December 8, 2017

Phil Beaver seeks to collaborate on the-objective-truth, which can only be discovered. 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.
 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 June 21, 1788 preamble:  We the civic citizens 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. Composing their own paraphrase, citizens may consider the actual preamble and perceive whether they are willing or dissident toward its principles.   

Our Views (Loren Scott’s report)

The mild forecast by Scott does not offer hope in light of Gov. John Bel Edwards’s talent to do the wrong thing.

Today’s thought, G.E. Dean (Exodus 20:12-14 CJB) “Honor your father and mother, so that you may live long in the land which Adonai your God is giving you. Do not murder. Do not commit adultery.”

Dean says, “Isn’t it time we got back to God’s plan for marriage and family[?] Neglecting this truth has caused untold damage.”

Much of the damage that comes to mind is brought on by father and mother. That unfortunate actual-reality prompts some questions. Should an unloved child honor father and mother? Should a child who never knew father honor father? Since God is created in man’s image (it works both ways), is God the cause of the damage? Or is civic justice each person’s opportunity and duty? Has God assigned the discovery, establishment and maintenance of civic justice to the continually renewed living people?

Perhaps our chance for civic peace hinges on private liberty with civic morality, with which statutory laws based on justice rather than dominant opinion may be developed.

    

Letters

Traffic police (Partesotti) ()

Traffic stops often lead to discovery of drugs, sex trafficking and illegal aliens.

Further empower Citizens United (Morrison) ()

I agree that public integrity should be increased rather than lessened.

PGA uplifting TV (Delahoussaye) ()

I agree. PGA is entertaining rather than imposition. Moreover, viewers are not exposed to visceral helmet-to-helmet brain attacks.

The brain is so essential to the human existence; a body and mind comprise a person. Football seems to arbitrarily risk persons.

 

Columns. (The fiction/non-fiction comments gallery for readers)

  

Cute use of “is” (Rich Lowry) (politico.com/magazine/story/2017/11/29/the-trump-presidency-isnt-nearly-as-bad-as-it-sounds-215985)

“Trump’s presidency operates on a largely separate track than his Twitter feed and his other off-script interjections and pronouncements. He’s certainly violating norms, worth preserving in their own right, of how a president should conduct himself and speak.“

Trump makes an obviously true statement: Election to the presidency does not eliminate freedom of responsible expression. To belittle people’s lies requires controversial speech.

I do not consider Lowry’s writing, which I read, as reliable as Trump’s tweets, which I read about.

  

Trump (Dana Milbank) creators.com/read/walter-williams/06/17/were-confederate-generals-traitors

“Trump’s erraticism is damaging in its own right, to alliances and civility, but the greatest danger is that while we chase Trump’s distractions, we lose sight of real calamity.”

“Alliances and civility” as effected by Milbank would be collectivism among liberal democrats.

In the decades since the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Alkinsky-Marxist organizations (AMO) arose and their collectivism seemed poised to impose liberal democracy (chaos) on the American republic (civic order). The rule of statutory law has not yet established that the-objective-truth is the basis of  human freedom and that persons are too psychologically powerful to conform to arbitrary opinion.

  

However, the 2017 rebuke of the sex revolution, which developed during the era of liberation theology, perhaps marks the nadir of civic morality and hope for the ascension to widespread personal liberty with civic morality; in other words, civic peace, with statutory justice that constrains dissidents to civic morality.  

 

Alabama opinion (Byron York) (washingtonexaminer.com/why-the-alabama-senate-race-is-shifting-in-roy-moores-favor/article/2642236)

York presents evidence for his opinions. However, he typically overlooks some fundamental human issues that transcend politics.

Evolution of the species has produce one, the human species, that is psychologically powerful enough for the possibility and responsibility for personal freedom. Rose Wilder Lane (book, The Discovery of Freedom, 1943) pointed out that cultural evolution has not yet informed most people to avoid subjugation to authority.

The signers of the draft constitution for the USA provided, in the preamble, an agreement by which willing people may collaborate for personal freedom with civic morality. The preamble was ratified by nine states on June 21, 1788. However, the first Congress, with the tenth state having joined the USA, re-established the factional-Protestant political partnership the British colonists were accustomed to. The American theism-political partnership has dominated the people since then.

I am no authority and struggle to understand republicanism vs democracy. It seems republicanism struggles for the rule of statutory law but has not yet discovered personal liberty with civic morality; perhaps it cannot move past the notion of theism for everybody, in particular Christianity for everybody. It seems democracy struggles for self-rule or self-governance. In the absence of a majority who perceive justice in self-rule, democrats have evolved to a collectivism based on joining with groups who cause they do not really support. Between these two exclusions: the rule of law vs self-rule, and their associated parties, the GOP and the DNC, there are many blends.

