Keeping judicial tyranny secret

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, state, nation, or other institution.

A personal paraphrase of the June 21, 1788 preamble, the 1787 Constitution’s most neglected statutory law:  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 and our states by the USA. I want to collaborate with other citizens on this paraphrase, yet would always preserve the original, 1787, text, unless amended by the people.   

Our Views

May 5 (theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/our_views/article_31704798-4fc7-11e8-8179-1f151f617289.html)

Watts, thank you for staying informed.

HB 699 reflects the diabolical posture of the judicial system itself.

Speaking for the people, a responsible and free press is essential to the rule of law, and the First Amendment to the constitution for the USA makes at least half that point: “Congress shall make no law . . . prohibiting . . . the freedom of . . . the press.”

Judge Ansardi says “I will.” Legislators Stagni and Claitor say, “We’ll carry the liablitliy.”

The Advocate personnel say, kill HB 699, and I agree.

Now, The Advocate personnel, let’s kill HB 365 so as to preserve a great Louisiana jury rule that helps protect the people from judicial evil.

May 5 (theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/our_views/article_7b116b12-4fb7-11e8-896d-6f592fc81b50.html)

The Advocate personnel seem forgiving on another failure by Gov. John Bel Edwards and others.

The question is, who’s getting a deal? A civic citizen can’t resist recalling that casino dealing landed the crook in jail. Is someone guilty now?

The news came out in time to stop the Harrah deal, so stop it.
 
May 4 (theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/our_views/article_e1a68c2a-4f0a-11e8-984d-b72acb478a4d.html)

The Advocate personnel seem civically moral concerning TOPS as an incentive for K-12 students to take charge of their individual academic excellence.

Recalling Kahlil Gibran’s poem, “On Children” (katsandogz.com/onchildren.html), children are not properties and their adulthood will require knowledge, understanding, and intentions the great State of Louisiana cannot imagine.

Our coaching and encouragement through example may be public integrity rather than indolence.

I appreciate my district representative, Franklin Foil, for all his efforts to raise the bar and encourage him: Don’t stop.

I join The Advocate: “urge the House to reject” lowering the bar and instead, raise it. As always, future young adults (perhaps age 35) need wisdom today’s mature adults (not age related) cannot imagine.
 
May 3 (theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/our_views/article_a54ce968-4983-11e8-8e45-8b6459cf061e.html)

As writers for a hometown newspaper, personnel at The Advocate publish such a false view it is difficult for this reader to connect with actual reality.

In this case, the $600 million bundle is a rapidly conceived boondoggle intended to distract the people of Louisiana from the lousy job Gov. John Bel Edwards has done with the state’s distribution of federal relief to victims of the 2016 floods. People are suffering.

  

For example, debottlenecking the I-10 east MR bridge would be accomplished without burdening Baton Rouge in the Perkins Road underpass area by constructing a new bridge. With the new bridge, I-110 as it is would be more amenable to Baton Rouge living than the un-needed re-work Gov. Edwards has decided on.

I’ve taken about 4 non-fiction writing courses, and the professors’ chorus is “write for the reader.” A frequent secondary point was: you live in the Bible belt. I got demerits because I was writing a message for all readers.

It seems The Advocate uses controversy to enhance mystery: Keep the people stirred up over party politics so Louisiana won’t notice the damage Gov. Edwards effects.

 

May 2 (theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/letters/article_9ffb0428-4d74-11e8-a818-1b38ba642511.html)

I’d be glad if this was over.

With salacious enjoyment of Dawn Ross’s claims, The Advocate arrogantly claims “taxpayers know who’s to blame for scandal.” The Advocate is shamelessly guilty of hubris and meddling.
    

Everyone pays sales taxes, but some with redistribution of federal income. So, “taxpayer” is a valid term, but I think The Advocate’s press vigilantism effects harm to all Louisiana citizens.

Ross sued and Schedler responded that he would face the suit. I commented then that the court could decide but did not want the people’s expense of a special election. I still hope that expense will be avoided.

However, I am disturbed by The Advocate personnel taking it on themselves to convict Scheduler. I don’t know motives but question both parties in a ten-year affair. I hold The Advocate to blame for exacerbating Ross’s witness about Schedler’s moral failure. When claims are questionable, civic citizens wait for the consequences of the judicial process.

In other words, civic citizens let the justice system work rather than practice vigilantism. A free and responsible press appreciates justice rather than vigilantism, and most press employees are citizens, whether civic or dissident.

May 1 (theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/our_views/article_33fe0734-48d3-11e8-8cf9-cf88e3ef1f6d.html)

Perhaps it’s not what The Advocate personnel write: the way they write makes their audience a mystery.

It seems SB14 is good for the State of Louisiana, but Gov. John Bel Edwards has the erroneous personal idea it would hurt him, so he is trying to block it.

Go Legislature! Pass SB14 for the people of Louisiana!

