On Popular Sovereignty
While he opposed slavery personally, Lincoln also thought it his duty, and the duty of all Americans, to combat not only the practice itself, but also any notion that might provoke its prosperity. While defenders of popular sovereignty claimed it maintained a neutral approach to slavery, it created other dangers for the nation both related to the issue of human rights and beyond. As a northern statesman, Lincoln believed that the principle of popular sovereignty directly assaults the country’s foundations on basic ethical beliefs and system of justice.
As the founders intended a moral background for the Constitution and the country, Lincoln states through his speeches that popular sovereignty violates that morality …show more content…
Though he does not necessarily believe that slaves were equal to white men in all things, he holds a certain reverence for the Constitutional ideal of all men, having been created equal under the doctrine of consent, all enjoying the same unalienable rights. Even the south cannot fully deny the humanity of the negroes (“Speech on Kansas-Nebraska” 326), as Lincoln puts it, as they annexed slave trade piracy on punishment of death, though they surely would never do so for the piracy of livestock, and even try their best to distance themselves from slave traders. Lincoln trusts both in the humanity of the slaves and the wrongness in one man owning another, and hopes to explain those ideas amongst those who had even the slightest chance of understanding. However, while Lincoln intends to determine whether or not blacks count as human beings and therefore have rights, the popular sovereignty that Douglas proposes bypasses that argument …show more content…
Stephen Douglas, as the principle’s main defender, supposes that their “liberty and independence are based upon the right of the people to form for themselves such a government as they may choose…and no limitation ought to be applied to this power” (“Speech at Chicago 1858”, 20). Here, the supposed power of democracy surpasses any virtuous ideologies, religious or not, and likewise ignores any true meaning behind the Constitution. The law exists, for Douglas and his followers, as a mere guideline for how the majority can vote on their rulings, but does not limit them. Meanwhile, Lincoln asserts that slavery acts as a violation of the mantra that all men are created equal. He quotes his ancient faith, and the faith shared by many other Americans and the founders themselves (“Speech on Kansas Nebraska”, 328), to help make his point and combat the power Douglas hands to the majority. While Lincoln insists the majority—and therefore those who would rule in popular sovereignty—must have limits upon the rights of mankind, his opponent upheld the right of democratic rule above basic human decency. This is exactly what Lincoln fears may happen to the rest of the American people. He “object[s] to it [popular sovereignty] as a dangerous dalliance for a free people…that
While he opposed slavery personally, Lincoln also thought it his duty, and the duty of all Americans, to combat not only the practice itself, but also any notion that might provoke its prosperity. While defenders of popular sovereignty claimed it maintained a neutral approach to slavery, it created other dangers for the nation both related to the issue of human rights and beyond. As a northern statesman, Lincoln believed that the principle of popular sovereignty directly assaults the country’s foundations on basic ethical beliefs and system of justice.
As the founders intended a moral background for the Constitution and the country, Lincoln states through his speeches that popular sovereignty violates that morality …show more content…
Though he does not necessarily believe that slaves were equal to white men in all things, he holds a certain reverence for the Constitutional ideal of all men, having been created equal under the doctrine of consent, all enjoying the same unalienable rights. Even the south cannot fully deny the humanity of the negroes (“Speech on Kansas-Nebraska” 326), as Lincoln puts it, as they annexed slave trade piracy on punishment of death, though they surely would never do so for the piracy of livestock, and even try their best to distance themselves from slave traders. Lincoln trusts both in the humanity of the slaves and the wrongness in one man owning another, and hopes to explain those ideas amongst those who had even the slightest chance of understanding. However, while Lincoln intends to determine whether or not blacks count as human beings and therefore have rights, the popular sovereignty that Douglas proposes bypasses that argument …show more content…
Stephen Douglas, as the principle’s main defender, supposes that their “liberty and independence are based upon the right of the people to form for themselves such a government as they may choose…and no limitation ought to be applied to this power” (“Speech at Chicago 1858”, 20). Here, the supposed power of democracy surpasses any virtuous ideologies, religious or not, and likewise ignores any true meaning behind the Constitution. The law exists, for Douglas and his followers, as a mere guideline for how the majority can vote on their rulings, but does not limit them. Meanwhile, Lincoln asserts that slavery acts as a violation of the mantra that all men are created equal. He quotes his ancient faith, and the faith shared by many other Americans and the founders themselves (“Speech on Kansas Nebraska”, 328), to help make his point and combat the power Douglas hands to the majority. While Lincoln insists the majority—and therefore those who would rule in popular sovereignty—must have limits upon the rights of mankind, his opponent upheld the right of democratic rule above basic human decency. This is exactly what Lincoln fears may happen to the rest of the American people. He “object[s] to it [popular sovereignty] as a dangerous dalliance for a free people…that