I consider myself a responsible liberal or a fiscal conservative. I regard those two phrases as near synonyms. I oppose liberal-democratic collectivism and consider their Alinsky-Marxist organizations (AMO) as un-American intent to overthrow the preamble itself or the hope for personal liberty with civic morality. I call it civic peace.

I think the people of Alabama are making the statement:  We will not yield to either AMO or Barack Obama’s latest version, OFA.

Other forums 

libertylawsite.org/2017/12/06/resistance-and-the-crisis-of-authority-in-american-politics/

To Ken: Starting at the end of your statements and working backwards, I oppose believing. Since I stopped believing, I admit to myself that I do not know what I do not know. It does not matter to me, but your beliefs about my beliefs are for you and of you. They influence neither me nor people who are interested in civic peace.

Your claim that there are no civic citizens—that I imagine them—is false. Many “real flesh and blood people” in America are responsibly free and many of them practice the civic agreement that is stated in the preamble. What I propose is the acceptance that the preamble’s inclusiveness, “We the People of the United States,” will perhaps never be. That is, there will always be dissidents to the agreement that is stated in the preamble. But the civic citizens care about the civic vs dissidents division—contrary to your claim “who cares.” Perhaps you are hung up on the-objective-truth and physics. People avoid falling off bridges because they know the power of gravity. (Borrowing from Lane.)

Furthermore, dissidents are, after all, human beings, and as such are too psychologically powerful to accept dominant opinion, such as factional-Christian doctrines, as the-objective-truth. Aware humans civically subject themselves only to actual-reality, and some hope for a favorable hereafter. Therefore, a civic culture must be based on collaboration to discover and use the-objective-truth to establish statutory justice, law, and law enforcement. Human beings will not accept religious beliefs as a basis of civic justice.

By collaborating on the-objective-truth, civic citizens empower themselves to responsibly pursue the happiness they perceive rather than the idea someone else has for them. When most people are living with responsible freedom, dissidents will observe the benefits and reform, such that the culture asymptotically approaches We the People of the United States.

Despite my stand, when most people behave with responsible freedom, every no-harm belief flourishes, whether it’s a personal belief or an association of believers. The fact that I oppose the practice of believing, so as to trust and commit to the-objective-truth (which I do not know), harms neither me nor anyone else in the world.

You belittle physics—reality—by changing the subject to science, a study. You might sober up a bit (toward physics) by reading Rudyard Kipling’s story, “The Man Who Would be King,” 1888, or watch the great John Huston movie of the same name. It is an outstanding illustration of the power of biology, a progeny of physics, over religious belief. Also, you may then go to your mirror and say to the face there: You are the pretender: be thankful and sober up.

Sam Harris has nothing to do with either Albert Einstein or me. I discovered Einstein’s essay there by google search and am glad to share the information, despite blind skeptics who write before they read. I have never tried to understand why Harris reprinted Einstein’s essay.

“This didn’t happen” is meaningless beyond personal denial. The fact is, Christianity falsely labels the preamble a secular sentence. The preamble is neutral to religion and is a civic contract. But denial of the-objective-truth is how dissidents divide themselves from a civic people.

On the contrary, people like Barack Obama think of people as objects for the state. Obama said, “Together we determined that a modern economy requires . . . schools and colleges to train our workers.” I want an education system that coaches children to understand the basics and intend to live a full life in responsible freedom.

Thank you for pointing out a poor choice of words. I hereby revise the statement to “the elites of America think it’s OK for many American children to be born only to continue generations of poverty.” No thanks for your arrogant “baby licensure” whatever it means. I wrote “procreation licensing so as to civically protect children from adults who will not appreciate them.” An interminable skeptic would easily distort my statement.

I arrived at where you started. I hope you have a better idea of what I am working for and have begun to think about how the people may collaborate for civic peace.

To Button Gwinnet: The procreation license I have in mind solely protects children from being conceived for a life without love.

For example, humankind understands that the human body does not complete construction of the wisdom-building parts of the brain until age 23 (female) or 25 (male). I suggest the procreation license require the woman be older than 28 and the man older than 30.

The idea is to inform people rather than force people.

As for abortion, I constantly write that I oppose abortion for fun but otherwise oppose tyranny against a woman who is pregnant. Her decision to remain pregnant is private.

Phil Beaver does not “know” the-indisputable-facts, or actual-reality. 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.