April 30 (theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/our_views/article_4c9cc128-48d7-11e8-af65-3bf96bc8dfea.html)

To Elaine O. Coyle: I agree, and The Advocate personnel seem to express that they are above citizenship. And they promote taxation of citizens for Gov. Edwards’ coffers.

“. . . the governor's opposition led [legislators] to withdraw.”

I urge legislators to create a limit on how many special sessions a governor can use to stonewall the Louisiana Legislature. It would require a constitutional amendment.

Talk of a constitutional convention brings to mind the preamble to the constitution for the USA. EBRP library meetings over the past four years realized that the preamble is a civic agreement that is offered to individuals for collaboration for mutual, comprehensive safety and security so that each individual may pursue the integrity he or she perceives rather than the dictates of a tradition, religion, race, or political faction. A civic culture, based on the-objective-truth rather than opinion that is coerced (civilized) or forced (democracy) is achievable and offers a better future.

With a constitutional convention, Louisiana may reform to collaboration on the-objective-truth rather than conflict for dominant opinion. Not only the racial strife that dominates the Louisiana Legislature, but the ominous uncertainty that citizens who do not relate to American history may be relieved by the public integrity that is offered by most citizens committing-to and trusting-in the preamble’s subject: “We the People of the United States” who are voluntarily civic rather than dissident to justice.

The Advocate personnel could realize they are first, individuals who may accept the authority, power, and personal energy to develop both personal and public integrity and second, employees of a responsible and free press. If so, they could promote the preamble and the-objective-truth, which can only be discovered.

Forget special sessions. Reduce state spending while you can.

April 29 (theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/our_views/article_d81ccadc-4a43-11e8-92d3-e7cb1870e857.html)

To John Smith: I agree.

The Advocate personnel call to question their own integrity.

Personal relationships in the workplace have always been controversial. Intimacy with a person who has lost his or her spouse has always been more controversial than first love. Tolerating intimacy for a decade and then suddenly creating a brouhaha is controversial.

When the accused claims innocence, We the People of the United States, the civic citizens who agree to the goals stated therein, have provided a judicial system whereby the plaintiff and the accused may present their views with qualified legal counsel.

In cases like this one, if the accused knows he or she cannot defend past behavior, he or she resigns. Schedler’s refusal to resign is a statement of innocence which partial evidence cannot refute. Prudent citizens err on the side of innocent until proven guilty in the court of law.

But not The Advocate personnel. They must be dissuaded from the constitutional law of the land by schools of journalism that posit that political policy is based on public opinion and public opinion is controlled by the press. The recent presidential election disproved that theory, and as a result the press has lost its reliability. That is, the press has lost any self-discipline it may have had.

I have no interest beyond human hopes for the best in either party in this personal dispute. If Schedler resigns, it will confirm nothing more than public meanness in a controversial incident.

However, I have every interest in the integrity of my city, my state, and my country. Here, there is a balance of powers: the administrative, the legislative, and the judicial. Those three branches are ordained and established by We the People of the United States who trust-in and commit-to the goals stated in the preamble. Other citizens are dissident to the goals, for many reasons: laziness, ignorance, arrogance, predation toward civic citizens, belief that crime pays, evil, and worse. A press that is free and not responsible is dissident.

A civic people gravely err by not having a First Amendment statement on free and responsible expression, including press reporting, formerly journalism. Fortunately, the Louisiana Constitution cites responsibility. The Advocate personnel motivate inspired legislation that puts enforcement behind Louisiana’s provision and amendment of the First Amendment to the constitution for the USA.

  

Today’s thought, G.E. Dean, The Advocate, Page 5B or 7B

April 30, Luke 6:41 CJB)

“So why do you see the splinter in your brother's eye, but not notice the log in your own eye?”

Dean says, “Let’s get right with God ourselves before we try to help others.”

  

Dean assumes that individual authority, power, and energy is sufficient for a human to judge that he or she has discerned whatever, if anything, is in control of the-objective-truth. Dean’s arrogance and hubris may not conform to the-objective-truth.

Based on the fact that the Holy Bible was canonized by the Church in partnership with an emperor and includes passages that condone the master-slave relationship and vice-versa (when everyone knows either by experience or observation that slavery is not alright for them), I assert that Dean offers bad advice.

I recommend that people collaborate for mutual, comprehensive safety and security so that each individual may pursue integrity.

  

Letters

Erroneous unanimous jury vote (Sammonds, March 22) (theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/letters/article_6459b93e-2d60-11e8-a0dc-9f6e35fa9991.html)

To John Moreau: You could be correct, but I do not think so, naive as I may be. Civic morality is coming.

 
Blacks are human, and aware humans want to accept their human authority, even as they suffer social coercion and government force. That is, every individual has the authority and power to manage his or her personal energy to develop integrity during his or her lifetime; it's a human condition that has been demonstrated throughout history. Civilizations, governments and societies obfuscate individual authority.

