No, it isnt. July 4th happened after the Union was already a thing.
> The main thing to understand, before I go into detail, is that the Declaration of Independence is one of the founding documents, but it did not create a nation. Some of the colonists got together and wrote a historically eloquent letter to the world that basically said, “ayyyy England, F your king!”
Saying "F your king" is an integral part in being independent of England which is a prerequisite to being an independent nation. The Declaration of Independence established the United States as an independent nation. Any previous forms of the United States would have been a colony of England.
> The Continental Association is first time the colonies expressed a collective will to work together in the form of a legal document. It was published October 20, 1774 but went into effect December 1, 1774. The US does not observe December 1 as a national holiday, though it should. It is barely in the cultural memory at all.
The Continental Association is, essentially, where the colonies got together and discussed the idea of independence. The word "colonies" is a dead giveaway. After July 4th, there were no more colonies.
"The Union", referred to by Lincoln. Is not synonymous with the Nation.
The independent nation of the United States of America declared its sovereignty on July 4th, 1776. That's the "correct" way to think about July 4th, aka Independence Day.
You can say whatever day you want is your birthday, but only one day actually is.
The place where the treaty was signed is much less important than what it said and who signed it, even if it ends up being named after that place.
This is like saying the constitution grants rights.
What? You have sovereignty as soon as you decide it. Especially if you are fighting a war to maintain your sovereignty. If the treaty was never signed, the US would still be sovereign.
Try this extreme example. Imagine if the founders decided to simply wipe out the british and there was no brit left to sign any treaty. Would the silly british king still be sovereign over the US even though the silly british king and his silly kingdom no longer existed? Of course not.