Asking conservative libertylawsite writers to consider "Jane Eyre"'s Christian experience

Phil Beaver seeks to collaborate on the-objective-truth, which can only be discovered. The comment box below invites readers to write.

"Civic" refers to citizens who collaborate for responsible freedom 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 to us by the USA. I want to collaborate with other citizens on this paraphrase, yet would always preserve the original text.   

Our Views (theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/our_views/article_1fbd96fc-1743-11e8-ae7a-f75321fce1f6.html)

The Advocate on Tuesday reported an ultimatum by the Legislative Black Caucus, who “took a swing at Republicans for suggesting that the group had threatened to derail any compromise that didn't meet members' demands.” The Republicans had slammed Gov. John Bel Edwards for poor leadership. See theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/news/politics/legislature/article_c7421160-1b20-11e8-ba42-7be1f25d0e92.html.

Today, The Advocate chooses sides in the fray: “Compromise is now a dirty word, particularly in the balky caucus of the House Republicans. That's been the biggest obstacle to progress — even more than whatever errors Gov. John Bel Edwards might have made in the process.” Compromise is inferior to collaboration so as to help the people of Louisiana rather than conflict for dominant opinion.

It’s The Advocate and the Legislative Black Caucus against the people of Louisiana. Edwards is a mere pawn. I encourage Edwards to step aside under the adage: lead, follow, or get out of the way.

I hope The Advocate will reform from its attraction to social democracy. The USA needs to restore the path to private liberty with civic morality that was abandoned by dissidents after March 4, 1789, when the First Congress, representing ten states, was seated. It would not be too difficult to restore the 1787 constitution for the USA.

For one thing, the Congressional Black Caucus would need to voluntarily collaborate using the preamble, a civic agreement. The Civil War made it clear that most white citizens collaborate using the preamble.

Also, The Advocate could become responsible rather than merely free, so as to help preserve freedom of the press. I'm ready to create some restrictions on mendacity with means of enforcement.

Today’s thought, G.E. Dean (Mark 9:43 CJB), The Advocate, February 28, 2018, 7B.

"If your hand makes you sin, cut it off! Better that you should be maimed but obtain eternal life, rather than keep both hands and go to Gei-Hinnom, to unquenchable fire!”

Dean says, “Hell is a real place. Jesus said so.”

Good grief! I long since perceived real people rejected such barbaric thinking. It is a travesty that my hometown newspaper, in the face of a crisis in mental health, publishes such barbaric trash.

It’s hard to prove that The Advocate and G. E. Dean have not encouraged barbaric acts during past decades! It is past time for them to reform from promoting harmful ideas.

Letters

Reacting to lies (Ruzicka) (theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/letters/article_895fc642-0ac9-11e8-9826-73579d00632e.html)

  

Ruzicka, your first political phrase, “our democracy” expresses a popular lie, which you could easily discover by reading the constitution. You live in a republic, specifically, the American republic. It is unique in the world, but not exceptional:  The people have neglected the responsibility to know how to vote for their personal interests. Most people neglect their personal authority to behave for civic morality.

Now, I know you as a liar. Considering a wise instruction from an often erroneous book, I should not help a liar advance his lies; see Matthew 7:6 and consider the metaphor’s pig or dog. In the past, I would have patiently tried to persuade you to consider the words in the constitution for the USA: “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government.” After President Trump’s examples, I am not certain how I would try to communicate with you; I’m reluctant to let the other party dictate my morality and have not resolved my dilemma on the point. I think what I might say is, as long as you represent the USA as “our democracy,” I have no reason to communicate with you. That way, I have not lied.

Trump lies to liars:  His is a clear message:  “I perceive you have come to me without establishing integrity and your commitment to express integrity. I hereby make that your problem, while I resume my day’s plans.”

Other forums

libertylawsite.org/2018/02/28/boise-state-universitys-blueprint-for-social-justice-university-radicalism-scott-yenor

I appreciate Professor Yenor’s post and the five comments so far.

