share it with the community. I think the personal pursit of happiness can lead to a community's pursuit of happiness.
Its clear to every citizen that even the earliest form of our government desired freedom to pursue happiness. But to what extent?
The foundation of the United States was not intended to be the foundation of a utopia, so we cannot try to have the government step into every little dispute. However, creating a RELATIVELY fair society for all sounds to me like democracy. Basically, I'm trying to say that government regulation of certain industries and pursuits of personal happiness is conditionally permissible. It all depends on the situation.
I feel like our government is more focused on issues in our economy rather than the "pursuit of happiness" of the people in our country. I agree in some ways that the government should set limitations so people don't go completly over board, but I also feel like we the people should have the right to do as we please. I think that the base of America has been built on the pursuit of happiness, allowing us to be a free and independent natation.
Personal pursuit is what makes people strive to do things even though they dont have good intentions for their action and saying that doesnt mean I am for it what it means is that our society today is only looking out for themselves and not considering that every action has an affect on another person. I believe that people in society should do what they want to do for the people that they need in their life
i agree with fox news because everyone does what it takes to make them happy whether its short or long term happiness they are trying to achieve. When we watched the Pursuit of Happiness we saw that will smith was trying his hardest make a good life for him and his son. For a while he failed at providing and this shows that its only a pursuit; there is never a guarantee you will achieve happiness.
If you're pursuing your own happiness, it shouldn't get in the way of others' pursuits. I totally agree. If government wasnt here to regulate the corporations or have the constitution to tell that we all are equally protected, America would be torn into shreds! So i do think government should be in on what we do but not to the extent of a communist government.
I feel that it is a human right to be able to pursue happiness. Whether or not you attain that happiness may not completely depend on you because of certain circumstances that are out of your hands. Everyone also has a different vision of what "happiness" is. The American Dream isn't happiness for everyone. Everyone is pursuing a different kind of happiness, and we all have that right. The government is in place to assure it is possible for us to attain happiness and to try to provide fairness. Government should not impose on our right to pursue happiness, they should help us.
Personal pursuit is what makes people strive to do things even though they dont have good intentions for their action and saying that doesnt mean I am for it what it means is that our society today is only looking out for themselves and not considering that every action has an affect on another person. I believe that people in society should do what they want to do for the people that they need in their life
I feel everyone should pursure happiness in ways that fits them, but i agree with you that they shouldn't pursue it in the way big cooporations do. By under paying workers or goin to other countries and using sweatshops and paying them a penny a hour. They should pursue there happiness in a unselfish way.
I disagree with what colleen says because its not the governments job to provide us happiness. If it was then this wouldn't be a democratic, free nation. Also the government is taking all the money we have like colleen was suggesting, its almost the opposite. they have provided us with several programs to give us money so we can spend it and stimulate the economy; like cash for clunkers.
In my opinion, the goverment shouldnt be involved with Americans trying to "pursue their happiness" because with the goverment being involved, they still have some what power and control over what we do. Freedom does have a role in the pursuit of happiness but if your freedom means something of wrong doing , then thats when the goverment can and will step in. Only the people who work and strive for happiness will earn it in the long run. My pursuit of happiness at the end of the day is to run track and I wouldnt want anybody or the goverment telling me I cant do it.
I diagree with Collen. I believe the goverment has set up programs so people can pursue there happiness; like social security and welfare. The goverment has been trying there best to get us out of the deficit so everyone can pursue there happiness
Fox news--is personal pursuit of happiness ok if greed (like the BP oil spill) endangers society? How/when should government intervene? Do you value more self or community?
i believe that the persuit of happiness is a good way to seek our dreams but we think of this as a national problem that people take each others happiness but we have to look at the amount of competency that goes on in our country. we cannot all have great jobs and live a wealthy life because of all this competency. but look at the whole world do u think that an indian child working in a factory getting a few dollars a week is happy doing what they do we arent just hurting ourselves with all this cometency we are hurting people around the world.
I agree and disagree with Fox News. . .Yes , people do think about themselves in society because they are living for their own interests and looking out for themselves but then again, event though all of America doesnt know each other, we have to still look out for each other in the economy. I would like to get out of this recession that we are STILL in right now and by doing that people have to have their pursuit of happiness and still have the pursuit of the economy to make it better.