I speculate George Washington, Benjamin Franklin and Ralph Waldo Emerson achieved psychological maturity but James Madison, Thomas Jefferson, and Abraham Lincoln not so much. Albert Einstein diminished personal excellence by not being explicit.

 
Now that that human condition---individual authority, power, and energy---has been articulated, the message may spread, and most of the people may gravitate toward humbly yet firmly (serenely) managing the jealous, lesser coercions and forces they face: civilizations, governments, social morals, democracy, crime, evil, religion, and religion-government partnerships.

Citizens who accept individual authority gravitate toward fidelity to the-objective-truth, and once they grasp that way of living their human connections and transactions improve. Life emerges joyful despite nearby chaos. The civic culture is infectious and may take over, beginning where the message spreads the fastest.

For all I know, God will come and solve the people's injustice to themselves---inform each individual that he or she has the authority, power, and energy with which to offer civic morality. But I don't think God will come yet readily admit I could be wrong.

In that regard, the 1861 Abraham Lincoln spoke reality: justice comes from civic people.

I hope this helps.

A next generation, more unique state constitution (Waguespack) (theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/letters/article_2dce15fe-4c9b-11e8-89ee-6f56ca998834.html)

When I arrived in Baton Rouge from Knoxville, TN, I soon learned that many laws, such as family inheritance were unique here. As my needs unfold, I like the differences I encounter.

Some general items, like responsibility for expressions, and the currently hot 10-2 jury decisions I also favor. In my only jury duty, the 10-2 vote was critical for justice, because one juror kept stating: “It’s Exxon paying: just give him the money.”

But I’m interested in a 1 in 50 opportunity for an achievable better future, initially in Louisiana and eventually in the USA and beyond.

If there is a new constitution, it can have a preamble that improves on the preamble to the constitution for the USA with the intentions of publically promoting the civic collaboration that is offered therein. Also, it can stipulate the establishment and maintenance of statutory justice. That is, law and law enforcement grounded in the-objective-truth rather than dominant opinion.
 
As some readers (excluding The Advocate personnel) know, I write about the preamble and the-objective-truth daily. Also, I am writing a book to present the concept with illustrative applications.

Antiquated vs modern (Franklin) (theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/letters/article_406480d0-4c9c-11e8-af44-13eaf10091b3.html)

Rev. Franklin, do you represent a non-Christian religion, the antiquated Christianity, or the 1970s originated African-American Christianity (wsj.com/articles/dr-kings-radical-biblical-vision-1522970778). If the latter, how do white Christians assimilate to 1970s African-American Christianity? Is religious assimilation necessary for civic morality? (Civic citizens collaborate to live in the same years and same locale without questioning each other’s hopes for their respective afterdeaths.)

Is civic assimilation sufficient to collaborate for mutual, comprehensive safety and security? Do civic citizens have higher moral status by which they may constrain dissidents such as criminals? Ought dissidents to civic morality to serve on juries? Should a dissident to civic justice who is Christian serve on a jury?

Is the 10-2 rule about racism or about justice? Louisiana has the best jury-law in the land, why regress to the erroneous 48? Why shouldn’t Louisiana improve to 7-5 to mimic the US Supreme Court. Or to save money make it 5-4, like the Supreme Court.

American civic morality is offered as an agreement that is stated by the preamble to the constitution for the USA. It emerged by a sequence of 2/3 votes. In 1842, Frederick Douglass praised that civic agreement and the articles that followed as making the provisions for future justice. Can Rev. Franklin have religious morality and also agree to the civic contract that is stated in the preamble?

Can African-Americans assimilate to American civic morality? Each week, I report in our neighborhood watch letter 17 categories of police reports for our map area. As far as I can tell, black friends and neighbors assimilate to American morality, and that’s all I need to know. Religious or not, ethnically identified or not, sex preferences or none, gregarious or private: all of no interest.

To Scuddy Leblanc: ". . . agree to accept the rule of law."

 

The original Great Books and Reading Program, a five year process in public libraries, could inform the will to collaborate for justice. I have a tendency to write "civic justice," but its plain "justice".

  

Civic citizens deserve protection from dissidents (Montgomery) (http://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/letters/article_dc84c1ea-48b5-11e8-afb3-efefbb58c0a8.html)

I agree and appreciate your letter to the editor.

I do not understand The Advocate personnel pressing HB 365 with no consideration for crime victims and a civic people who create and maintain the systems for “peace and safety.” The Advocate personnel are shameless.

Also, please suggest to the District Attorney Association that they neglect a civic people when they require unanimity before the association can defend the people (including dissidents to justice) in hearings at the state capital. The Supreme Court makes decisions on majority vote, and the constitution can be amended on a 75% vote.