“Who could object to a university embracing Academic Excellence, Caring, Citizenship, Fairness, Respect, Responsibility, and Trustworthiness as Shared Values?” An answer is: anyone who prefers privacy rather than caring; justice more than fairness; appreciation before respect; liberty rather than sharing; mutual safety and security more than citizenship; and freedom-from oppression and aspiration to liberty-to pursue personal happiness rather than the dictates of others.

Many people ponder what to do about the chaos that has developed. I constantly work to inspire relief by the people rather than by government or God. Neither one of those powers—state nor church—usurps human authority.

American citizens lost track of the 1787 Constitution for the USA. Some are influenced by foreigners, who do not realize the USA is unique more than exceptional. For example, some citizens are influenced by English tradition. The colonists turned statesmen won independence from England in 1781 at Yorktown, Virginia. In general, Europeans erroneously work for social democracy. But Americans understand freedom-from and liberty-to and will not freely go back to before.

The colonists had experienced freedom-from European oppression and from 1607 through 1765 earned the liberty-to live according to private preferences yet pursue civic morality. They declared war for justice more than controversial rights. In 1788, the people in nine of the 1783 Treaty of Paris’s thirteen free and independent states authorized a unique nation based on a civic agreement that is offered in the preamble to the constitution for the USA. By “civic” I mean voluntary, or without contrived coercion or force. The agreement is in the civic American’s genes and memes more than articulation.

The preamble offers a voluntary agreement by individual citizens, and many Americans erroneously reject it for reasons they may or may not understand. The agreement proposes collaboration for the American republic rather than democracy or monarchy. The American republic empowers every individual who collaborates for civic justice rather than dominant opinion. But most people do not accept their individual authority for living, and therefore choose some doctrine. Perhaps, by experience, they discover the doctrine’s evil before their life ends. If so, they may seek a new doctrine, continuously denying personal authority to live their life. Some, at last, accept their human authority and behave.

“Everybody knows” that something is in control of everything, in other words, something is in control of actual reality. Perhaps the controller is God, or the-objective-truth, or chaos, or potential energy, or physics, or sheer power.

“Everybody knows” that with 7.6 billion people on earth, there must be order. Perhaps order comes from government, cultures, the people, or raw power. Many people overlook—take for granted—the civic order they practice. For example, almost all people civically queue to enter a concert.

Thus, there are two external powers each person must deal with: actual reality and government. But there’s a preeminent authority that responds to the two external powers: Each individual has the authority over his or her energy for life—perhaps his or her ninety years. He or she may develop that authority according to personal preferences. The collective, individual choices effect humankind’s progress or regress.

Those who develop authority may choose to develop fidelity; perhaps a comprehensive fidelity. That is, fidelity to the-objective-truth, to self, to family, to extended family and friends, to the people (nation), to the world, and to the universe. No one knows, but the-objective-truth may involve the God; I doubt it but do not know.

Not everyone behaves with fidelity. For example, some people perceive crime pays and therefore abuse justice until harm is discovered. Then, they may either reform or perhaps face statutory justice, even annihilation. People who lie don’t realize that they isolate themselves from the quest for justice.

Humankind seems on a deliberate march toward statutory justice, which is written law and law enforcement based on the-objective-truth (actual reality) rather than opinion. When an-objective-truth has not been discovered, a civic people collaborate for necessary law according to the theory of interconnected, discovered-objective-truths.

Having the same individual authority as other humans, criminals can accept statutory law but invariably reject capricious, dominant opinion. Criminals may be inspired to reform when a culture develops statutory justice.

Individuals who have discovered comprehensive fidelity may begin each day with the commitment: In every thought, in every word, in every action, I will first do no harm. It is a commitment more than an intention. For example, if someone has lied to him or her, he or she identifies and rebukes the lie. If he or she perceives need to act but imagines harm to another party, he or she discusses the proposal, listens to the other party’s views, and collaborates to discover beneficial action or none. These are only examples of recent experiences from my quest to first do no harm, now in my second month of practice.

