Happy Birthday, America! Here is something to ponder on this memorial day to the Declaration of Independence: Back in 1776, both Christians and Deists considered it “self-evident” that human beings were “created” and thus had equal moral and spiritual standing before God. Furthermore, the “Creator” “endowed” human beings with rights, which, because they have a transcendent foundation are “inalienable”; that is, they cannot be taken away.

Today, belief in a creation and a Creator are far from “self-evident”; creation is widely treated as a myth (with random evolution being the only acceptable view) and belief in God is not allowed to have any kind of legal or governmental standing. Right, instead, are endowed by the state.

It follows, therefore, that rights are “alienable,” that they CAN be taken away. The state has recently been generous in creating rights that have nothing to do with God–that indeed violate God’s ordinance–such as the right to an abortion. But without a transcendent foundation for rights, aren’t we left with arbitrary, self-interested power and the foundation for tyranny?

Can American ideals and liberties long survive without the foundation set forth in the Declaration of Independence?

In the “secret identity” post, “Cindy” outed herself as the former Cindy Evers, one of my former students. Others have shown up from time to time. Are any of you readers former students of mine? I realize that I passed so few of you that it is hardly likely. And yet, I’d love to hear if any of you have become contributing members of society. Have you, despite your fears at the time, found VOCATIONS into families, workplaces, the church, and the culture? Do you still remember anything at all that you learned in my classes?

Seriously, identify yourselves and tell me what you are doing these days. I’d be glad to hear from you.

Those melancholy Danes have now cheered up, to the point that Denmark is now the happiest place on earth. The USA ranks up there at number 16, despite reports of record dissatisfaction. According to the study, happiness rates are actually way up since the first such survey in 1981. It’s interesting to track how the different countries measured up. U.S. Territory Puerto Rico is second, and strife-torn Columbia is third.

Nat Hentoff is a non-religious liberal human rights activist. He is, however, consistent with these positions. He is pro-life. I have never understood what is liberal or in any way humane about supporting abortion. In fact, that a candidate believes in abortion makes me not believe him when he then pretends to be for the poor, the marginalized, the little guy. Not when they are willing to kill the poorest, the most marginalized, and the littlest guy at all. Anyway, thanks to commenter Sam for alerting me to this column by Nat Hentoff, who has real problems with supporting Barack Obama. From Opinion - Nat Hentoff: Infanticide candidate for president - sacbee.com:

On abortion, Obama is an extremist. He has opposed the Supreme Court decision that finally upheld the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act against that form of infanticide. Most startlingly, for a professed humanist, Obama — in the Illinois Senate — also voted against the Born Alive Infant Protection Act. I have reported on several of those cases when, before the abortion was completed, an alive infant was suddenly in the room. It was disposed of as a horrified nurse who was not necessarily pro-life followed the doctors’ orders to put the baby in a pail or otherwise get rid of the child. . . .

As I was researching this presidential candidate’s views on the unilateral “choice” that takes another’s life, I heard on the radio what Obama said during a Johnstown, Pa., town hall meeting on March 29 as he was discussing the continuing dangers of exposure to HIV/AIDS infections: “When it comes specifically to HIV/AIDS, the most important prevention is education, which should include — which should include abstinence education and teaching children, you know, that sex is not something casual. But it should also include — it should also include other, you know, information about contraception because, look, I’ve got two daughters, 9 years old and 6 years old. I am going to teach them first of all about values and morals.

“But if they make a mistake,” Obama continued, “I don’t want them punished with a baby.”

That line is very telling for the pro-death philosophy: Having a baby is a bad thing, a punishment.

Economics columnist Robert J. Samuelson points out that it isn’t just oil that is skyrocketing. Raw materials of every kind have shot up. He decries the scapegoating practiced by both political parties, which blames oil companies or speculators and puts the blame at unprecedented economic growth by countries that used to be poor but that are now buying up raw materials just as the developed world does :

Raw materials prices have exploded across the board. From 2002 to 2007, oil rose 177 percent, corn 70 percent, copper 360 percent and aluminum 95 percent. But that’s just the point. Did “speculators” really cause all those increases? If so, why did some prices go up more than others? And what about steel? It rose 117 percent — and has increased further in 2008 — even though it isn’t traded on commodities futures markets.

A better explanation is basic supply and demand. Despite the U.S. slowdown, the world economy has boomed. Since 2002, annual growth has averaged 4.6 percent, the highest sustained rate since the 1960s, says economist Michael Mussa of the Peterson Institute. By their nature, raw materials (food, energy, minerals) sustain the broader economy. They’re not just frills. When unexpectedly high demand strains existing production, prices rise sharply as buyers scramble for scarce supplies. That’s what happened.

“No one foresaw that China would grow at a 10 percent annual rate for over a decade. Commodity producers just didn’t invest enough,” says analyst Joel Crane of Deutsche Bank.

Prices, Samuelson said, will moderate once the high prices tease out more production; that is, if world governments will allow for more mining, drilling, and growing.