2 February 9, 2016

As depicted in the text logo, below, A Civic People collaborate to determine civic morality using physics-based ethics for both personal posterity (children, grandchildren and beyond) and adults. Most adults candidly cultivate both private pursuits and civic morality, achieving an over-arching culture of no-real-harm personal liberty with civic well-being (PLwCWB). No-real-harm factional associations, cultures and religions flourish. With practice, more of We the People of the United States understand PLwCWB: effective civic policy empowers long private living.

Practice for February 9, 2016 Please mark your calendar for our special meeting, the first collaboration for physics-based ethics respecting a major civic issue: abortion. Sunday, February 21, 2:30 PM, Main Library. See more detail at theadvocate.com/calendar#/details/Civic-Morality-and-Human-Pregnancy/2045492/2016-02-21T14 . The table of content for the thirty-minute presentation follows: Presentation content Review past two years’ collaboration by 40 people in 7 meetings Candid dialogue is necessary and wanted; hesitant collaboration is loss The status: Collaboration for a possible future is underway with these meetings The word “nature” is significant in American history Explicit use of the word “civic” to express future, achievable morality Four point theory of a civic people: personal privacy, civic collaboration, the literal preamble, and physics-based ethics Physics-based ethics and human pregnancy From dependent new-born person; three-decade transition to intent for a full life A couple invite a possible person into mutual fidelity Personal appreciation: a fantastic human experience Possible consequences of sexual intimacy Natural abortion:  consequences of laws that emerged from physics Civic morality Human fidelity Collaboration for the future Should public opinion influence a woman’s decision to be pregnant? Should the people establish A Civic People of Baton Rouge? Anyone who would like to critique the presentation would be welcomed; just tell me where you’d like to meet. Of course, I like resources at my home, but will travel. Preparation for this meeting forced me to answer a question I had not resolved: once physics-based ethics is adopted by a civic people, how are persons free to innovate—to push the envelope of civic morality? Imaginative persons will then have the best possible basis—the bedrock--for responsibly exploring the unknown. Today, there is nothing but opinion-based ethics under theism and the new-age democracy—whatever a faction of the people wants. Collaboration is coming so fast it is difficult to fathom isolation. Often the silent party does not realize that the new idea created by dialogue we had together lives on. I constantly seek other groups or individuals who are fascinated with the possibilities offered by the literal preamble to the constitution for the USA. (BTW, the October 9, 2015 email requested readers to study the literal preamble, paraphrase it, rewrite it for 2016 living and perhaps collaborate for a statement representing A Civic People of the United States. Only by understanding that civic sentence can a person understand what the people have missed by allowing government regimes under opinion-based law and theism. The emails are archived at cipbr.blogspot.com. Often, syndicated writers point to the present national misery, blame the Administrative State, Supreme Court opinion, and dysfunctional Congress, then conclude that the only hope is the people, without spelling out what the people should do. That’s how collaboration at the library meetings has worked, but it is woefully insufficient. A Civic People of the United States needs to meet regularly and begin to operate as a non-profit education corporation.) I mentioned earlier the discovery of a blog for conservative law professors. A disliked “intruder” into the ongoing conservative v progressive debates, I urge them to collaborate for physics-based ethics. Some of them imply--explicitly express--that I have not the propriety for discussion with scholars; offer to collaborate anyway. A recent thread was very rewarding: see libertylawsite.org/2016/02/06/the-larger-lessons-of-increased-collaboration-among-law-professors/#comment-14 . It spoke of collaboration for their own reasons. A thread that started immediately before the above mentioned post is even more rewarding, because it allowed collaboration even though my message is alien to common thought: http://www.libertylawsite.org/2016/02/03/can-social-justice-be-rescued/#comments . This thread contains some recent attitudes, which have not had the benefit of collaboration at library meetings. A study of the book offered at amazon.com/Conversations-Action-Collected-Essays-Relationships/dp/1478378484#reader_1478378484 , offers a fantastic attitude about civic discussions, which I paraphrase as follows: With Flores’ training, willing people view conversation as collaboration to invent a better future, commit to the goals they create together and remain true to the future in many ways, including promptly suggesting change when injustice is discovered. There’s a nineteen page record of the study for adaptation to collaboration for civic morality. My friend Fred suggested the 2015 movie, Best of Enemies. A good description is at nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2015/07/best-of-enemies-buckley-vidal.html . I have lots of thoughts from watching the movie, but none more important than commentary toward the end. The ability to talk the same language is gone. More and more we’re divided into communities of concerns. Each side can ignore the other and live in its own world. It makes us less of a nation. Because what binds us together is the pictures in our heads. But if those people are not sharing those ideas they’re not living in the same place. The collaboration experienced in the library meetings, leading to A Civic People of the United States in July, 2015, and the continuing work create the possibility for a future culture of personal liberty with civic well-being by a super-majority of Americans—an overarching culture of the real-no-harm cultures that are now divided by events of the past and fears of the present. J T McQuitty, commenting on theadvocate.com, kindly suggested  “The Treacherous Road from Physics to Biology,” Howard Gest, 1994. EBRP library kindly obtained it in one day’s time, and I will read it before Feb 21. Also, coursera course “Moral Foundations of Politics,” which I am now taking. It seems just what this chemical engineer needs. We continue to find support for our proposal for an incentives program for Louisiana students to take charge of their fantastic transition from infant to young adult intending to live a full life. We dub the infant’s challenge the Overstreet Transition, because it is described in H. A. Overstreet’s book The Mature Mind, 1949. As it stands, the program would add $1 billion to the annual budget, and we want legislators to fight against programs that merely satisfy adults at the expense of children and children to be born. Borrowing words from Mike Gonzalez, “Conservatives, Hispanics, and the Immigrant Experience,” National Review, No. 21, Fall 2014, “Give and adult that is emerging from a collaborative student a stake in America, and he or she will want to preserve America.” If you want to help develop this idea, let us know. We have an extensive proposal that needs improvements. I am still reluctant to add to the list of Online resources, without collaboration. There is so much on the Internet and some of it offers real harm. The suggestions we listed in the past are posted in one file at cipbr.blogspot.com. For readers who are new to this possible collaboration, the first 40% of the February 21 special meeting will review what has transpired in the last two years of library meetings. In addition there are 85 essays at promotethepreamble.blogspot.com, the most important of which is the post of 7/12/2015 on the theory of a civic people as practiced so far. End