I think that since we have the right to pursue our happiness, why does the government still get in the way? It's our freedom to do what we would like, but I see that the government can step in to an extent. Stated by Thomas Jefferson we have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. But without life we cannot have liberty, and without liberty we cannot have the pursuit of happiness. So we should be able to pursue our happiness how we would like.
I believe in a happy medium between government controll and economic freedom. More hands off government means more of an incentive to peruse your dreams and be the best. Government controll is needed to step in when companys or people start infringing upon other peoples rights. If not though they should let people be driven by the invisbible hand. America needs to protect everyone in the country, i beilive that our welfare system has some problems but it is our job to help the poor. I prefer persuing my happiness by myslef and not having the government give it to me. No government control would lead to chaos but to much would take away our freedom.
I absolutely agree with what Mr. Brown said about the government should be discouraging the wrongful acts people put on one another. Every citizen has the right to the "pursuit of happiness", whatever that may be for you. But, that doesn't mean you have the right to mistreat or put down others. You must pursue your happiness in a way that benefits you, and others. People need to stop being selfish, the government needs to promote the common good, and our economy/ country will be a better place.
i think that britty is right about what the purpose of the pursuit of happiness was for the good of the whole country not just on single person. but people are full of greed that blinds them from seeing what they are doing to the whole country. some people have enough money to start bussinesses this would creat jobs that would help improove the economy of the country but more importantly it would help the people that are going through harsh times and improove their living conditions. but instead they keep their money to themselves but there is nothing wrong with that although that shows the little interest of the people in making this nation a better nation economicly.
I also agree with Emily and Mr. Brown. I think that people should not try so hard to benefit themselves that they hurt others. Since we are all living in this country together we should automatically try to help each other out and do whats best for everyone.
okay technically the pursuit of happiness is a common good thing. its isnt materialistic to me. Money cant buy happiness, since happiness is an emotion and not some plant you can grow from the ground. The pursuit of happiness is inside of you not what you can gain through wealth or through earning glory.
to what coachB said i think that when people pursue happiness then they worry more about the property then the common good. It seems to be that most people only care how they are doing in life and they do not always care about others
To me pursuit of happiness means doing the things that make you happy, achievinng your goals that make you feel like you did something with your life. However, some people do this by stepping on others to get themselves up the ladder. Personally having that on my mind, success would not feel earned,but easily acquired. It is up to people to judge their "happiness" and ask themselves who did I hurt in the process?
Well i agree with what Britty says, the pursuit of happiness is for the common good and wasnt made for American to become selfish and greedy. I believe that also that anyone and everyone should be able to pursue their own personal dreams
Many people believe the pursuit of happiness is all about the "American Dream". To me, I believe that the pursuit of happiness is based on the common good. Some who are regilious believe that God chose their route, and that even if that person is living on the street, they can still have their pursuit of happiness. Me on the other hand, I believe that the pursuit of happiness is based on family and living a well rounded life. Just like in the movie pursuit of happiness, Will Smith was not "happy" because he was about the get more money, but because he could now support his family and live a better life. He succeeded in something, and that's what counts. So clearly, the pursuit of happiness is based on the common good.
I looked back over the blog again and I really liked one of the last things it ended with, "true happiness is not rooted in property, it is found in community." We see people pursue money and materialistic things everyday, and when they get those things they worked for, they still say they are not happy... I think people are happier when they work together and try to help each other out. Doesn't it make you feel good when you have made somebody else feel good??? Its almost like Christmas, yes it is awesome to get gifts from other people, but I find it more awesome to watch my brothers get excited over the presents I have given them... Our government should encourage us and promote us to do the common good. If everybody's self interest was to pursue their own happiness while helping pursue each other's happiness, I think our society and economy would look a lot better than it is right now.
I am a firm believer in working for what you want and perusing your happiness freely, but I agree with Mr. Brown that government regulations are necessary. Our founding fathers had good intentions with the government they gave to us and I believe they had the people’s best interest in mind (unlike the British government that they felt was smothering, overbearing and selfish). In order for someone to have their best possible chance at obtaining the happiness they desire some assistance is necessary. A society aspiring happiness without guidelines would be like a hungry person looking for food; if the person didn’t have someone tell them that too much food or certain types of food were unhealthy there could be negative consequences. John Locke and Thomas Jefferson were on the right path with the idea of “perusing happiness” and the government is simply put in place to give everyone the best possible chance for happiness (what would we do without social security, the FDA, national defense and other government regulations??). As the invisible hand leads society by means of self interest, government guidelines simply keep that hand under control.