I share these ideas with everyone who will read or listen and hope you will share too, with improvements I’d like to learn for collaboration. By word of mouth, we can establish an achievable, better future. One of the keys is each citizen’s individual authority to trust and commit to the preamble’s civic agreement.

  

libertylawsite.org/2018/02/28/marriage-market-and-politics-in-middlemarch-george-eliot-classical-liberalism

I am disappointed that you do not compare “Jane Eyre,” by Charlotte Bronte. Janet lives an uncanny life of civic rectitude despite potentially devastating Christian impulses.

But that’s only my view. I would love to read yours.

Phil Beaver does not “know” the actual-reality. He trusts and is committed to the-objective-truth which can only be discovered. He is agent for A Civic People of the United States, a Louisiana, education non-profit corporation. See online at promotethepreamble.blogspot.com.

February 27, 2018

Phil Beaver seeks to collaborate on the-objective-truth, which can only be discovered. The comment box below invites readers to write.

"Civic" refers to citizens who collaborate for responsible freedom 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 to us by the USA. I want to collaborate with other citizens on this paraphrase, yet would always preserve the original text.   

Our Views (theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/our_views/article_92d7ea44-180f-11e8-b5c5-0f3509508159.html)

The Advocate seems to be saying that in a civic culture, neighbors ought to be able to appeal to corporations for collaborative attention to comprehensive environmental safety and security, but that activists sometimes go so far as to be dissident toward justice.

  

Thereby, the unfortunate caption “settlement riles both sides” ruins The Advocate’s responsibility to clarify that the EPA worked for a civic culture: EPA concluded this long standing dispute with costs to the people that do not unjustly reward activists and lawyers.
 

Readers who think I am writing to complain may consider my view that I want to motivate my hometown newspaper to focus more on press responsibility as a necessity for press freedom.

      

Today’s thought, G.E. Dean (Mark 9:35 CJB), The Advocate, February 23, 2018, 5B.

"He sat down, summoned the Twelve and said to them, “If anyone wants to be first, he must make himself last of all and servant of all.”

Dean says, “Jesus was a servant and so should we.”

We need to collaborate for mutual, comprehensive safety and security. That incorporates appreciating each person’s privacy in the pursuit of their personal preferences rather than trying to impose our personal preferences on them. In other words, our collaboration addresses civic morality, which does not involve religion at all. In other words, we collaborate for separation of church and state.

I encourage The Advocate to consider this first principle of the preamble to the constitution for the USA:  The preamble is civic and therefore neither religious nor areligious. The Advocate’s support of G.E. Dean’s blasphemy is egregious.

Letters

Privilege to vote (Armstrong and Kalb) (theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/letters/article_7739ae90-1b1f-11e8-85b0-f3322766abb5.html)

 
The constitution reads “under order of imprisonment,” and these two social democrats claim it says “under imprisonment.

Armstrong and Kalb inform a civic people that social democrats want what they want and demand it now. Social democrats shameless use “human rights” as a basis for injustice. Social democrats are empowered by self-appointed legislative-judges.

  

There is no such thing as “a uniquely precious and sacred [right to vote].” Voting is a privilege. After human maturity, the first qualification for that privilege is having read, understood, trusted-in and committed-to the preamble to the constitution for the 1787 U. S. Constitution. The articles that follow create a frame work by which a civic people may deliberately establish statutory justice. Dissidents to justice, such as legislators who use prayer to proclaim divine authority and judges who disregard the preamble, may discover incentives to join the civic culture.

People who neither understand nor collaborate to establish statutory justice ought not qualify to vote. Collaborating for the agreement that is stated in the preamble is a first principle. I realize few people know what I am writing about, but like math, the preamble cannot be taught: The individual may consider it, appreciate it, and adopt its agreement. Civic citizens try to coach by example.