3 March 9, 2016 ed 03/17

A Civic People collaborate (volunteer) to determine civic morality using physics-based ethics for both personal posterity (children, grandchildren and beyond) and themselves. Most adults candidly cultivate both civic morality and private pursuits such as spirituality, achieving an over-arching culture of no-harm personal/private liberty with civic well-being—PLwCWB. No-harm factional associations, cultures and religions flourish. With practice, by example, more of We the People of the United States understand, and effective civic policy empowers long, private living.

Practice for March 9, 2016 If you are tired of civic meetings that remind you of Crossfire TV events, join our meetings. We state a concern, suggest a remedy, then listen to responses which together or in replacement create the possibility to improve future living in Baton Rouge. Please mark your calendar for a special meeting, the second collaboration for physics-based ethics respecting a major civic issue: family fidelity. Tuesday, April 19, 7:00 PM, Jones Creek Branch Library, . See more detail at theadvocate.com/calendar#/details/Civic-discussion-How-Civic-Morality-Informs-Family/2193425/2016-04-19T19. The table of content for the thirty-minute presentation follows: Presentation content Learned in past two years’ collaboration--by 40 people in 7 meetings Candid dialogue is necessary and wanted; hesitance invites civic loss The status: Collaboration for a better future seems underway “Civic” expresses moral, human connections for now and for future progress “Nature,” prominent in America’s founding thought, emerged from physics. Four point theory of a civic people: personal privacy; civic collaboration; physics-based ethics for civic morality; and a personally updated preamble Physics-based ethics and authenticity in human progress From dependent person; three-decade transition to authentic, full life A prepared couple invites a possible person into mutual fidelity: family & heritage Mutual personal-appreciation and bonding: a fantastic human journey Possible consequences of sexual intimacy—some good, some bad Physics limits errors of biology: natural abortion A civic people subjugate neither mom nor fetus Civic morality and human fidelity Participants collaborate for a future that is inviting to children Should civic opinion coerce family governance? Will volunteers in Baton Rouge establish A Civic People in Baton Rouge? If physics-based ethics is adopted, how are volunteers free to innovate—to push the envelope of civic morality? Imaginative persons will then have the best possible basis—the bedrock--for responsibly exploring the unknown: physics. Today, there is nothing but opinion-based ethics under theism and the new-age democracy—whatever a faction of the people wants and can get. A special meeting, the first collaboration for physics-based ethics, respecting abortion. Sunday, February 21, was typical, with low attendance but great discussion. A couple observations about each a) collaboration and b) human family--the real topic of abortion: Mona Sevilla had created an opportunity when she suggested a special meeting to collaborate on one case of physics-based ethics, and I suggested abortion as the topic. A chemical engineer giving a talk on human reproduction is a stretch of “authority.” I thrashed around for a gynecologist to help, but could not imagine how to persuade the dedication of time and energy. I got help from Dr. Marion Freistadt, Assistant Professor, Dept. of Biology, Delgado Community College speaking on “Introduction to Evolution and One Example of Contemporary Relevance,” at NOSHA’s Darwin Day. Key phrases: polymerase fidelity; species mutation rate, high enough for adaptability yet low enough to maintain genome fidelity; fitting for survival rather than survival of the fittest; an ovum contains mitochondria, food and genes; the sperm delivers as many genes and is a gamete; natural abortion corrects physics’ errors. One person suggested I ask a physiologist, but I do not recall one. However, the experience taught me that such civic-neutral leadership is exactly what can make A Civic People of the United States happen. By taking on topics that are challenging and collaborating on the results, we can mutually become the informed citizens the 1787 signers of the preamble imagined. It’s like the uninformed collaborating with the uniformed for un-biased enlightenment. Therefore, I encourage each or you to pick a topic, say “gullibility,” but a topic of your interest and study the question: How does physics inform [gullibility] and how does a civic people best benefit from understanding the physics of [guile]. “Physics” is mass, energy and space-time from which everything emerges. Space-time is the three volume dimensions—x, y, and z as they vary in time. “Everything’ includes lies, facts, religion, and ethics. I had not realized it before, but the moral emphasis on conception is threatened by the blastocyst’s failure to implant (by about the eight day after conception). Also, half the time, gestation fails due to errors by physics or its prodigy, biology. During the discussion, Mona said: “Thank you. However, you did not disclose how physics informs so-called “arbitrary abortions.” We did the additional research to answer the question but cannot