I think that the pursuit of happiness in the constitution is based on the ideas oh adam smith and john locke, but deal with an individuals rigth to live own property and feel comfortable with their possessions and life style. I beleive Jefferson was right to add those specific words and everything is limited by govenrment somewhat and the addition of persuit of happiness in the constition reinforced the freedom WE THE PEOPLE have!
Well the pursuit of happiness is a thing that is basically saying that we have the rights to seek it out. Many countries don't have this rights like we do to seek it. Many people don't want to work to get it they just want it to fall in there laps. What they need to know is that need to put hard work into trying to accomplish it. Just think what Chris Garner did he worked for the internship and got it in the end.
I believe that the pursuit of happiness is a good idea, if we use it in the right way. You can't just think about yourself and the things that you want, you have to think about what is good for the majority. The pursuit of happiness is meant for people to be able to do good and not to be selfish with their decisions. The decisions that we make effect the whole cournty in some way or another. the pursiut of happiness is a great tool just we have to use it wisely.
#1Dukeboy i agree completly with you it is an emotion that you can recieve by your won personal goals and not by how much money you have. But money could be someones goal and in that case would be their happiness.
I agree with Casya because I too believe that the government should back off, allowing people to make more of their own decisions to pursue their type of happiness. People have different expectations, which means their pursuit of happiness may be totally opposite from another person pursuit of happiness. No matter what though, a person's pursuit of happiness is always different, and can be succeeded if they shoot for it. :)
I agree with Fox News. If people truly want to be happy then they will pursue it. In my opinion pursuing my happiness is finishing high school, going to college, having a good successful job and a family. Yes, some people don't really have to do much to be rich and have everything they want but I don't think they're truly happy. I think this because you can't buy happiness. They may have alot of money but thats it, not a job that can help others and do good for your community. So to puruse your happiness I think you need to work hard for what you want and strive to get it.
I agree with bright pink bookmark. We need a good medium between the government control and the economic freedom that we have. the government needs some control but we also need that freedom to make our own desicions but for the good of everybody and not just yourself.
I think it's sad how some people try to pursue happiness but can never achieve happiness because of something that wasn't their choice. For an example, some people are born in poor families and can not do what they want to be happy. So basically some people have no chance in pursuing their goals and other people think it's their fault when it's not. What I'm trying to say is that government should be more involved. Even though they already help a lot with programs such as medicaid and protect people with the law so no one elses pursuit of happiness hurts someone else, I think they could do more to ensure a person can pursue happiness.(please disregard all gramatical errors =P)
I also agree with Rabbi's boy because the pursuit of happiness is something that you feel is important and is your goal. Your pursuit of happiness is not about what others want, it all about you and what is best for you. Sometimes society is less important than youself at that time.
I believe that pursuit of happiness comes from a person's own self-interest. People do whatever it takes to make themselves happy, but they shouldn't be greedy about it because that wasn't the main idea about pursuit of happiness. Selfishness can possibly keep another person from pursuing their happiness. I don't think the government should get in the way of that, though. I agree with 4x2*Track.Star. How would you like it, if you have the most amazing life and you're doing what you have always dreamed of, but the government tells you you can't kept doing it. In my opinion, that is ruining a persons happiness. The only time the government should step in, is when the person is doing wrong or committing a crime to pursue their happiness. Pursuit of happiness is a wonderful idea if the people use it in the right way, without being greedy.
I think government should stay out of induviduals pursuit of happiness because well there is way to many to keep track of and individual can not do as much damage to anyone as a corperation can. I think government should watch over corperations because they can do lots of damage and also their pursuit of happiness is to become extremly rich and they would step on people. The pursuit of happiness is the goal of people to do what ever they want so i think the puisuit of happiness is going to help society because if more people are happy then they are societ.
I agree with nolan, corperations can do a lot of damage. Corperations are only looking for one thing and that is making money and making their corperation well known. So therefore the government should watch out for them, not the people who are only wanting to pursue their happiness.
If the government decides to interfer to much within our political system, then it is obiviously going to take away some of are freedom, and thus potentially restricting someones pursuit of happiness. However if the government doesnt even "touch" the economy, then something might happen like what happened with the big bank CEO's, and just rip everyone off and not think about the common people, or the common good. So how much should the government be involved within our economy, and how would that affect our personal pursuit of happiness?
