5 ms·

"It is possible to commit no mistakes and still lose. That is not weakness, that is life." -Jean-Luc Picard Additionally, the Declaration of Independence stat

"It is possible to commit no mistakes and still lose. That is not weakness, that is life." -Jean-Luc Picard Additionally, the Declaration of Independence states our fundamental philosophy as a nation that all men are created equal. We all start from the same line, but where life takes us and what we make of it is completely up to life and us the individual.

galaxyLogic 2y ago
[flagged]
- skellington 2y ago
  It is commonly understood that 'men' in that context and in the context of the time is a reference to 'mankind' or 'the race of men' which means the human race, not males specifically.
  - StackRanker3000 2y ago
    So why weren’t women allowed to vote when those words were written?
    - Levitz 2y ago
      It's not as if every man was able to vote back then either. Property owners, of age, white. The story of universal suffrage isn't that clear cut.
      - StackRanker3000 2y ago
        So did the Founding Fathers actually believe that all human beings were created equal?
        gopher_space 2y ago
        I think like half of them did. The compromise over slavery cursed our nation.
        Levitz 2y ago
        If I was to say, yes. This is an opinion from someone that isn't even from the US, mind you, but given what I know about the constitution I do think it was the case. To this day, we generally don't allow people to vote in an election if they aren't a citizen yet I reckon we don't consider non-citizens lesser human beings. The idea of allowing only those with property to vote (because they have stake in the country) or to only allow men (they will be fighting the wars) are outdated, but they aren't nonsensical.
        skellington 2y ago
        You're being too reductive. There is no simple one sentence answer and the path to modern western liberal values spans 400-ish years. It wasn't really that long ago that all/most societies believed that slavery was normal. Just the IDEA that "all men are created equal" is intensely liberal. And that it was put into a document without qualifiers is miraculous. We can't judge the past only from a modern lens. YOU didn't do anything to help the world move towards liberal values. YOU are just the benefactor of thousands of years of conflict/learning/etc.
- Dalewyn 2y ago
  To copy myself from another sibling comment: Man as in mankind. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/man https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/man >1a(1): an individual human >b: the human race : HUMANKIND >c: a bipedal primate mammal (Homo sapiens) that is anatomically related to the great apes but distinguished especially by notable development of the brain with a resultant capacity for articulate (see ARTICULATE entry 1 sense 1a) speech and abstract reasoning, and is the sole living representative of the hominid family
- Cthulhu_ 2y ago
  Linguistic pedantry with strong sexist overtones said in bad faith. Come on.
- 4ndrewl 2y ago
  Literally (and I mean that) no difference when it was written. Language changed.
  - Dalewyn 2y ago
    >Language changed. I argue that it hasn't; we say "man" both by itself and as part of another word (eg: manpower) in many contexts where gender is literally irrelevant. What has changed is the likelihood of certain individuals engaging in sexism in the name of equality.

galaxyLogic 2y ago

[flagged]

skellington 2y ago
It is commonly understood that 'men' in that context and in the context of the time is a reference to 'mankind' or 'the race of men' which means the human race, not males specifically.
- StackRanker3000 2y ago
  So why weren’t women allowed to vote when those words were written?
  - Levitz 2y ago
    It's not as if every man was able to vote back then either. Property owners, of age, white. The story of universal suffrage isn't that clear cut.
    - StackRanker3000 2y ago
      So did the Founding Fathers actually believe that all human beings were created equal?
      - gopher_space 2y ago
        I think like half of them did. The compromise over slavery cursed our nation.
      - Levitz 2y ago
        If I was to say, yes. This is an opinion from someone that isn't even from the US, mind you, but given what I know about the constitution I do think it was the case. To this day, we generally don't allow people to vote in an election if they aren't a citizen yet I reckon we don't consider non-citizens lesser human beings. The idea of allowing only those with property to vote (because they have stake in the country) or to only allow men (they will be fighting the wars) are outdated, but they aren't nonsensical.
      - skellington 2y ago
        You're being too reductive. There is no simple one sentence answer and the path to modern western liberal values spans 400-ish years. It wasn't really that long ago that all/most societies believed that slavery was normal. Just the IDEA that "all men are created equal" is intensely liberal. And that it was put into a document without qualifiers is miraculous. We can't judge the past only from a modern lens. YOU didn't do anything to help the world move towards liberal values. YOU are just the benefactor of thousands of years of conflict/learning/etc.
Dalewyn 2y ago
To copy myself from another sibling comment: Man as in mankind. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/man https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/man >1a(1): an individual human >b: the human race : HUMANKIND >c: a bipedal primate mammal (Homo sapiens) that is anatomically related to the great apes but distinguished especially by notable development of the brain with a resultant capacity for articulate (see ARTICULATE entry 1 sense 1a) speech and abstract reasoning, and is the sole living representative of the hominid family
Cthulhu_ 2y ago
Linguistic pedantry with strong sexist overtones said in bad faith. Come on.
4ndrewl 2y ago
Literally (and I mean that) no difference when it was written. Language changed.
- Dalewyn 2y ago
  >Language changed. I argue that it hasn't; we say "man" both by itself and as part of another word (eg: manpower) in many contexts where gender is literally irrelevant. What has changed is the likelihood of certain individuals engaging in sexism in the name of equality.