• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Why Does MSNBC Want to Go Backwards?

    Who knew that telling people they have rights would be so controversial?

    In his nationally televised address Wednesday night, Representative Paul Ryan (R-WI) reminded Americans that “our rights come from nature and God, not from government.”

    MSNBC’s Chris Matthews went apoplectic. “It’s clear that Paul Ryan was talking to people who think about rights as something…produced by Thomas Jefferson, ignoring the people for whom the rights only came in the 1960s.”

    Another MSNBC commentator, Touré Neblett, said the line that rights come from God and nature is “so offensive.” For “black people, Hispanic people, and women, our rights do not come from God or nature. . . They come from the government and from legislation that happens in relatively recent history in America.”

    But rights don’t come from government. They can merely be protected by governments.

    Natural rights are those inalienable rights which directly result from human nature. Humans possess these rights, including the right to one’s own life and the right to liberty, simply by virtue of being human. This is the only secure grounding for rights.

    Because people are “endowed by their Creator” with these rights, no government can take them away. Thus, legitimate government must protect these rights. If governments fail to do so, the problem is not with the rights—it’s with those governments. As President Calvin Coolidge explained:

    “If all men are created equal, that is final. If they are endowed with inalienable rights, that is final. If governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, that is final. No advance, no progress can be made beyond these propositions,”

    “If anyone wishes to deny their truth or their soundness,” by claiming that rights for women and minorities were invented recently through a few legislative acts, then “the only direction in which he can proceed historically is not forward, but backward toward the time when there was no equality, no rights of the individual, no rule of the people.”

    To claim that rights are provided by government is to ignore the meaning of the Declaration.

    Those who wish for a society where government grants people rights cannot “lay claim to progress.”

    Natural rights were not Thomas Jefferson’s creation. They were not even an American creation. The only thing new about natural rights was this: America was the first nation to be founded on the self-evident truth that all people “are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.”

    All people. And that’s final.

    Posted in First Principles [slideshow_deploy]

    29 Responses to Why Does MSNBC Want to Go Backwards?

    1. Ed Wilkinson says:

      I hear what has been said on MSNBC and I can hardly believe it. I'm having problems believing that I live in the same country I grew up in. There are people that believe that anything we have or hope to have must be provided by the government. Good old fashion work and pulling yourself up seems to be over. We are going to be indebted to our government just for our survival.

    2. c meier says:

      It shocks me that someone would criticize anyone for telling the people what the Declaration of Independence clearly states– let alone media commentators who should have some kind of education in knowing where our rights come from. I don't watch state-run media so I would have no idea of what this network is saying, but thanks for the heads up. We as citizens– of all ethnicities and both genders need to be vigilant when an elite group lies to us to try to make us believe that our rights are conditional.

    3. Barbara Case says:

      Regarding the article that rights come from the government… Are we so naive that we can discount that human rights are controlled by our government. It sounds more like a dictatorship (or Natzi Germany) I always believed in American freedom but have seen so much of that taken away by our rulers in the past three years. God help our country if this continues

    4. Bunnie Jatkowski says:

      Should I read this to say, if All men are created equal and that is final. Why was there the need for "Government" to bestow that same "equality" to Black People of this Nation also presumed to be "endowed" by the Creator with "inalienable rights" , if the Government as you say does not bestow rights?

    5. PCS says:

      Chris Mattews you are an Idiot! When are you and the rest of MSNBC going to just report the news versus your opinion. You and the extreme liberal points of view have ruined what was one a good network

    6. tocelp says:

      Excellent article!

    7. kappello says:

      Dimwits, the Declaration of Independence and our monuments clearly tell us our freedoms come from God and the main reason the US came about was for religious freedom, freedom of religious expression and assembly in whatever form it was. Our rights come from the one who created all things, Jehovah and we are but stewards of those right. Did it take some humans a longer time to realize that was the case for all yes, but that does not change the fact that the founders knew those rights didn't come from us, but from a much higher source.

    8. @TammieEdu says:

      Quoting article: "For black people, Hispanic people, and women, our rights do not come from God or nature." Quit making this about race. Shame on you @MSNBC. Inalienable rights are color blind. Too bad MSNBC isn't.

      • @blaughon says:

        Inalienable rights may not be color blind but Thomas Jefferson and others who drafted our early documents were. The Declaration declares rights of all, but the actual document that became the supreme law of the land specifically denied rights and freedom to a large portion of the population. Financial issues, not religious freedoms, were the primary force behind our so-called declaration of independence.

    9. tocelp says:

      This is the best article I have ever seen showing the difference in ideology between the Liberals and the Conservatives. Hopefully this article will be seen by millions of potential voters, especialy anyone who is un-decided.

    10. Brooke says:

      Prior to the 1960s, the inalienable rights of Blacks were not protected or acknowledged by the government. Prior to the 1860s the government did not acknowledge black people as completely human. By ignoring the civil rights laws, you are turning a blind eye to an incredibly significant piece of America's history that includes slavery and oppression.

    11. Son of Eagle Power says:

      You go Julia! Praise the Lord!

    12. CAZT says:

      Thank you! Amazing, well done.

    13. Nicholas Sullivan says:

      I think you seemed to have missed the point that Toure was making about how even the founding fathers and the members of the enlightenment did not mean everyone. If they had, slaves would have been freed in the 18 th century and not the 19th and they would have received equal rights then, not in the 1960s. Similarly, Obama would not have had to pass a law just this year saying a woman needs to be paid the same as a man if she is in the same job. Just as racial profiling would not be an issue if we all were created equal. Government is the only thing that can actually stop other people from taking advantage of others.

