Paragraph 50: The American Church is guilty,
Douglass holds the church accountable for the ongoing slavery and views that they even support slavery. The church also has power to rid America of slavery, but since the church hasn't done anything for the slaves this has only proven Douglass statement that the church is at fault.
bnt inter-preted, as it 01tglt.t to be inte11n·eted, the Constitu-tion is a G1.oRious LIBERTY DoommNT. Reu.cl it~ , pI"eamble, con ·ider its purposes. Is slavery among them 1 Is it a.t the gateway i or is it in the temple? it is neither.
Douglass is saying "American" interpretation of the Constitution has corrupted the true meaning of the Constitution. In the document there is no mention of slaves, etc.
l\Iy sul jcct, then, , fc11ow-citi,-cn-a, is Ainmro · LAVERY. I ·lrnll see thi3 day, anc1 its popn1ar charactcri~tic· from the · l:wc's point of view. StancTu1g, th re, identified with the American bondman, mnking his wronrrs mine, I do not h itate to declare, 1\ith aU my soul, that the character mul con net of thb nntion never lookc l bla1·ker to me than on thi 4th of July!
Douglass is now stating the subject of his speech is about slavery happening in America. He can not celebrate since he is not apart of America. Douglass is going to show how cruel America truly is.
To me the American slave-trade is n terrible rea1ity.
Seeing people taken away by nicely dressed people was common.
If we abandon equality, we lose the single bond that makes us a community, that makes us a people with the capacity to be free collectively and individually in the first place. I
If we opt for freedom rather than equality we create a imbalance in our society or you could say that we have one now. How can we as a people truly be "free" if there isn't equal opportunities? How can there be freedom if their are constraints on some but not others?
He was still a servant
The story Allen uses clearly displays a place without equality. No matter what one does or has done in a society (that doesn't have equality) that person is still "this" or "that." Having someone(s) "higher" than others could lead to a hierarchy rather then a democracy.