February 18, 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 am willing to collaborate with other citizens on this paraphrase, yet may settle on and would always preserve the original text.   

Letters yesterday

Women compete with women (Stich) (theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/letters/article_58ea28b0-0b8f-11e8-af93-336bb86449ac.html)

To John Smith:  Thank you for expressing your thoughts. I appealingly disagree with you.

Let's examine my work and your claims. I work for private liberty with civic morality; mutual, comprehensive safety and security; human justice; statutory justice according to the-objective-truth rather than dominant opinion; religions that do not harm flourishing; a civic culture that collaborates with all societies that first do no harm.

 

Merriam-Webster online defines fascism: "often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime . . . that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition."

 

I work for the civic individual, facing the fact that there are dissidents to civic morality, such as people who believe crime pays; there are individuals whose behavior is evil. Where's the fascism in "statutory justice according to the-objective-truth rather than dominant opinion," or any of the synonyms I listed?

 

I carefully wrote, "Couples who usually have sex rather than making love are candidates for infidelity," which leaves room for a couple to sometimes have sex as love-making. You converted that and the woman's responsibility for her ova to my "philosophy to both eugenics and who owns the eggs and how screwing . . . "

During her fertile years, a woman may ovulate about 13 times a year producing 400 viable ova. A civic woman collaborates with her ova, and a civic man appreciates their collaboration so as to protect them both.

 

My friendship is available, even in the face of distorting my ideas. Discovery of your human authority to consider my statements rather than your creativity about my statements is a responsibility I cannot usurp.

  

In the USA, neither government nor God usurps the human individual's authority over his or her energy during life. Each individual may collaborate for human justice for living as well as pursue personal preferences in hope and comfort---perhaps respecting his or her afterdeath.

I recently discovered, and am reforming to this idea: In every thought, word, and act, I will first do no harm. From discussion, I was informed that some action produces unexpected harm. I considered changing the statement to “I will first intend no harm.” However, I collaborated with family and friends and concluded that “intend” is too weak. First, do no harm.

   

Other forums

Letters to the editor, “Blame Mother Nature,” Wall Street Journal, February 14, 2018, page A18.

Senator John Kennedy objected to Louisiana depicted as “grazing at the trough of federal handouts.” Good thing Kennedy opposes Gov. John Bel Edwards’ Medicaid financial boasts. Edwards made “It’s the right thing to do,” a hog call.

Letters to the editor, (President Clinton’s lies under oath) Wall Street Journal, February 14, 2018, page A18.

  

It seems clear that when human individuals lie, they remove themselves from the civic forum, civic meaning citizens collaborating for mutual, comprehensive safety and security.

The Democratic Party has not collected the woe it begged by supporting President Clinton’s lies. A civic people may stop neglecting human justice any time they perceive the benefits.

Lies beg woe, and woe comes on its own timing.

Review and Outlook, “Russian Meddling This Election,” Wall Street Journal, February 14, 2018, page A18.

  

It is un-American to worry about “democratic processes,” in this constitutional republic. Voting execution, yes; democratic processes, no. Commitment to the preamble, yes; foreign influence, no. Domestic voting intrigue, yes; foreign tempering, no.

To put this another way, the American voter either 1) votes for his or her preferences in political outcomes (votes for his or her personal benefit) or 2) block votes---say with his or her political party or a favored race or other society, such as institutional religion. The candidates he or she must consider are nominated with money that comes from everywhere! Remember candidate Obama on tour in Europe and the Middle East? See theguardian.com/world/2008/jul/18/barackobama.uselections2008.

However, the American voter is stubborn in his or her insistence on long-term human justice. The people, by ignoring the preamble to the constitution for the USA, have already weakened the American republic. We may reform any time we perceive the need.

  

quora.com/Is-secession-compatible-with-democracy

Presenting this question under an American-flag icon seems un-American, regardless of the definition of “democracy.”