Another confused nanny-state product (Shepherd) (theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/letters/article_613030cc-48c6-11e8-a14a-bf0c5d6125da.html)

Perhaps James Comey was the first public official to witness before Congress that his adulthood was punctuated by a lifetime of dependency on someone else to take responsibility for James Comey’s integrity. Every individual has the authority, power, and personal energy to develop integrity or not. I don't think Shepherd accepts his human authority.

The human condition requires each person to either earn his or her bread or thank someone in charge for taking the responsibility. Most people admit this condition to themselves and work so as to responsibly pursue the happiness he or she perceives. This is a condition of civic citizenship.

Likewise, the responsibility to assure mutual, comprehensive safety and security so that each person may responsibly pursue personal happiness rather than someone else’s ideas for him or her, rests with the individual. Other citizens are dissident to human justice.

In the USA, the collection of civic citizens is the government, and dissidents use AMO tactics to overthrow the civic order. Alinsky-Marxist organizers push the chaos of social morality, wherein a mythical government takes care of indolent people. Shepherd seems to be an AMO sophist, much like James Comey seems to be.

Failure of adult education in prisons (Krieg) (theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/letters/article_81bc0f98-48c4-11e8-b139-cb9dec3f898b.html)
  

Educate prisoners in civic morality before considering an HB 265.

Krieg is a citizen and could have expressed that every individual has the authority, power, and personal energy to develop integrity. If officials coach, encourage, and exemplify that principle, prisoners may benefit from time served: may qualify to vote.

In William Faulkner’s short story, “Barn Burning” (archive.org/stream/collectedstories030393mbp/collectedstories030393mbp_djvu.txt), a ten year old boy experiences justice for the first time in his life. Later, he delivers justice, then starts a life without his depraved family. Naturally just, the boy changed his life upon learning about justice.

Prisoners could exit time served with a Ralph Waldo Emerson mimic: justice will I serve for the rest of my life. Krieg, unfortunately, claims he is “adhering to the conditions placed on us by law” rather than enlightenment.

Because American political regimes obfuscate the civic agreement that is offered in the preamble to the constitution for the USA, prison officials do not instill in prisoners the American civic morality: integrity, justice, collaboration, defense, prosperity, liberty, and permanence. Just as the nation owes children an education in reading, the USA may, any day now, unhide for children and adults the civic morality offered by the preamble.

Legislators are citizens too. I encourage Louisiana Legislators to replace HB 265 with an education directive that positions people who have done their time to demonstrate awareness-of and intentions-for American civic morality.

To Marsha Marshal My mantra is: I do not know the-objective-truth yet choose to accept my person's authority, power, and energy to develop integrity.

Columns

World view a worn out cliché (Cal Thomas)  (limaohio.com/top-stories/297732/cal-thomas-crazy-bernie-is-at-it-again)

MW online says worldview means “a comprehensive conception or apprehension of the world especially from a specific standpoint.”

It seems evident that people who use the term express the hubris to tolerate citizens who didn’t contract a worldview disease yet are subject to the menace.

Especially, civic citizens in the USA just want mutual, comprehensive safety and security so that each may pursue the happiness they perceive rather than the plan someone with a worldview has for them.

If it did not entail barbaric financial and educational abuse of children, I could care less that some people are cosmopolitans choosing what festival or entertainment they’ll attend this week somewhere in the world.

With three decades excellent preparation for young adulthood and the intent to live a full human lifetime, I perceive each adult in the USA is qualified to develop integrity. If they do, their life will satisfy their preferences. If not, their life will not be as satisfying. However, the individual has the authority, the power, and the energy to make every choice that comes their way. This message needs to be shared: Worldviews and higher powers are contentions the individual may constrain.

Worldview has nothing to do with a life where safety and security is offered. We the People of the United States may end its barbarism toward its children whenever it decides to.

Posted on the site using FB.

  

The senators are only 100 citizens and ought to be civic (David Shribman)  (post-gazette.com/opinion/david-shribman/2018/04/22/The-U-S-Senate-is-faltering-under-the-grind-of-partisanship-and-ideology/stories/201804220011)

It seems both Shribman and “Broken: Can the Senate Save Itself and the Country?” by Ira Shapiro miss the facts. Senators are first citizens who can be civic, meaning they individually trust-in and commit-to the civic agreement that is offered in the preamble to the constitution for the USA. The preamble authorizes the laws and institutions about which the 100 senators are commended to legislate. They owe nothing to the people beyond upholding the preamble’s noble goals.

Senators “can stop being blind partisans and go back to being real senators, focused on collective action for the national interest. They have an obligation to rise above the partisanship, not simply mirror or exacerbate.”

Pundits always complain but never offer a path forward. Humankind has learned so much in the past 231 years it is time for Senators to collaborate to discover and utilize the-objective-truth.

Senators instead exacerbate political regimes’ 229 years’ obfuscation of the preamble’s civic (rather than secular) agreement. It began when the First Congress hired factional-Protestant ministers to lend Congressmen “divine” authority. Now that this Chapter XI Machiavellian tyranny has been articulated, it ought to stop.

