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