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 write.
Note 1: I often dash
words in 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" refers to citizens who collaborate for the people more than for the city.
A personal paraphrase
of the preamble by & for Phil Beaver: We the willing people of nine of
the thirteen United States commit to and trust in the purpose and goals
stated herein --- integrity, justice, collaboration, defense, prosperity,
liberty, and perpetuity --- and to cultivate limited services by the USA, beginning
on June 21, 1788.
Composing their own paraphrase, citizens may consider the actual preamble
and perceive whether they are willing or dissident toward its agreement.
It seems the current tax is 12.41%; http://brgov.com/dept/finance/facts102.htm. It seems in New Orleans its 14% + 1.75% + $2/day, perhaps another 1%, so almost 18%; sonesta.com/us/louisiana/new-orleans/royal-sonesta-new-orleans/fact-sheet-0.
I’ll vote “Yes.”
Also, I urge
residents to help keep hotel visitors safe in Baton Rouge and elsewhere. Report
crime after you see it happening and, if possible, capture faces on cellphone
video.
Today’s thought,
G.E. Dean (Psalms 19:14 CJB)
“May the words of my mouth and the thoughts of my heart be
acceptable in your presence, ADONAI, my Rock and Redeemer.”
Dean says “This is a great prayer. Let’s live with this
thought in mind.”
David and Dean would assign to their personal phantasm the
duty they possess as psychologically powerful human beings. In other words,
they evade the civic citizen’s responsibility: comprehend the-objective-truth
and behave accordingly. The civic citizen can and may, without being inhuman or supernatural,
collaborate for mutual, comprehensive safety and security while responsibly
hoping for any personally preferred hereafter. However, he or she cannot, in
other words is not able to, impose his or her hopes on other civic citizens.
Preferring civic justice, I will not follow erroneous expressions
from David (3000 years ago) or Dean (perhaps now).
Letters
Stringent bitterness (Sheehan)
(theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/letters/article_694d5f06-bfea-11e7-9d30-1bb6e5c4d1e5.html)
I oppose this
opinion: “. . . sheriffs,
district attorneys and other opponents to criminal justice reform . . . care
about victims only until their cases are closed, then they’re done with us —
until they need to exploit [victims] for political reasons.”
Civic citizens do not condone
chaos dictated by criminals. History shows there will always be a faction of
citizens who think crime pays. Civic citizens must constrain crime and incarcerate
those citizens who are committed to crime. Citizens who favor habitual
criminals are dissidents to justice and the system of enforcement.
Criminals empower
themselves by coercion and force. Civic citizens propose and authorize a
monopoly on force. Responsibility for statutory law enforcement is assigned to
first responders, jailers, DA’s, investigators, and others. The idea is to
protect victims and avoid making bystanders victims.
Staying out of harm’s way implies
not being present during criminal incidents: That’s easy for criminals but not
so easy for victims and innocent bystanders who may become victims. However,
the enforcement system is not invoked until there is a crime.
Criminals can choose to stay away from crime, which means
fewer victims.
The-objective-truth (Washington)
(theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/letters/article_6fe8f7fe-bfee-11e7-a55e-9f698c80fa9a.html)
Civic
people encounter the insufficiency of the truth.
It
happened to me in 2006, after my speech “Faith in the Truth,” which I no longer
offer, first, because “faith” is misleading. A great teacher, Dr. Harold
Weingarten, Baton Rouge, asked me, “Phil, by the truth do you mean absolute
truth, ultimate truth, God’s truth, your truth, or what.” I weakly responded, “The
truth I refer to is not subject to human evaluation.”
Today, I advocate, trust and commit to
the-objective-truth, which is explained in promotethepreamble.blogspot.com/2017/08/the-objective-truth.html.
I am grateful to Harold for collaboration and have told him so, but do so
again.
Accepting the-objective-truth, Washington is correct. It is insufficient,
for example, to expose students to some official passages from Socrates’ trial
that lead to the hemlock.
The student who would own and opinion as to why Socrates
died some 2500 years ago, must study Plato’s Euthyphro, Apology, Crito, and Phaedo.
The student
who would vicariously experience the meaning of justice in a criminal world may
do so by studying Faulkner’s Barn Burning.
The student
who would come to grips with the humanity of an African slave may do so by
discovering “I’ll just go to Hell” in Mark Twain’s “The Adventures of Huckleberry
Finn.”
The student
who would count mathematics a subset of physics may contemplate that 2 apples
plus 2 oranges is 4 fruit, and neither imagination nor games can change the physical
facts. (Therein, physics is energy, mass, and space-time, rather than the mere
study and its study-progeny.)
America’s
youth are being subjected to perhaps the 25th best education system
in the world, the USA’s system. And in the USA, Louisiana is ranked perhaps 46th.
That means Louisiana ranks perhaps 1100th in the world.
To Wayne Varnado:
The collaboration you offer I
like best is the importance of comrehension, which comes not from the teacher's
impositions but from the student's desire for personal autonomy or authenticity.
Columns. (The
fiction/non-fiction comments gallery for readers)
Media writers (Bernard Goldberg)
(sott.net/article/366304-No-one-wins-in-the-Fake-News-war)
Hubris, in
other words, personal gullibility, rather than humility motivates Goldberg’s
presumption to represent journalists.
