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.