I would like to disagree with what mr. Nolan said. He said that the government should only interfer with corporations, not individuals. However the corporation is being ran by individuals so if the government does interfer with that particular corporation, then you are affecting those individuals purssuit of happiness. I believe if the government is going to interfer with the economy or such, then it should affect everyone, or no one, and not pick who, or what is going to be limited in pursuing his/her own self intrest, or happiness.
I agree with Nolan on this one because corporations corrupting others' pursuit of happiness. The government NEEDS to regulate corporations not individuals.
I think that if the government gets too involved in the economy, they will create more bad than good. When people have the freedom to choose what they want to do with their life, they have a better chance of being happy. When the government gets too involved in telling us how to live our lives, less people will be happy. I also agree with Shannon in that the government should be more concerned with corporations than individuals. Corporations are looking out for their best intrest so they can easily interfere with an individual's pursuit of happiness. The government should be more concerned with corporations than individuals.
Responding to J_Daugherty, I think that especially the part he mentioned about the economy, that if the the government was totally hands off in the affairs of the economy, then the outcome could be much worse then jus "ripping off" the common people. It could come to were the banks have become so powerful that they are buying investors off(more than they already are) to essentially control the entire economy.
I agree with nolan, but I also agree with Daugherty because there are people that just don't have the best of morals, so government should not only regulate corporations, but should enforce laws that ensure everyone is free to pursure their happiness while not hurting another person. The people are not perfect, there is always the side that does the worng thing. It is for that reason we have a government, to protect our freedom and ensure are safety.
I agree with your definition of the pursuit of happiness. you do not have a right to pursue your happiness if it means ruining someone elses. you can pursue your own happiness if it does not effect anyone elses. it is in the best interest to pursue your happiness byhelping the country in a whole.
I think that there is many different views on what happiness means. For some people it means to have a sucessful life and to be happy with what they have done. For others it means to be "better" than everyone else. It is important to remeber to not put other people down for what they have done. In society it works better if everyone works together rather than being worried about only themselves.
First of all I think pursuing happiness shouldn't be involved with obtaining material goods. It should be an ambition that really makes you happy and benefits the common good. Personally I think government shouldn't be involved with how you persue happiness because people telling you how to live is not true happiness, unless of course it is immoral and inhumane.
I think people need to stop, just think about what theyre asking for when they say people can do whatever they want since were "free". News flash we aren't completely free we have laws we must obey that are put in place for a reason. Ever been in a class with a substitute teacher? the teacher was the athority but now that she/he is gone the class does whatever they want. America without rules think about the creeps and unmoral people out there people would be able to molest children because it makes them happy. EW! GROSS! With freedom comes restrictions and once people take things to a point where it hurts or may harm someone it is not right.
I believe that everyone should have the right to pursue their own happiness however they choose unless, however, they are inflicting on anothers ability to pursue happiness. In the case that somebody is neglecting someone elses ablity to pursue happiness, the government should be allowed to step in, such as when corperations abuse their workers. I also believe that the government should not involve themselves unless it is absolutely neccisary. I belive too that John Locke meant you can purue happiness in a way that makes you happy; if that is aquiring property people should be aloud to do that and the government should protect it, not provide it no matter what.
It is mainly our rights to acquire property and material posession, "The Great American Dream" of becoming wealthy. That the constitution should safeguard every American their ability to a mass wealth, free enterprise for every American and making sure that they are enabled and protected. In this way, a wealthy American will create a wealthy nation, however, the government has the ability to tax, and have police power to protect each citizen and tax reasonably in order to maintain peace and for the government to perform its services to the people. This is why our government is so balanced and our society peaceful. In addition, pursuit of happiness also entails that the government should protect every citizen from being abused by big corporations.
(Colleen) I don't know what kind of assurance from the government she is asking. Every American have all the rights and is well protected by the Constitution to pursue happiness. It is now up to us to use every help for the government and mainly to use our talents and potentials to create material posessions and wealth. There is so much potential in all of us.
cvargas,
So you think property is happiness? Can people pursue selfish pursuits and not harm society in the process? I don't think so. We have tried the "trickle down" ideas of your "Great American Dreram"--they haven't worked.
I agree with your view Mr. Brown. The pursuit of happiness should be used as the best for the nation. We need to have a check and balance system to make sure that everything is fair for everybody. Our society should not be like the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. If we leave it to the citizens to make the decisions nothing will get done. Nobody can be satisfied. If one person makes one decision that decision will affect another person and a whole chain reaction will occur. The pursuit of happiness needs to create equality and unity and what's best for the nation, not what's best for an individual.