American voters have at least three levels of voting, each with its constitutional limits on outcomes: Town/county elections, state elections, and federal elections. Some offices may be filled by popular vote, but divisions of powers prevent democracies, usually at all three levels. Powers are distributed among administration, legislation, adjudication, and constitutional infrastructures, such as safety and security both foreign and domestic.

The USA is a constitutional republic, not a democracy.

Secession has already been attempted, when the CSA (seven states) fired on the USA (27 states) in 1861. The tribunal of the American people, by military power rejected the bid.

Foreign powers and aliens against a civic people (citizens who understand, trust, and commit to the preamble to the constitution for the USA) would like to impose democracy, social democracy, liberal democracy, or some other form of chaos on Americans.

I doubt civic Americans will ever forsake the American republic—-collaboration for statutory justice.

Secession may be compatible with some democracy, but America is not a democracy.

quora.com/Would-you-say-that-with-every-technological-or-political-advancement-society-moves-in-the-opposing-direction-culturally-i-e-a-sort-of-modern-primitivism

Your question is too complex for my thinking, so I would like to restate it: Would you say that with each discovery of the-objective-truth the cultures that have evolved weaken in the attempt to preserve their particular primitivism?

I think my restatement preserves your concern, and I answer with a resounding, yes.
 

Humankind is on a deliberate quest for civic morality; that is mutual, comprehensive safety and security for the living people. With each discovery of the-objective-truth, humankind’s understanding increases, and people living on the edge of awareness and comprehension benefit. Let’s call this the civic culture, a culture that transcends all other societies and civilizations. Members of the civic culture accept their human authority to behave in civic morality or human justice.

However, many humans are constrained by their national or other cultural constraints and spend so much energy preserving doctrine they believe they cannot stay informed and appreciative toward the-objective-truth: they must “preserve the faith”.

A case in point is the conservative law professor who claims originalism but does not attempt to preserve the draft constitution signed on September 17, 1787, and ratified by representatives of the people of nine states on June 21, 1788, establishing the USA. Amendments after that date do not represent the intent of the signers, and therefore are amendable to the original intent of their discussions. A prime example is the 1791 imposition of freedom of religion, an institutional doctrine, rather than freedom to think, a human authority. Also, the declaration of war against England has no thoughts the may be imposed on the signers. The signers and ratifiers prior to March 4, 1789, are the only founding fathers.

Each time freedom of religion is held above freedom of thought, for example, in Greece v Galloway, 2014, the USA regresses.

The-objective-truth is the basis of human justice, and it can only be discovered. Reason responds to it, but the-objective-truth does not respond to reason. With each discovery, societies that do not conform to the-objective-truth lessen their opportunities to benefit from actual reality. However, humankind maintains its march toward civic morality—-human justice—-leaving the conservative cultures in developing primitivism.

libertylawsite.org/2018/02/16/a-secular-argument-for-religion-in-the-public-square

The originalism we attest to occurred during May, 1787 until June 21, 1788, when the people’s delegates in nine state ratification conventions ratified the preamble and the draft constitution, establishing the USA. A tenth state joined the USA before the first Congress was seated for ten states on March 4, 1789. Ideas outside this time-envelop were not subjugated to the debates by the signers (2/3 of twelve states’ delegates) and the 1/3 dissenters at the Philadelphia convention plus the ratifiers and therefore do not qualify as original statutory justice. Attempts to impose on the signers expressions from the declaration of war against England are sophistry, some in sympathy with the dissenters.

The separation of church from state that was offered by the signers was undone by the First Congress by May, 1789, when they erroneously hired factional-Protestant ministers to represent legislative divinity on par with the English Parliament’s self-appointed legislative divinity.

Each human being has the authority to control his or her life-time of energy. It is not a right, granted by God or a government but rather is an evolving human characteristic. The person may attempt to subjugate his or her authority, but neither God nor government either accepts or usurps the responsibility for the person’s behavior.

Most cultures impose on the individual the erroneous civil morality that he or she needs a higher power in order to control behavior within civic justice. Therefore, rare and fortunate is the individual who accepts his or her human authority to behave and to develop fidelity to the-objective-truth. This fidelity is comprehensive and extends to all human connections.