Justice reform off base (Landry) (theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/letters/article_4a8428a4-1b1e-11e8-9232-4ffe9ec79b6d.html)

I support the prior comments.

Rep. Landry brings to mind the adage, “The wicked flee when no one pursues.” With so much experience, why didn’t Landry influence better legislation?

Why not fund mental care for young people rather than spending money on convicts?

Why not learn from the New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary’s ruinations at Angola? theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/news/crime_police/article_c2c84230-f700-5c00-936c-85933b4b73be.html

Educate convicts rather than indoctrinate them in the world’s most notorious business scam: inculcation of fear and promise of relief after you’re are dead. The Burl Cain case should be enough to get the attention of Louisiana legislators to the need for separation of church and state; for John Bel Edwards it’s the Church and state.

In your complaints about 72 arrests out of 1900 early releases in November (is that 3 months?), why not inform us about normal statistics?

Why did you not stop incarceration of people who are accused of minor offenses when they do not meet bail?

Rep. Landry, you convinced me you are part of the problem.

Phil Beaver does not “know” the actual-reality. He trusts and is committed to the-objective-truth which can only be discovered. He is agent for A Civic People of the United States, a Louisiana, education non-profit corporation. See online at promotethepreamble.blogspot.com.

February 26, 2018

Phil Beaver seeks to collaborate on the-objective-truth, which can only be discovered. The comment box below invites readers to write.

"Civic" refers to citizens who collaborate for responsible freedom 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 to us by the USA. I want to collaborate with other citizens on this paraphrase, yet would always preserve the original text.   

Our Views (theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/our_views/article_1fbd96fc-1743-11e8-ae7a-f75321fce1f6.html)

The Advocate is egregious in its failure to report Louisiana history within American history and help readers identify the American dream: personal liberty with civic morality. The Advocate either erroneously or unjustly nourishes social democracy like Gov. John Bel Edwards' imposition of Medicaid expansion.
 
An opponent of my opinion could say, “But Phil. The Advocate personnel are all new hires.” I’d respond, that’s only an excuse emerging from freedom of the press to be irresponsible, a travesty that has been codified for 227 years.

Why did Barack Obama make a Middle East and European tour before his election in 2008? See theguardian.com/world/2008/jul/18/barackobama.uselections2008. I posit that it is because the rest of the world opposes the American republic and wants it to regress to social democracy or worse. Social democracy is chaos, as we may observe across Europe and in the USA in 2018. The Advocate personnel are not too young to read about 2008 events or about the supporting development of Alinsky-Marxist organizing (AMO) beginning before 1967.

But The Advocate could authority. The 1787 American was well aware of higher powers: God (unlikely)  or physics controls actual reality and government controls either civic justice or tyranny. The 1787 American had experienced relief from European Gods and European kingship; they had discovered freedom-from oppression and the liberty-to live according to personal opinion as to what happiness is rather than bow to the dictates of others. The signers of the 1787 constitution for the USA offered a path to statutory justice, and that path can be restored.

The 1787 American had discovered that every human has the authority to behave according to his or her fidelity and to develop judgement on which to pursue personal happiness. Neither God nor government can usurp human authority to behave according to personal preference. Government can constrain or execute a person but cannot usurp their human authority. The preamble to the constitution for the USA expresses these principles.

Social democracy is a voluntary enslavement in the nanny state, now in the USA the administrative state. The socialist says, “Government must take care of me. I will stand in line, fill out forms, and subjugate to the bureaucracy’s demands: I relinquish my authority to behave for my personal happiness.”

However, the agreement that is offered by the preamble to the constitution for the USA has no such provision. The social democrat is a dissident to American republicanism.
 
Both The Advocate and Gov. John Bel Edwards nourish American dissidence. They may reform as soon as they perceive the opportunity.

To JT McQuitty: How does this 38-page article impact opinion about the tyranny of Gov. John Bel Edwards and The Advocate's complicity?

