The rabbit trail of my life has intersected with a fair number of history buffs. I have never taken the time to analyze if I am attracted to history lovers because they know interesting stuff, or if they are attracted to me because I am willing to listen to them. Either way, there is some sort of affinity there, and as a consequence, every few years someone is sure to inform me that Independence Day is really on July 2nd, and not on the 4th.
On July 2, 1776, Congress adopted Richard Henry Lee's Resolution that “these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and independent states....and that all political connection between them and The State of Great Britain is, and of right ought to be, totally dissolved.”
In the days when social tweeting was limited to our avian friends, no one in England knew about that decision yet. It was Thomas Jefferson's highly edited version of
The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America that was approved on July 4th.
(Notice that "united" was just an adjective at that time and not part of the name of the new country.) It was on the 4th of July that we gave our well-reasoned account for declaring our independence. I have met several invidious Jezebel-types who have tried to tell me that our country was founded on violence. They are dangerously ignorant and just as bone-headed as King George. Unfortunately, they worked for the government.
(And, no, Sheryl, 'King George' does not refer to Washington!)
Back on June 11, 1776, Congress had asked Jefferson to be part of a committee of five men who would draft a list of reasons for separating from England. (Other committee members were John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, Robert R. Livingston and Roger Sherman; in perspective, Jefferson wasn't that well known outside his home colony of Virginia yet.) Jefferson was chosen to write the Declaration because (a) he had a splendid vocabulary and had shown a flair for writing, (b) he was still sort of 'grunt' status in Congress, Adams and Franklin being better known and having fuller schedules, (c) it was a providential assignment by God, or (d) all of the former reasons. Personally, I will go with
d.
The
Archiving Early America website added another reason: they say that Adams wanted a Virginian to write it, and I have no reason to doubt that. In fact, the second paragraph, the remainder of this one, and the paragraph that follows ought to have that website cited as the source, continuing with: "All told, in writing the document, Jefferson — together with his colleagues — made forty-seven alterations in the text, presenting it to Congress 17 days after the Committee had been named."
"Congress also changed Jefferson's original phrase "sacred and undeniable" truths to "self-evident," which appears in the document today. But to its everlasting credit, Congress saw fit to retain what has become “one of the best-known sentences in the human language” and “the most potent and consequential words in American history."
And so, Congress approved this wording: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable Rights...
Which do you like better? Sacred and undeniable? Or Self-evident? Personally I prefer "self-evident." When rights are endowed by our Creator, calling them sacred and undeniable is redundant.
Bonus Round: Link to news article where Obama has misquoted the Declaration
One of the astronauts described the launch from pad 39A as "riding a volcano." The journey began in fire and flames, but the destination was the Sea of Tranquility. In many ways, it was a Pilgrim's Progress for the 20th century. The journey demanded total commitment. Bailing out was not an option. Only mission control had the authority to abort. The astronauts had to follow the directives from mission control; their lives depended on it. The goal was a successful landing in a place of peace. The reward was glory. 