Posted on the site using FB.

Defrauding American children (Walter Williams) (http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/williams042518.php3)

“Nationally, our high school graduation rate is over 80 percent. That means high school diplomas, which attest that these students can read and compute at a 12th-grade level, are conferred when 63 percent are not proficient in reading and 75 percent are not proficient in math. For blacks, the news is worse. Roughly 75 percent of black students received high school diplomas attesting that they could read and compute at the 12th-grade level. However, 83 percent could not read at that level, and 93 percent could not do math at that level.”

   

News

Vigilante case (Grueskin) (theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/news/communities/livingston_tangipahoa/article_6099f82e-4f00-11e8-abbd-7f0085e79470.html)

Contact your state representatives and ask them to kill HB 365, which would change the 10-2 jury rule to 12-0; legis.la.gov/legis/ViewDocument.aspx?d=1090162.

The victim's legal representatives must prove the accused is guilty beyond reasonable doubt. The accused legal team must create doubt in the victim's claims. A simple majority of impartial jurors is sufficient to observe the arguments and listen to the judge's instructions. If anything, the 10-2 rule could be revised to mimic the Supreme Court's 5-4 rule or the constitutional amendment’s 3-1 rule.

Another point: In cases involving drugs and guns and in other crimes, like neighborhood vigilantism, add penalties when the DA can prove habitual vigilantism.

Legislating from fear (John Simerman) (theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/news/article_f5d47386-4efd-11e8-925e-5b89b2f876ad.html)

Kill HB 699. Kill HB 365.

Louisiana has the best chance in the USA to establish a future without the domestic fear that motivates secrecy.

  

Public meetings at EBRP libraries starting on June 21, 2014 led to proposals to coordinate civic issues using the purpose and goals of We the People of the United States, which are stated in the preamble to the constitution for the USA. The agreement that is offered divides citizens between those who are willing to collaborate for human justice and dissidents. (We feel that the proposal to amend “unity” to “integrity” is collaboration rather than dissidence.)

  

Also, during the last three years’ library meetings, participants developed the proposal for an achievable, better future by civic collaboration to discover the-objective-truth rather than conflicting for dominant opinion.

The combination of those two principles led to the realization that every human has the authority and power to use his or her personal energy to develop integrity. But some individuals prefer infidelity, and their human powers are equal to the powers of the civic citizens. The dissident’s will to infidelity cannot be constrained by laws based on fear and opinion. The dissident will yield only to the-objective-truth. The convicted dissident may learn when laws are just and therefore have the chance to reform to civic citizenship.

Some writers rebuke me, but I am of no importance, because I do not know the-objective-truth and can only collaborate to help discover it and make best use of the discovery. For example, telling a lie takes the liar out of civic conversation. Stonewalling and secrecy are kin to lying.

Elected officials are citizens, and when they do not employ civic principles, they place themselves in the dissident camp. That’s how both the preamble’s agreement and the-objective-truth operate: the authorized, powerful, and energetic human chooses to collaborate for either justice or infidelity; chooses to be either civic or dissident.

 

These articulations are published daily in local, national and international forums. Members of the Louisiana Legislature may begin to respond as soon as they perceive a unique opportunity for leadership. On the other hand, they may read about locally discovered principles being used elsewhere.

 

I agree that the press’s arrogance needs to be constrained, however, legislation to reform them to responsibility ought not take the route of secrecy. We the People of the United States need to know the facts. HB 699 is a knee-jerk reaction to the attempt to regress from Louisiana’s excellent 10-2 jury verdict in HB 365.
 
Kill both HB 699 (legis.la.gov/legis/ViewDocument.aspx?d=1086957) and HB 365 (legis.la.gov/legis/ViewDocument.aspx?d=1090162). Later, consider mimicking the US Supreme Court’s 5-4 decisions, perhaps with reporting rules like theirs. More importantly, lend some credibility to the preamble and jury verdicts by creating a jury pool from citizens who attest that they trust-in and commit-to the preamble.

Also, consider not allowing juries to take straw votes, as they diminish justice rather than decision. But do not restrict a responsible press.

Civic justice cannot be discovered on knee-jerk reactions to the home-town newspaper.

Second comment: “Jee Park, an attorney with the Innocence Project New Orleans . . . said. ‘This bill will prevent defendants from uncovering . . . misconduct that occurs during jury deliberations that may have led to [injustice]."

Park’s comments expose a problem that philanthropists and non-profits like he represents impose on passive citizens. The path to justice is by discovering injustice and addressing it directly. The judicial system uses vague definitions, like “impartial,” equivocating evidence beyond a doubt with unanimous jury vote, and judicial infidelity, such as maximizing criminal charges as a negotiating tactic. Racists don’t accept that the race card begs woe to the people including racists, despite five decades of data on affirmative action and the great society’s harm to black Americans and thus the people.

