Do we hold "truths" to be self-evident?

I liked the turn of phrase but its inadequate for a philosopher, isn't it?

On what basis are they truths. And how is it that they are self evident?

It's actually doctrine. It's a condition of participating in the union, of being a citizen of the united states in good standing. If you argue against these truths, as some have certainly done over the years, you are not kicked out of the country. But you are not aligned with the beliefs of the authors of the declaration of independence

I agree with John M that, from a philosophical perspective, Jefferson's line is inadequate. It is by no means self-evident that all men are created equal. Indeed, that some men are created healthy while others are created disabled suggests anything but equality.

If I may, I think Jefferson's line is a literary license employed for the purpose of allowing him to outline various assertions without having to provide a thorough defense of each. Were he to have done otherwise, the Declaration of Independence would have been a far more voluminous work. The Declaration of Independence was not meant to be a philosophical treatise.

As for us in modern times, I do not claim to speak for everyone, but I do recognize the existence of both self-evident truths and truths that require evidential support. So to answer your question, I would say yes, but only some of the time.

Jefferson was operating within a different philosophical perspective then we do today; namely, he recognized that most of humanity didn't see these truths as self-evident, after all it was written in a document declaring independence from a monarch that did not hold them as self-evident, but he was stating that they are self-evident in the sense that they follow logically from the nature of the world and human nature. At that time there was more of continuum from the natural sciences to political philosophy, so just as one could use reason to discover the laws of physics humans also could use reason to discover the laws of morality. The self-evident truths are not self-evident in the sense of seeing, but self-evident in the sense that 2 + 2 = 4 is to any rational person. Since Jefferson's time the game, to use your phrase, has changed. Philosophically, since Hume, it's gotten very, very problematic to hold moral laws exist in the same ways physical laws, or for that matter to hold any moral precepts are discoverable by reason. If this is a good trend, or a mistaken path of philosophy, is an answer for another day, but one does wonder if the quality of the discourse has declined within the political moral horizon from that time to this time (on an intellectual level).

The rules of society dictate the boundaries of individual freedoms. Those "truths" articulated by Jefferson were extending the boundaries of individual freedom beyond a king. Until that point, American citizens were restrained by the will of their monarch. By hopping over the king, Jefferson appealed to a "higher authority" than the king. Essentially negating the concept that a citizen of a nation must be "subject" to the king.

Truths are open and self evident but we conceal them with cock and bull stories !