    14. Ob-EWAN-Kenobi says:

      However, the declaration is not the law of the land, the constitution is. And the constitution did not say that everyone is equal until amendments were added. It also doesn't say these rights come from a creator. THAT is final

    15. Nature has led the life cycle of most species through procreation! The life of some cells reproducing within itself offspring, may be present , but does this anomaly counter natures natural procreation, for existence in humans?
      As for the MSNBC commentator Toure Neblett, His statement claiming our rights come from Government and from legislation in recent relevant history, That sounds like Totalitarianisms decided recent relevant history!
      Chris Matthews is wanting what he wants,? I just think he's more upset about Liberal Democrats not having a successful economic plan! The idea that conservative Republicans have a successful economy plan charted, is boiling his Liberal blood! wallyworkswell@yahoo.com

    16. Douglas P Allen says:

      Chris Matthews is quite the self-important fool.

    17. Bobbie says:

      How dare any pathetic disrespect suggest insults to all women and people who aren't white by saying everyone doesn't have the same rights from the human creator by the nature all human life exists, as whites. These people?, are beneath lowliness. Chris Mathews and many others speaks for himself where words are only coded by desperation when sincerity is heard from the mouths of people who's lives are open to show who they are! Like everyone significant in the republican party.

      We can't have people with personal weakness and intolerance focusing on personal weakness and intolerance to run this country. We need people who have honesty and dignity. Who promote people, not feel sorry for them. The republican party has that decency and character. Men, women, everyone!

      Where the government and little people are unable to treat everyone with equal respect is where the government has no role in peoples' lives

      America doesn't deserve people with mental malfunction (failure to respect to understand words according to meaning) and Leo Terrel and many more unfortunately brainwashed into self pity and by coded words, does not promote a healthy society!

      I thought influence by ignorance and disrespect for fellow Americans was against a code of ethics and common decency? Oh, that's right…

    18. Carol, AZ says:

      "MSMBC wants to go backward," because they are backward.

      Paul Ryan's direct quote from our Constitution was 100% correct.

      Chris Matthews needs return to the swamp and write his book from Cuba.

    19. Oscar Brown says:

      They're STATISTS who play journalists on television. That, or they're morons; are there any other options?

    20. Bob Joyner says:

      Natural rights are the basis of American exceptionalism. To ignore this fact is to ignore the basis of our declaration and the establishment of this country as the only one on earth with this origin at the time of our founding.

    21. Doug says:

      As someone who admires and respects Bill Gates and the class he has exhibited over the years, I cringe when watching the drivel that comes out of MSNBC. I should think he would exert his influence to get rid of the incompetence at MSNBC and find some real talent. What a shame for Bill to let such trash tarnish his quest for excellence.

    22. Ken Marx says:

      Human rights always existed, but historically have been suppressed by governments. This truth was recognized by our founders, but it took many much longer to recognize. Women's suffrage was not a right granted by the government. Civil rights were not rights granted by the government. They were rights that already existed and were simply confirmed by the government. In other words, the government simply removed the barriers that existed.

      Chris Mathews is a simpleton whose grasp of humanity and history is radically impaired.

    23. Dan Poole says:

      This definitely goes to show how Progressives perceive the world. They really do believe in totalitarianism, that government knows better then individuals or groups of individuals. Progressivism is the ideology of tyranny and death.

    24. Glen says:

      The MSM once again shows its left leaning bias. It seems their new God to worship is Obama. This is not fair to the American public because they do not get the truth.

    25. Bill Hodges says:

      "Silent" Cal was a genius; Mathews is a moron!

    26. @criticalbias says:

      Good article.

      One can also look at it like this: Government took away the rights of blacks and women. And by definition, that is corruption.

      People came first, government came second. People without government are entirely free. A free people recognizes, just as birds do, that we have inalienable rights. Government can trample them or government can protect them.

      In the case of this country, government was written to protect our rights, and where it was wrong (slavery and women) we finally got it right.

      Inalienable rights are the rights of man without government. Ours was designed to protect those rights.

    27. Joel Williams says:

      The Declaration of Independence laid the rational argument for separation from Great Britain, which at it's heart was an argument against mankind's rights originating with the monarchy and the abuses that arise therefrom. That had been the case for centuries and the governed attempted over time (as in the case of the Magna Carta) to correct the flaw as to where rights originated. The entirety of our Constitution was constructed in such a way as to prevent the government from assuming that all human rights originated with it. The separation of powers, federal powers vs. state powers and the Bill of Rights all lead to that end. The famous phrase, "the consent of the governed" does imply that the governed will be informed and actively involved in protecting those rights. That seems to be a widely understood necessity by the Framers who indicated the involvement of the citizenry was imperative in order for the Constitution to function as intended.. Chris Matthews is an embarrassment to American foundational political doctrine and is uninformed to the point anything emitting from his mouth should be summarily dismissed as an attempt to up the lackluster ratings of his network. My observation indicates that Mr. Matthews is incapable of independent thinking and is only comfortable in the womb like environment of being governed so such comments are to be expected in that case. One man's opinion.

    28. Renaus says:

      Who cares what Chris Matthews thinks. It's evident that he's a shill for Obama and has this strange man-love relationship with him. Anyone who would say they have a thrill running up (or down, around?) their leg, televised to the public no less, has a screw or two loose. Chris Matthews and his 23 person viewing audience is a thing of the past. I think Rush has it right, Matthews is having a mental meltdown because he sees the writing on the wall. Matthews is history along with the present administration.

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.

    ×