It’s time for passive citizens to act, not by marching in the streets, but by acute awareness of legislative bills that increase misery and loss.

Civic and passive citizens, recognize that you live among dissidents to justice, and that will always be so. Just as most citizens earn their living so as to not have to thank a bureaucrat, civic citizens stay informed and express their defense of private liberty with civic morality by contacting their legislators when injustice is being proposed. Legislators, recall that you are citizens, equally endowed with human authority, power, and energy to develop integrity.

Citizens, contact your two state legislators and urge them to kill HB 365 and also kill HB 699.

To Marsha Marshal: Thank you for the correction to “fora,” especially on my template for the blog, cipbr.blogspot.com. Also for the opportunity to collaborate.

It is not surprising that an AMO agent would be pedantic. I’m probably wrong, but I take “Union” in the preamble to refer to the Confederation of States, which had not been able to collect revolutionary war debts and settle other disputes among the thirteen in freedom and independence.

In our library meetings, we individually paraphrase the preamble, intending to keep the essence of the original and preserve its text but, to consider 2018 civic morality, fast forward to the purpose and goals we each perceive. The USA’s journey, after June 21, 1788 never contemplated, let alone approached human justice. Phil Beaver assumes there will always be political factions who are dissident to justice. Not only that, Phil Beaver does not know the-objective-truth, beyond a few actual realities like my name is Ray, the earth is molten-filled and globe-like for now, and civic people do not lie to civic people. Dissidents to my view of civic morality may be correct, so I do not want them to unify to my opinion. Yet, I hope they do the work to understand, behave according to their understanding, publicly express their understanding, and remain open-minded to discovery: That’s integrity. In summary, I do not expect civic unity but want public integrity.

It matters not if a person never considered that honesty is insufficient, what matters is that they develop the intent to earn integrity. Integrity comes in the simplest of ideas that have huge impact on awareness and imagination. For example, the Sun will not rise tomorrow: the Earth, in its easterly rotation, will unhide the Sun, which was hidden in the western “sunset” the night before. This awareness can help humans reduce egocentricity as they imagine the vastness of only the visible universe.

It’s amazing how seriously you nourish the windmills of your mind. I write, speak and listen to learn and author three blogs, which are read internationally, even though they offer USA topics. Today, the oldest blog, promotethepreamble.blogspot.com, originated on Feb 9, 2014, had 0.15% increase in views, 95% of which was Russian. The all-time view counts are 65.6% USA, 14% Russia, 4.5% France, and 1.8% each Germany and Ukraine. The latest post is “Neither initiate nor tolerate harm,” 2/2/18. I do not post often. The blog cipbr.blogspot.com has a similar international view record, even though the primary subject is commentary on theadovcate.com.

One of my favorite conversations is on quora.com, with 220,000 views of my essays. Again, I do not answer very often---only when I feel I have a chance to learn from others. 

Then notion that justice could not lead to constitutional amendments is about as un-American as it gets. On August 7, 1999, The Advocate published my sincere essay, “Let’s Revise the First Amendment,” proposing the religion clauses become thought clauses. Today, California is working on such an idea, and I propose integrity rather than religion, a private pursuit. I am smoking appreciation for the preamble and the 2/3 civic citizens I encounter daily. 

There’s an elephant in this debate, and it is black racism’s damage to black civic citizens first and the people second. Just look at Mayor Broome’s failed platform of church and dialogues on race. Black vigilantism in Baton Rouge is on the rise.

Civic citizens collaborate for civic morality rather than dominant opinion. Civic citizens candidly address the elephants. Louisiana’s 10-2 jury rule increases justice: help kill HB 365 and HB 699.

To Marsha Marshal:  AMO rule no 5: "Ridicule is man's most potent weapon." AMO agents often ridicule themselves.

To Marsha Marshal:  “'Impartial,' as in 'impartial jury,' is part of the text of the 6th Amendment. And there's jurisprudence a mile long explaining what it means, going all the way back to the original[ist] intent of the Framers. Nothing very complicated there.”

Really? Why isn’t “actions and decisions free of bias or prejudice” enough to define “impartial”?

However, my point is that jurors decide whether or not the victim’s representative presented evidence, beyond reasonable doubt, that the accused is guilty. One partial juror can spoil the victim’s chances.

Let’s face another elephant in the room: A philosopher of law is not qualified to ridicule a chemical engineer. 

Reform so as to help Kill HB 365 and HB 699. Louisiana has no excuse for joining the folly of the 48 states who require unanimity.

To Marsha Marshal: You do not seem to accept your human authority, power, and energy to develop integrity. You look to a higher power in reams of judicial babble rather than the-objective-truth. You rely on sophistry developed after Magna Carta rather than actual reality. Your individual authority can be far superior to the scholastic woe developed since 1215.