I'd have to disagree with what AshleyR said to a certain extent."When people have the freedom to choose what they want to do with their life, they have a better chance of being happy." The reason I have this perspective is that if some decisions are made by the people and it affects another person then how much freedom does that leave that other person? Not much. Referring back to what I said before about the chain reaction people are never satisfied so something wrong is always going to come up. The government needs to base its decisions on the best for the nation and not specific individuals. Our nation is about greed. We need to strike balance between being happy and being greedy. It's one thing to make choices in your pusuit of happiness but it's a different aspect if you affect someone else in a negative way. There needs to be fairness among all the clases of people (rich,poor, middle class)People can pursue being happy as long as it doesnt impinge on other's rights to reach the same dream.
I agree with your thoughts CoachB. Self-centered individuals working with others in a large group can cause numerous problems and obstacles for those who look at the bigger picture. Citizens need to put their selfish feelings aside if they wish to overcome an obstacle that affects all of them. However, this does not mean that we have to submit ourselves to a lower level of living. It simply motivates members of society to put forth a little more of their resources to the greater good. For some, this might be a challenge. But as for myself and others like me, I'm happy and satisfied as long as I have a roof over my head, the basic amenities, and my family.
i dont think property is happiness but i do think you can pursue youre own self intrests, even if they are a little selfish. i mean as long as you dont knowingly hurt one another. and i agree with cvargas that there is so much potential for all of us. we are all given the right to the PURSUIT of happiness. i dont think it's the governments job to help you just because you want them too. it nowhere in the constitution says that we are guaranteed happiness. we have to find it and make our own dreams come true.
and i agree with missy. she said that people have many different views of what happiness is. happiness is not always to be the richist person in america. maybe it's just like in the movie "the pursuit of happiness" to have a better life. i think this may be a lot of people's view of happiness; to be able to provide for everyone in their family and take care of everyone's needs. but to some people happiness may mean living like a king or queen, everyone has a different view.
The founding fathers wanted Americans to have the right to persue happiness including financial but not at the expense of others. Without government regulations corrupt people and corporations would abuse others to persue material posessions and wealth. We already have this problem with regulations in place.
I agree with Fox News in that the persuit of happiness is what motivates people to keep working to persue their dreams. People can forget their values when they are in the midst of chasing their dreams. The end doesn't always justify the means. Property and material posessions don't equal happiness.
I believe the government does need to back off and allow us to pursue our happiness as long as we dont interfere with others. But we should be able to do whatever we want to pursue our happiness. At the same time though we do need to keep the idea of for the common good in our heads and not get selfish.
I disagree with colleen because its not the govt's job to provide us happiness thats what our job to do. for most people pursuing happiness is what motivates them to do stuff and thats not the govts choice thats ours.
knzfan4ever--how does that happen? "keep it our heads to not be greedy"? Good luck. Without an advocate on the side of all (the gove't), it won't happen.
i think thepursue our happiness really focus in what thein the three unalienable rights. i think has to do with common goods i think each unalienable right has
its reason to be there happiness is not bought buy money or thing you have to find your own happiness and i think those thing are the key to do it
fox news- i think you are totally right about what you are saying i think each person has a reason to look for the purse of happiness i think that it inspires people to be strong and to keep trying.
I disagree with knzfan4ever. Not everyone is going to think about the common good when they pursue their happiness. Thats why the government is necesarry and needs not to back off. Maybe in some parts of our economy the government is strict and has to many restrictions, but what I think they should do is try to help the people who cant achieve what they want more effectivly.
Mr. Brown,
My mom sent me the letter to the editor of the N&O that you wrote about John Tedesco. I didn't know if you had seen a letter I wrote to the editor of the N&O a few years back while I was living in D.C. but it echoed a similar sentiment. I will try to find a copy and email it to you. When I got her email, I looked you up on the FVHS website and came across this blog. This is fantastic! I'm a second year law student (didn't get Teach for America) at Tulane. I think your discussion on the 10th Amendment is fascinating and something that even the Justices are confused about (as we learned the hard way in first year Constitutional law). Your students are so fortunate to have this medium for communicating and expressing their civic opinions! As Justice Brennan said in Texas v. Johnson, having our ideas challenged helps us to develop our values. My sister will be a freshman at FVHS next fall and I hope you'll still be around. I will look for that article and send it to you.
Anastasia Caton
Post a Comment