end controversy when “arbitrary” is a matter of opinion. Since then, it has come to our attention that in the United States there is a ratio about 1 adoption per 6 abortions, whereas at a Planned Parenthood office, the ratio is 1:145. People who try to match adoptive parents with unwanted babies should be collaborating with Planned Parenthood. Those babies should be neither neglected nor arbitrarily blocked from opportunity for life. In my continuing (antagonized) contributions on a blog for conservative, constitutional law professors, one anonymous poster addressed my posts sensibly at www.libertylawsite.org/2016/03/09/american-exceptionalism-is-ending-where/#comments . I responded to his concerns with integrity respecting the local activity. I regret that I could not claim more interest in a civic people, but feel that my own limitations are the cause. I am ready to spread this message to the world, but need help. If you are at all interested, please lend your talents. Each month I add a few people to the distribution of these messages, and the readership stays at about 50%. So, if you know of anyone who might be interested, please connect us. Thursday, I will attend a workshop on how to use Facebook. Anyone interested please consider attending with me to help me understand. I constantly seek other groups or individuals who are fascinated with the possibilities offered by the literal preamble to the constitution for the USA and in physics-based civic morality. I started moving Baton Rouge specific posts on promotethepreamble.blogspot.com to cipbr.blogspot.com to improve organization. J T McQuitty had suggested a.    “The Treacherous Road from Physics to Biology,” Howard Gest, 1994. It does not address physics-based ethics at all, rather tacitly claims that the transition from physics to life requires a god. That’s an opinion coming from the god hypothesis, which understood physics neither denies nor supports. (Why is there anything? may not be a valid question.) Also, McQuitty suggested the coursera course “Moral Foundations of Politics” My take away for our purposes is as follows:       Conclusion from the course, sometimes in my words and opinions You can’t get the politics out of politics Science, a study, cannot resolve power struggles Power must have a moral basis Opinion is not a sufficient basis Past thinkers (like Jeremy Bentham) proposed using science but were bound by its semantics as a discipline of study, whereas our proposal is to admit we do not know what we do not know but intentionally to use what has been discovered about physics, defined as energy, mass and space-time, from which moral politics emerges. To make our point, we must take the reader through the giant leap from the big bang, 13.8 billion years ago, to the 2016 struggle between the objective truth versus opinion in civic morality. Perhaps John Locke’s 1690 focus on safety and security (not provided by the Hobbes idea of the state of nature) corresponds to Albert Einstein’s wish to lessen misery and loss. For simplicity, we will switch to Locke’s phrase: safety and security. Morality in politics requires Majority rule toward no-real-harm People who are affected by governance must have a say The system must prevent factional domination. A political system is required and the least dysfunctional is labeled “democracy,” one of a family of systems with these characteristics The system prevents chaos, often arguably called “the state of nature” Not divided into majority and minority, but made up of many segments; imagine a circle with a 15% segment to which is added cross segments of 5%, 25%, 35%, 49% and more. Note: this model is OK for moral philosophy but it has not caught on with the Marxist liberation theologists and Alinsky disciples who disrupt law and order in American cities Mobocracy is still the form of democracy known by the masses Vigilantism still prevails in some communities in America Certainty is not feasible, so humans must accept fallibility Progress corrects paradigms Deductive thinking yields to discovered reality Democracy requires Individual role in decision making, at least by voting Right to oppose Hope for future relief from grievance No Catch 22 that causes permanent alienation Cyclic deliberation rather than imposition Exclusion from satisfying the meaning of life or spiritual uplifting Provides a subordinate good in support of living rather than a purpose for living Accommodates ubiquitous powers that serve the people Supportive considerations I want to follow-up first The will of the people is impossible to learn: plato.stanford.edu/entries/arrows-theorem/ Power is ubiquitous plato.stanford.edu/entries/hartshorne/ plato.stanford.edu/entries/adaptationism/ plato.stanford.edu/entries/aesthetics-18th-british/ plato.stanford.edu/entries/aesthetics-18th-british/ plato.stanford.edu/entries/friedrich-hayek/ I am still reluctant to add to the list of Online resources. The suggestions we listed in the past are posted in one file at cipbr.blogspot.com. The special session of the Louisiana legislation was very disappointing, yet getting tax increases Governor Edwards wanted might clear the way for eliminating fraud and waste. End

Our mailing address is: Phil Beaver Agent for A Civic People of the United States 1624 Leycester Drive Baton Rogue, LA 70808 USA