Chemical engineers are trained to accept the responsibility to design chemical reactors, shipping containers, and vessels that both serve humankind's needs and will not blow up. After a few decades studying classical liberalism and the competition, ChE ethics led me to the recent articulation: in every thought, word, and act, neither initiate nor tolerate harm.

The articulation is mine, the prompt Hippocrates' oath, but the integrity is Agathon's, 360 BCE. I hope you can disconnect fascination with the law so as to focus on human justice. Help kill HB 365 so as to preserve Louisiana's 10-2 excellence.

I don’t know why you cannot appreciate another person’s willingness to read, speak, and collaborate. However, all the loose labels you assign to my individual are acts of public abuse. You may call me Ray.

 

On August 6, 1787, John Rutledge, representing the Committee of Detail, presented the draft constitution that began, “We the people of the States of New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia, do ordain, declare, and establish the following Constitution for the Government of Ourselves and our Posterity.” Those are the same thirteen states that had ratified their free and independent states, according to the 1783 Treaty of Paris, on January 14, 1784. Rhode Island had not sent delegates to Philadelphia to object to the possibility that the confederation of states would morph to a nation.

 

On September 12, 1787, William Johnson, representing the Committee of Style and Arrangement, presented the draft constitution, which began, “We, the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, to establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.” Members of the committee were Alexander Hamilton (NY), William Johnson (CT), Rufus King (MA), James Madison (VA), and Gouvernour Morris (PA). usconstitution.net/constcmte.html.

 

“Morris’s choice of the words, “We the people,” for the beginning of the famous Preamble helped to define the American nation as a single entity, created by the people, not the states.” billofrightsinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/7-Morris-FCII.pdf

 

Every individual (not form of artificial intelligence) has the authority, power, and energy to develop integrity. Honesty is insufficient. Competition for honest opinion is ruinous for the competitor. Only the-objective-truth can be the basis for integrity and the object of fidelity.

 

I hope you now agree that Morris rather than Madison helped reform the political authority from the states to the people in their states and thereby the people in their country.

 

I contend that by 1860 Frederick Douglass’s 1852 claim that everybody tolerates slavery until he or she may be the slave, was known and held true by most people. In other words, most people would adamantly oppose the radical views of John C. Calhoun, for example. If they considered themselves civic as defined in the preamble, at least 2/3 of free citizens in the rebel states would have marched on their legislatures and said, “Not on my watch will you attempt to secede from the USA.” In other words, the CSA might never have met in February, 1861 and fired on the USA in April. Notice in the Declaration of Secession that the practical complaints led to the claim that politics in the North was influenced by erroneous interpretation of the Holy Bible.

CONTINUATION

The preamble can be as useful to Americans today. For example, consider the phrase “African-American Christianity” (wsj.com/articles/dr-kings-radical-biblical-vision-1522970778). What does it express, and what is its purpose? Merely on reading it, I think of division, on ethnic grounds, of God. I’m reminded of the religious error that was corrected by the Civil War. That error originated 1700 years ago, when the Church canonized the Holy Bible including passages that condone slave-master political relationships and vice-versa.

But on study, I observe that Cornel West and the like more than Martin Luther King Jr. is responsible for the increase in usage of that spiritually divisive phrase. For example, King was assassinated in 1968, and “African-American Christianity” usage became significant in the early 1970s. Also, James Baldwin informed us that some blacks pity the white man’s Christianity, adding to Frederick Douglass’s words against American Christianity. Some black liberation theologists hold that the only way a white can save his or her soul is by helping the African-Americans reign supreme. Jeremiah Wright says, “Don’t blame us for the division,” I think implying that God’s chosen people are black.

I’m reminded of a line from “Little Big Man,” but reversed, so as to represent Frederick Douglass’s attitude toward the preamble: There are too many civic people for dissenters to prevail. (LBM was addressing the extinction of the indigenous people because there were too many invaders; humans wiped out by dissenters. In the movie, LBM was addressing extinction of the reds by the whites.) FD got beyond skin color to address humanity as a characteristic.

The preamble is neutral to skin color, religion, or any other cultural distinction excepting dissidence toward human justice. Citizens may have divided cultures as long as their culture collaborates for human justice. In other words, either observes the law or collaborates to reform discovered injustice. The claim to be an American and not read, understand, trust-in, commit-to, and promote the preamble to the constitution for the USA is un-civic at least, and I think disqualifying for any civil service--- voting, let alone jury duty.

I hope you are correct when you say that my guess that 2/3 of Americans have the preamble’s practice in the genes and memes. I hope it’s more like 9/10 of Americans. What I think is that the split is 1/3 civic, 1/3 passive, and 1/3 dissident. Thus, a jury rule of 6-3 would be acceptable to me until there is more data to evaluate (kill HB 699).

I hope these ideas help persuade you to consider contacting your state representative and senator and request them to kill HB 365.