And what, if anything, does it teach us about what Bobby Jindal, for whom I never voted, was trying to accomplish? (I noticed that for a change, The Advocate did not seem to try to use Jindal's actions as an excuse for Edwards' cheerful tyranny.)

To Stephen Richard: I agree. The Advocate personnel, often cute as they can be, may focus on substance any time they perceive incentives to become responsible.

   

Today’s thought, G.E. Dean (Leviticus 23:22 CJB), The Advocate, February 26, 2018, 5B.

"When you harvest the ripe crops produced in your land, don’t harvest all the way to the corners of your field, and don’t gather the ears of grain left by the harvesters; leave them for the poor and the foreigner; I am Adonai your God.”

Dean says, “Don’t spend all that you have on yourself. Think of others. Help others.”

This may be the most insidious advice the Church included when it canonized the Holy Bible, in the 3^rd and 4^th centuries AD. Today, we see its egregious consequences. Social democrats accuse civic people of using the Holy Bible to victimize the poor. Many elites support social democracy, thinking their wealth is so far above the fray that they are exempted from justice---antinomian.

In a civic culture, many individuals accept their human authority to behave for personal well-being; earn the living they perceive will make them happy---according to personal preferences; collaborate for statutory justice in public, or at least conform to the discoveries a civic people accomplish. For example, it is well known that the earth is 4.6 billion years old and like a globe rather than flat. Also, liars remove themselves from the civic debate; civic people do not aid liars. In a civic culture, those who actually cannot take care of themselves receive assistance; those who can but do not suffer; criminals and worse whose harm is discovered suffer statutory justice.
 
Churches construct assumptions about what is yet to be discovered, instill fears in people who will listen, concoct doctrine for relieving those fears, and sell the doctrine for profit. Their sales are chiefly for power. Their most egregious practice is to sacrifice the poor in order to build institutional wealth. If asked to justify their lies with discovery, the Church retreats. Only a dreamer would imagine that Church wealth and power could be so dissipated that no individual would imagine earning a living as a clergyman. I am a dreamer.

Only a dreamer would imagine The Advocate discontinuing support of G.E. Dean’s egregious solicitations on behalf of the Church. I am that dreamer.

Letters

Inciting lawyers (Bonin) (theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/letters/article_76f05780-1800-11e8-9621-7b005be741f0.html)

It’s lawyerly to imagine big buck profits stirred by school shootings. I think I prefer the cryptic Bonin to his explicit inspiration.

A civic culture constrains its judicial branch including its hubris.

An impossible cultural union? (Mohan) (theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/letters/article_074df5b2-129d-11e8-b6c4-3b12eb3983fe.html)

Robinson and Mohan seem in agreement about the 2^nd Amendment for differing, erroneous reasons.

Robinson randomly bloviates like any liberal democrat, hitting a few points, but mostly missing. See mysanantonio.com/opinion/commentary/article/The-issue-isn-t-mental-health-it-s-guns-12625540.php.

I see no reason to market armament like the gun Cruz had; there’s nothing to justify hunting or personal protection with military power, and a civic people no longer support militia. I hope states if not the USA will ban weapons of war.

  

A civic people do not coddle bad behavior, as this country has done, especially since the 1949 Kinsey report, exacerbated by black power, black theology, and Alinsky-Marxist organization (AMO), accelerating after 1965. Readers including Robinson may consider John Rosemond’s book, “The Diseasing of America’s Children,” 2008, mentioned in his recent post, “Mental health disorders are not tangible realities”; santafenewmexican.com/life/family/mental-health-disorders-are-not-tangible-realities/article_03dcdc9d-4b70-5e28-92cd-1c304d3a0160.html.

