May 21, 2017

Phil Beaver works to establish opinion when the-objective-truth has not been discovered. He seeks to refine his opinion by listening when people share experiences and observations. The comment box below invites readers to express facts, opinion, or concern, perhaps to share with people who may follow the blog.

Note 1:  I often dash words in a phrases in order to express and preserve an idea. For example, frank-objectivity represents the idea of candidly expressing the-objective-truth despite possible error. In other words, a person expresses his “belief,” knowing he or she could be in error. People may collaboratively approach the-objective-truth.
 Note 2: It is important to note "civic" as in citizens for the people more than for the city.

 The Advocate:  See online at theadvocate.com/baton_rouge.

  

Our Views (gas tax). I foresee threats to my financial security in retirement.

Nevertheless, I want to pay $150 a year to relieve people who work from the drag on their lives our I10 and I12 and other parking-lots impose on them.

Of course, a tax-free solution would be preferable, but I do not perceive success with anything like staggered work schedules or carpooling.

   

Today’s thought. God beliefs can’t compete with voluntary public-integrity for civic  safety & security. In other words, no person's claim, "My God is almighty," can be refuted.

I had a very hopeful dialogue at a library meeting wherein the other party eventually responded positively to my every statement. However, both before and after comprehending my every opinion, he brought the application to God, the Bible, or Jesus.

For example, I defined “civic” as citizens mutually collaborating for living more than for the city. But he kept replacing “civic” with “social.” I reiterated that the collaboration I referred to favored the people in preference to city tradition. He said he understood, but we still had obligations to both the past and the future. I said we could neither understand past opinions nor predict future ones, but we can live for mutual safety & security and the city would benefit from our behaviors. He responded that it was easy if we just follow the Ten Commandments. Everything came back to his God, the Bible I guess or something derived from it.

When I spoke of the preamble as a basis for voluntary public-integrity, he said that the articles that follow the preamble do not reflect the fidelity to the-objective-truth, self, family, etc., I argue for. He said the preamble affirms hypocrisy: fidelity comes with faith in God through the hope for everlasting life.

The preamble was signed on September 17, 1787 by 2/3 of representatives of the states, ratified for amendment by another 2/3 on June 21, 1788, and the complete constitution was ratified by over 2/3 on December 15, 1791. At each step, the 1/3 who did not ratify were dissidents for reasons they understood.

It seems to me the dysfunction we suffer may be resolved if 2/3 of us collaborate for civic morality. The 1/3 dissidents include those who cannot discuss opportunities for voluntary public-integrity without trying to impose hopes in their God.

Mark Ballard column (Democrats black their eye). Typically, I guess because of business plan, a newspaper writer does not express the hearts of the problem: erroneous religious beliefs, arbitrary political-power by dominant-opinion, and religion-politics-partnerships.

  

Ballard overlooks “Christians” in his report, “’The monuments you seek to protect are deeply offensive to . . . Christians,’ said state Rep. Katrina Jackson, D-Monroe.” See theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/news/politics/legislature/article_c8bd15fe-39ac-11e7-9d86-673df313101c.html . (I would not interpret that she juxtaposes white-Christians as Satan, but the proposition is in common literature.)

  

The issues I refer to are addressed by Niccolo Machiavelli in “The Prince,” especially Chapter XI regarding the religion-politician-partnership that picks the indolent people’s pockets. See constitution.org/mac/prince11.htm . The alternative is collaboration to discover the-objective-truth.

I object to Ballard’s erroneous “For many blacks . . . enslavement for their great grandparents and disenfranchisement for their parents.” Slavery ended and arbitrary disenfranchisement continued in 1865. That’s eight generations ago. Disenfranchisement ended 2.5 decades ago. Thus, Ballard’s phrase are untrue for both great grandparents (not slaves) and parents (not arbitrarily disenfranchised).