As the function
expected by the people and protected by the first amendment, a journalist is “a
person who keeps a journal”
(Merriam-Webster online, definition 2). The essential journal is the record
created by the people to establish civic justice. Goldberg represents “a writer
or editor for a news medium” (MW, definition 1). They’re a dime a dozen and miss-educated
by Mass-Communications Colleges.
Goldberg exposes his failure in “Journalists
. . . should admit to their . . . hatred . . . of this president.” Journalists
record the journey without emotions.” I know this, because I am a journalist.
Each evening, I consider recording events of the day so that I can look them up
when I have forgotten. There’s no way I would record a lie. Hatred is a lie.
Among human beings, there is no place for hate.
Civic citizens of America have been
aware for decades that media writers lie. President Trump is a special citizen
in that he has given media writers and MassComm schools every opportunity to
admit their guilt and reform. However, as far as I can tell, media are just digging
in deeper.
In the people’s march toward civic
justice, the media writers are losing and I cannot name a single journalist who
records, with integrity, the people’s march; honesty, yes, integrity, no.
I suggest the people amend the
first amendment to protect a free and responsible press.
The Bible between man and God (Richard Cohen)
realclearpolitics.com/articles/2017/10/31/martin_luther_was_a_flawed_figure_but_does_he_too_deserve_the_red_paint_of_protest_135401.html
Cohen, as writers often do, took a
step into mysticism in “[Luther] interposed no one between man and God. One had
to read the Bible.”
The Bible is a phantasm that does
not represent God. In other words, the man who can factually interpret the
Bible has not subjugated the-objective-truth about God.
The NFL (theadvocate.com/new_orleans/sports/saints/article_dbe38906-c016-11e7-baa1-03c0c41c060c.html)
To Don Marshall and Woody Jenkins:
The NFL and others are experiencing
what they could have observed from past events: responsibility in freedom of
speech. Violent speech begs woe, and if woe is due, it will surely come.
For fairness to innocent citizens,
the Louisiana Constitution, to protect freedom of expression, states that the
speaker may be held responsible for consequences; yelling “Fire!” can bring the
speaker woe. The people, to protect innocents, may revise the First Amendment
to “responsible freedom of speech” (and responsible press, too).
However, at the crux of 228 years’
civic injustice is Woody Jenkins’ arrogant “the rest of us” and Don Marshall’s
will to impose American theism on fellow citizens, some of whom pursue
non-theism, other theism, secularism, and other personal preferences.
Citizens who reference the
Declaration of Independence as representing the founders’ opinions express
erroneous, American theism. American theism in fact suppresses the importance
of 1774 British colonists going to war to stop their own enslavement by
England. The civic citizens then included those who wrote: Upon victory, the
African slaves must be liberated. However, the statesmen who stayed in America
quickly, erroneously, re-established American theism and continued to modify
Blackstone common law.
More important to the American
dream---civic morality---is the 1783 influence of George Washington. He was
devout to his God, whatever that entity was. He retired as general and humbly
addressed follow-citizens, calling citizens “your Excellency.” He presented
four pillars on which a possible future nation might survive:
1st An indissoluble Union of the
States under one federal Head.
2ndly A sacred regard to public
Justice.
3dly The adoption of a proper Peace
Establishment—and
4thly The prevalence of that pacific
and friendly disposition among the people of the United States, which will
induce them to forget their local prejudices and policies, to make those mutual
concessions which are requisite to the general prosperity, and, in some
instances, to sacrifice their individual advantages to the interest of the
community.
There’s no theism in the four pillars. See
founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/99-01-02-11404.
The new book “Scalia Speaks,”
discloses Washington’s influence on Justice Antonin Scalia. Borrowing words
from Scalia, the people’s “responsibility is the here, not the hereafter.”
Washington closed his farewell with earnest hopes for his God’s protection for
fellow citizens. However, no one could then nor may now say whether
Washington’s God was Deist, Christian, or the-objective-truth, which is not an
atheism. Don Marshall invokes the founders and, if omitting general and
fellow-citizen George Washington, begs civic woe rather than justice.
Neither the civic-citizens’
agreement offered in the preamble to the constitution for the USA nor the
public expression of the National Anthem, “The Star Spangled Banner,” invoke
God.
Fellow civic citizens are free to have their personal God or none. People
who would impose their God on fellow citizens “[make a] bed [and] lay in it!”
borrowing from Woody Jenkins. However, they do so with the possibility of
consequences delivered by the tribunal invoked in Abraham Lincoln’s appeal
against American theism:
“Why should there not be a patient
confidence in the ultimate justice of the people? Is there any better or equal
hope in the world? In our present differences, is either party without faith of
being in the right? If the Almighty Ruler of Nations, with His eternal truth
and justice, be on your side of the North, or on yours of the South, that truth
and that justice will surely prevail by the judgment of this great tribunal of
the American people.”
For my future, the NFL is history. I
doubt the “tribunal of the American people” will be as stubborn as me.
However,
the controversy about the flag, the well accepted symbol of the American dream,
civic justice, is at the center of a 229 year struggle. The people may
establish a super-majority of citizens who comprehend, trust, and commit to the
civic agreement that is offered in the preamble to the constitution for the
USA. Those who do not, are dissidents to civic justice, for reasons they may or
may not understand.
Whether with or without
understanding, the people divide themselves according to the preamble: Civic
citizens and dissidents comprise the people.
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.
No comments:
Post a Comment