I think Robinson and my friend Brij Mohan have in common a religious affinity for social democracy rather than American republicanism; a unique civic order vs chaos. The UN statement of human rights is so extensive and impractical as to be meaningless except for social democratic tyranny: un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/. Robinson and Mohan could each could soften zeal by trying to understand the view I have acquired, reaching the midpoint of my eighth decade. A couple decades ago, I was living in America without understanding the preamble.

The American colonists imagined escaping two evils: European kingships and Christian tyrannies, but got saddled with an opportunity: resolving an erroneous Christian opinion. Initially, being commoners, with no training in hunting and fishing (only Lords could so use European lands), they got help for sustenance from indigenous experts: native Americans. The mastery of hunting, fishing, and self-defense is part of the American meme if not gene, for survival more than sport. I’m not Swiss, but I understand owning a gun and knowing how to use it for self-defense is part of their culture; en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Switzerland#Regulation. There were 45 Swiss homicides in 2016.

The colonists were too busy settling to realize the colonizers were empowering the agricultural economy with the African commodity still in play in 2018: black slaves. The Europe-Africa slave trade to America started in 1620 and continued until 1808. Frederick Douglass asserted that the 1787 constitution for the USA and its preamble was intended for black inhabitants; historyisaweapon.com/defcon1/douglassjuly4.html. Blacks extol Douglass, but do not collaborate to effect the agreement in the preamble.

Both Robinson and Mohan have educated themselves in social democracy and thereby miss the unique promises offered by the agreement that is state in the preamble to the constitution for the USA. It was a consequence of the events surrounding settlement of the eastern seaboard by Europeans, predominantly English settlers. Moreover, it was the discovery of freedom-from and liberty-to that the settlers experienced starting in 1607, codified in 1787, and passed on from generation to generation since then. As demonstrated by the Civil War, fought to settle a “more erroneous religious belief” (see the Declaration of Secession): black people are inferior and suffer God’s punishment. Most Americans deny this, because they want to. However, the record speaks.

The American republic holds promise for both the USA and for a world infected with ignorance, social democracy and communism. Its promise is stated in one sentence: the preamble. The preamble promises civic citizens private liberty with civic morality to develop statutory justice to constrain dissidents whether by innocence, arrogance, criminality or evil.

  

News

Philanthropy or staking BREC-tyranny? (Andrea Gallo) (theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/news/article_6acf094e-17fe-11e8-9712-17d10b05964f.html)

  

More and more I perceive philanthropy as a grubstake for public tyranny and graft. Consider the pope’s world-wide wealth-building operations and their effects in each locale; see him condone China’s operations, for example.

McKnight’s reminds me of a Chicagoan’s frustration: "I've been spending the best years of my life as a public benefactor. I've given people the light pleasures, shown them a good time. And all I get is abuse." See myalcaponemuseum.com/id211.htm.

Perhaps we'll see all BREC tax-votes fail until long after she resigns.

  

Phil Beaver does not “know” the actual-reality. He trusts and is committed to the-objective-truth which can only be discovered. He is agent for A Civic People of the United States, a Louisiana, education non-profit corporation. See online at promotethepreamble.blogspot.com.

February 25, 2018

Phil Beaver seeks to collaborate on the-objective-truth, which can only be discovered. The comment box below invites readers to write.

"Civic" refers to citizens who collaborate for responsible freedom 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 to us by the USA. I want to collaborate with other citizens on this paraphrase, yet would always preserve the original text.   

Our Views (theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/our_views/article_918bddca-1676-11e8-818e-eff16fe03545.html)

The people of Louisiana, for personal interests, ought to fire Gov. John Bel Edwards, and The Advocate personnel may create a responsible press any time they perceive financial gain by doing so.

“. . . Gov. John Bel Edwards . . . kibitzed from the sideline, saying he did not favor changes to the program,” might motivate readers to think The Advocate personnel create responsible press. However, the awkwardly written, “. . . even as budget problems — not, admittedly, of the governor's making — required him to submit proposals to reduce TOPS funding sharply,” is evidence of willful mendacity.