I would not question Ballard’s personal God or none as all powerful. However, some people use the slavery experience to argue that white church is Satan and white Christians are devils. That’s the message I get from both James Baldwin, Saul Alinsky, and some Alinsky-Marxist organizers (AMO), perhaps Together Baton Rouge.

Until The Advocate or other media has the courage to discuss the Church’s responsibility in the history of slavery dating from canonization of the Bible, imposed on the Americas in the fifteenth century, and colonized in America in the 16th-18th centuries, America has the potential to repeat history.

However, this time, instead of one white church attacking another white church over erroneous Bible interpretation it may be black church attacking white church, but with the same disastrous loss for the people of the USA.

  

I don’t think it will happen, because there are too many of us non-Christians to brook such Christian injustice for the people. However, as always, I may be wrong. About one issue I am not wrong: I am tired of the Christian squabbles that burden my civic-life, city, state, and country.

  

Pass HB 71 and promote voluntary public-integrity: each individual's God or none is all powerful if the people collaborate for civic morality and keep religious morality private.

Jeff Sadow column. Here’s a subtle reference to AMO, intended or not: “a drive to create controversy for its own sake.” See newenglishreview.org/DL_Adams/Saul_Alinsky_and_the_Rise_of_Amorality_in_American_Politics/ .

“. . . boycotted Republican President Donald Trump’s” inauguration will always remind me of Gov. John Bel Edwards perhaps Vatican-partnership trip.

“. . . a stream of Caucus members . . . bitterly attacked [HB 71] as supporting racism. Dispensing with rational argumentation that stayed on subject, they emoted that letting people directly decide whether to change the status, if not banish, an object made them feel hurt [and] alleged it sowed division.” It seems to me they were expressing racism and hate.

 “They acted destructively . . . sacrificing honest debate to induce conflict.“

George Will column (Baumol’s disease). Labor is man-hours service to perform a task. People in services that enjoy productivity increases can be paid more money. However, people in services that do not involve productivity increases must be paid roughly the same. Otherwise, they will not remain in that service.

Labor-intensive services, such as nursing, become a burden on the production segment of the economy.

This problem is hurting the economy as digital work such as designing aps is dedicated to entertainment rather than production.

Abortion (Page 1B). Abortion for fun should not enjoy public support. Otherwise, a woman’s decision not to remain pregnant is not of civic interest: It’s private.

Flood relief (Page 2B). The state hired a firm to oversee distribution of the flood relief funds, which seem now to be around 2.05 billion dollars. How much is the management firm being paid? Does the state have any recourse if the firm bilks the people? I that what SCR 83 does?

Child brides (Page 9a). It seems to me a civil condition for procreation should be the woman’s age above 23, the spouse above 25, at least 3 years stable marriage, parental training, intent to be faithful to grandchildren and beyond, and stable financial management. Thereby, a civic people may protect a newborn’s dignity and right to stay with the couple that conceived him or her.

Up to 16 years in prison (Page 11a). Brazil seems serious about protecting the public from IS sympathizers. Nothing has ever happened there, but they want to make certain. Liberal democrats in the USA want to talk a chance.

Other forums

Gov John Bel Edwards asks “while [the Confederacy] is certainly part of our history can we say it’s the best part?”

We can, if we face the fact that the Confederacy was a victim of believing minister’s sermons on Bible verses that condone slavery. Thereby, we may realize that, people with good hearts overlook the bad in the Bible to provide themselves comfort for a life they may not really like and hope for reward in the afterdeath. However, it is not literally the word of God and should never be used to justify immoral acts, such as slavery or war to defend a way of life predicated on slavery: The Bible seems to be literature a person may make the most of by admitting its fallacies.

Phil Beaver does not “know” the-indisputable-facts. He trusts and is committed to the-objective-truth of which most is undiscovered and some is understood. He is agent for A Civic People of the United States, a Louisiana, education non-profit corporation. See online at promotethepreamble.blogspot.com.