NO. They are not the same. The Declaration of Independence broke our nation's tie with Great Britain. It was a declaration of our independence. The Constitution was the document that followed. It set our rule of government and how our nation would function.
The Constitution is congruent with the Declaration of Independence in serving as the body and letter to which the Declaration is the thought and the spirit. Both documents were based on the same political and societal principles in denying absolute authority for government.
AF was [ x ] :{
Perspective played a major role in the Declaration of Independence because of the different ways people interpret it's content. Just like with the Constitution, how there were the Federalists who adhered strictly to the Constitution word for word and the Antifederalists who thought it was up for interpretation, the Declaration of Independence is the same way. Whether you interpret it strictly or loosely determines how you view what rights the forefathers of the U.S. really wrote in for us to be granted.
abused power.
im=mhbhczxc vcjvdxb
Lincoln refers to the Declaration and quotes from it in the first line of his address.
Lincoln refers to the Declaration and quotes from it in the first line of his address.
He signed the Declaration of Independence and he co-founded Columbia University!
He founded electricity and signed the declaration of independence
There are two ways to look at that. On the one hand, the Constitution does not mention homosexuality in any way. On the other hand, Declaration of Independence does aver that "all men . . .(have) inalienable rights, including (their) life, (their) liberty and (their) pursuit of happiness".
I can read this two ways. One way is after the Declaration of Independence was written and if that is the question then the answer is the revolution, but if I read this what happened after the revolution then the answer is the establishment of the United States.
The Declaration of Independence begins by stating the basic rights all people are entitled to. It then lists the various ways that King George III had violated these rights and ends by saying that these violations make it necessary for the colonies to break their association with England.