The constitution requires the administration to propose a balanced budget. Edwards and Dardenne could have proposed less spending, more controls, less favor to special interests, institute reliability to industrial tax breaks, and control the Medicaid expansion Edwards ordered. Instead, they issued irresponsible starting points for discussion, aimed at creating citizen-fear that might force legislators to vote for tax personal property and income increases.

Because they do not collaborate for the achievable better future for the people of Louisiana, both Edwards and Dardenne are ready for forced retirement, in my opinion.

I hope Rep. Foil re-introduces his bill for 2.75 GPA requirement.

  

   

Today’s thoughts about a PRB Socratic experience

 
Mom and Dad were such good providers! But one thing I wish they had done: both accept that I prefer commitment to the-objective-truth rather than belief in Baptist Christianity and coach me in my preference. Alas, they did not know enough, and I do not fault them for what they did not know. On the other hand, my sister thought my preference for the-objective-truth made Mom erroneously apprehensive for her salvation. But this is three or four generations later.

Yesterday, approaching age 75, I recalled my experience at age 10. I read the last two verses of the Holy Bible and felt, without articulating, “No God, whom I would follow, is so weak as to think he or she needs to psychologically threaten me.” It follows, that any person who psychologically threatens me is weak.

By personal experience, I know that 10 year old boys think for themselves; can be indoctrinated; yet have future chances to accept their human authority to think. This second point is illustrated in William Faulkner’s Barn Burning, a 30-mintue read: archive.org/…/collecteds…/collectedstories030393mbp_djvu.txt. A 10-year old boy tastes civic justice for the first time and consequently chooses to live by himself.

Yesterday, five boys rang my door bell. I answered and stepped out to enjoy the conversation and beautiful weather. Boys qualified to invite are commissioned to hear the response.

The boys tried to give me a packet and invite me to attend a Baptist church today (2/25/2018). I told them that I had dropped out of the Baptist church thirty years ago and now work to encourage civic morality. I encourage civic morality any time I perceive invitation.

I saw curious, open eyes and continued. “I see religion as private concern then hope for a favorable afterdeath; nothing wrong with that. [I perceived general agreement.] I see justice for living as a separate issue. Therefore, I try to interest people in using rather than merely referring to the preamble to the constitution for the USA. [I perceived interest.]” I asked, “Does anyone recall the preamble?”

They all raised their hands but a boy who seemed in the middle age-range seemed especially aware, so I asked him, “How does it start?”

He responded commonly correctly, “We the People.”

I said, “That’s part of it, but understanding the subject of the sentence requires the entire phrase: We the People of the United States.”

I quickly stated that it represents the individuals in their states, and only twelve states sent representatives to Philadelphia. Rhode Island suspected plans for the convention. Then, I explained that nine states ratified the draft preamble; the USA was established on June 21, 1788. In 1789, Congress was seated with only ten states, and dissidence from what the signers had made possible was restored. People hide the dissidence by referring to a broad group of statesmen as founders, but the establishers were the signers of the draft constitution.

To illustrate my point, I was going to explain what happened in the Civil War. I asked, “Why was the Civil War fought?”

 
The same boy answered, “To end slavery.”

I responded, “That’s close, but the reality is that it ended a dispute over Bible interpretation.” I started into an explanation of Robert E. Lee’s religious views in 1856, when an adult and seven more boys hurried up my sidewalk.

The adult somewhat took over, despite not knowing the prior conversation, and said that he did not want me misleading the boys. Also, he did not intend them to knock on my door, since I had sent some boys packing a year ago; in my opinion then, one of them became too insistent with his unawareness or ignorance; I did not relate this year to last year. Regardless, the adult said their message is that Jesus loves me and they want me to enjoy heaven with them and are praying for me.