In a civic culture, most people intend fidelity to the-objective-truth and stay informed as civic morality is discovered. For example, the Christian guided by 1700 years of passages in the Holy Bible that support the slave-master relationship reforms immediately on hearing Frederick Douglas’s idea that slavery is OK for everyone but me. But not Bible interpreter Robert E. Lee, who reasoned that abolitionists were evil in their opposition to God’s plan: see leefamilyarchive.org/9-family-papers/339-robert-e-lee-to-mary-anna-randolph-custis-lee-1856-december-27 from “The blacks are immeasurably better off here than in Africa” to “Still I fear he will persevere in his evil Course.” Lee, by responding to the-objective-truth rather than religion could have sold everything and moved to a non-slave state five years before President Lincoln asked him to lead the army for the USA.

Professor McGinnis and the commenters so far have not addressed the question. Does God represent the-objective-truth or does the-objective-truth represent God? (Plato had Socrates ask that question as “the good,” which involves values, whereas the-objective-truth simply is, and humankind’s role is to benefit from discovery.)

It is not surprising that this forum, till now, did not quote the late Antonin Scalia on separation of church and state. I only comprehend that he thought justice is a developing, human responsibility and salvation is for the afterdeath. See homespunvine.com/lecture-justice-antonin-scalia-on-capitalism-socialism-and-christian-virtue/.

America cannot achieve what it can be until a civic people separate church from state, so that dissidents may reform by statutory justice according to the-objective-truth rather than by coercion or force according to God.

Review & Outlook, “Kelly and the Chaos,” Wall Street Journal, February 14, 2018, page A18.

The WSJ unintentionally describes what Barack Obama, the current priest of Saul Alinsky organization (AMO), works for in the USA: perpetual political dysfunction. Obama obfuscates AMO with OFA. See ofa.us then, about AMO see  newenglishreview.org/DL_Adams/Saul_Alinsky_and_the_Rise_of_Amorality_in_American_Politics/ and washingtonexaminer.com/alinsky-disciple-obama-does-the-master-proud/article/238191 plus washingtonexaminer.com/study-saul-alinsky-to-understand-barack-obama/article/243226.

quora.com/What-can-society-do-legally-or-technologically-in-order-to-bring-more-objectivity-and-clarity-to-the-media

I continually criticize my hometown newspaper to reform to a free and responsible press. For example, see my post on their editorial on February 14, 2018: Our Views: Ash Wednesday reminds us of our limits. It is also an essay against the imposition of Christianity onto civic morality in the USA. Typically, when I post such an essay, especially if I am there first, there is no public response. The idea of reform after 229 years of self-appointed congressional deity in the USA is shocking. But to me, it’s pure Chapter XI Machiavellian tyranny: The Prince: Chapter XI.

I wish you would help me develop A Civic People: see promotethepreamble.blogspot.com. The idea is to establish a civic people as a super-majority who trust-in and commit-to the civic agreement that is offered in the preamble to the constitution for the USA, and by example, during the future influence dissidents to join a civic people. You could act by communicating with me then sponsoring meetings at your local library. At this point, I have no intention of making this a tax-deferred non-profit, because I want an American reform by most Americans, but so far, only sixty people have collaborated. I do not want to join the crowd/ocean of non-profits and civil institutions. You could call me at 225–766–7365 for response to your questions about what has been accomplished in four years of library meetings.

Lastly, and most importantly, a constitutional amendment seems an unsalable brick wall, but that is not so. The First Amendment needs to be changed to protect free and responsible expression not only for the individual but for the press. For example, just as a person cannot with immunity yell “Fire” in a crowded assemble, the press cannot with immunity publish lies. The press has made a big deal about foreign interference in the 2016 election, while The New York Times seems a force for social democracy in order to undo the American republic—-for decades now. Social democracy is dysfunction and chaos, as we see in Europe, whose people cannot even imagine American republicanism. So, my plea is for people to consider free and responsible expression and if they agree, frequently write their Congressmen demanding the amendment.

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.