A pretty severe debate and argument ensued, wherein I informed the adult (and all who heard) that just as I do not fear my origins I do not fear my destiny. I then informed him that I do not appreciate anyone coming to my home to try to invoke fear and promises for relief from the fabricated fear. Yet I appreciate a neighbor who helps in time of need; he retorted that the civic neighbor works for God’s reward. He added that my salvation is compelling, because it is getting late [I guess he is not aware of my plan to live to age 121]. He regurgitated Jesus’ love for me.

I informed them it’s not a love I want: I turned my back on hate decades ago. I stepped inside and retrieved my bible, and asked a boy to read Luke 14:25-27. He began, “Large crowds were traveling with Jesus, and turning to them he said: ‘If anyone comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters—yes, even their own life—such a person cannot be my disciple. And whoever does not carry their cross and follow me cannot be my disciple.’” [The metaphor does not work: When the executioner has condemned you, how can you retrieve the execution stake? How many people have erroneous let a poisonous snake bite them to prove either immunity or resurrection after death?]

At some point in the reading, the adult interrupted and said, “Jesus hates the sin.” A boy echoed the statement. They don’t know anything. Perhaps “disciple” was one of the twelve. But it does not matter: the erroneous “hate” is the problem.

I responded, “If it’s sin, then this passage asks family members to judge each other. Regardless, there’s no excuse for using the word “hate” in an expression about family.” I asked the older boy in the group, “Would you like someone suggesting hate among your family members?”

He hesitantly answered, “No.”

Trying to bring the debate to a close, the adult said, “We love you and are praying for you.”

I responded, “Pray in your closets, but do not pray at my doorstep.”

One of the boys erroneously said, “We pray everywhere,” as though my doorstep means nothing to him. I don’t fault the boy but the people who sent him. Perhaps some news reports are correct: There’s a newly aggressive, Christian evangelism in America.

Believing religion is for adults: The male human body does not complete the wisdom-building parts of the brain before age 25 (females 23). Giving a few years for experience and observations to kick in, a person ought not believe religion before age 40 or later, if ever. The worst human, psychological violence is to try to persuade a civically moral person that their private motivations and inspirations portend doom!

On departing, the adult reiterated that he was concerned about what the boys may have heard from me. I responded that my message was civic and that he was indoctrinating the boys in error and abusing them in the door-to-door work. As he reached the end of my walk, I said, “What you did today was aggression.”

I hope adults in Baptist and other churches read this and accept that some citizens think the preamble to the constitution for the USA requires every citizen to collaborate for civic morality, leaving religious morality a mature-adult choice. Churches don’t seem to realize that some children reared on mystery become wayward adults, much to their dismay.

Christianity might help some believers if the institutions (about 4000) would adopt civic morality for living, reserving mysterious morality for the afterdeath.
__________

Followup on Feb 26, 2018. The adult and I met and apologized for each of our failures: in every thought, word, and action, first do no harm. His similar language is do as Jesus would do.
 

The articulation of individual authority to behave while spending the energy of one human lifetime is new to me as I approach age 75. It led to the articulation of the commitment: in every thought, word, and action, first do no harm.
 

So far, I have learned that the practice of these two principles may require understanding and development. MWW, our daughter, and a friend helped me reject the notion, “first intend no harm.” Agathon’s speech, about 2500 years ago, reported in Plato’s “Symposium,” informs me that if a service I am paying for has lied to me I must discuss with the customer service office until I am convinced reform will be considered; otherwise, I am corroborating with lies to customers. I have yet to articulate the lessons from this experience, but will write about them when it seems clear to me.

One thing I am convinced of:  in a civic culture, no individual has the human authority to inform another individual that his or her authority to nourish both civic motivation/inspiration while seeking comfort and hopes for favorable afterdeath is erroneous. While I don’t doubt my authority to behave, I could be wrong.

  

Phil Beaver does not “know” the actual-reality. He trusts and is committed to the-objective-truth which can only be discovered. He is agent for A Civic People of the United States, a Louisiana, education non-profit corporation. See online at promotethepreamble.blogspot.com.