  
Illustrating successful jury deliberation made possible by Louisiana law (John Simerman) (theadvocate.com/acadiana/news/article_e5cfb82e-4cc8-11e8-9f08-23eeef38fba4.html)

   

Contact your state representative and state senator and ask them to kill HB 365.

Simerman wrote this article to defend a gun-carrying killer despite the damage done to the dead victim, wounded victim, and thier family by circumstances that motivated the killer’s passions: perhaps anger, fear, and vigilantism---all the emotions some humans control. Every individual has the authority, power, and energy to discipline himself or herself to conform to the-objective-truth rather than spontaneous, emotional opinion. Some parents make the decision not to carry a gun because carrying increases the chances of orphaning their children.

Some interesting highlights from the writing: 1) perhaps juries should call only one vote, considering the straw-vote pressure on the young juror who made the tenth decision; 2) Juror No. 8 should have recused herself as biased by years of service in victim advocacy and friendships with the judge and the DA; 3) Juror No. 3, on a panel with local skin-color representation remains sickened by resolution of black on black murder and her emotionalism about “trial by a jury of one’s peers”; 4) welfare officials, like the two social workers, may be influential in vigilantism but not so much among citizens; 5) Juror No. 8 claims a vote on the evidence (like eight shots into the victim’s body?) when verdict rather than evidence is a juror’s responsibility; 6) it seems a majority of open-minded citizens who examine the competing witnesses, clarify the legal instructions and accept individual authority and power can reach a just verdict; 7) two overqualified public officials could have spoiled justice, but the 10-2 provision of the Louisiana law proved its justice in this case; 8) the unanimity of the ten jurors was reached on deliberation leading to manslaughter rather than murder, even though eight bullets seem like execution; and 9) most of the social justice arguments and emotional-statistics presented in this article are refuted by the facts of this 10-2 jury excellence.

Simerman represents Juror No. 8, the victim advocate, as believing the victim’s behavior that night caused his death and his wife’s gunshot wound. Juror No. 6 expressed the same idea: Public drunkenness justifies an eight-bullet death.

Even though civic citizens have no intentions to subject themselves to a jury trial, it is worthwhile to consider, from the standpoint of possible jury service, the meaning of “jury of peers.” First, jury members are, by constitutional law are impartial. The two dissenting votes in this trial came from social workers, at least one whom perhaps should have reported partiality. However, perhaps they were both chosen for partiality. For all I know, they were in the pool because of partiality. I would not want citizens who do not appreciate the civic agreement offered in the preamble to the constitution for the USA on my jury, either as the accused or a jury member. The purpose and goals of a willing people’s preamble authorize the provisions of the constitution.

Ends do not justify means, and black racism does not justify changing Louisiana’s excellence to an erroneous rule in 48 states. It’s true that many of their trials end hung, but the consequence is favor to criminals at the expense of both the victims and the civic citizens who support the judicial system so as to constrain dissidents.

Lots of injustice existed on the tongues and in the hands of moral dissidents in the nineteenth century. Even Abraham Lincoln supported exiling the slaves to Liberia. However, Louisiana’s goal on the 9-3 jury verdict law, perhaps founded in Napoleonic law, was to provide impartial jurors. Civic citizens have learned so much more since then. We observe that many grave decisions are made under our laws with 9-4, 5-4, 39-55, 2-1, 38-12, 51-50, and 270-268 to elect the president. How can 48 states be so blind to justice as to require unanimity when civic citizens like the family and friends of Will Smith deserve justice?

Citizens who could care less about HB 365 may find themselves future victims of un-civic, unjust jury unanimity. Act now. Contact your state representative and your state senator and ask them to kill HB 365, because the Great State of Louisiana has the best jury rules in the USA.  

(I like the prior commentary, and it is important to act: Kill HB 365, yesterday read by name and returned to the calendar: legis.la.gov/legis/BillInfo.aspx?s=18RS&b=HB365&sbi=y.)

  

To Marsha Marshal: One of the human conditions is that each individual has the authority, power, and energy to develop integrity for their own life. This articulation is about two months old now, and not one person has been discouraged by it or reacted negatively to it. In fact, most people delightfully say, "That's the way it is."

  

Some people can’t imagine what I said or wrote. Some people don’t want human, personal authority---prefer to rely on someone else rather than establish personal reliability. Some people prefer to respond to their emotions rather than do the noble work of comprehending and understanding so as to possess integrity.

 

Citizens may deny the preamble for personal living, but it offers a civic agreement. It is the first civil (social and legal) statement in the constitution for the USA, both the 1787 document and today's text with 27 amendments. The United States Supreme Court refers to it in construction of its opinions, whether 5-4 or 9-0.

  

The 1787 Constitution was signed 39-16 by delegates and 12-1 by states. Rhode Island dissented for 28 months over the federal government replacing the confederation of states. The USA has always had dissenters, and an impartial jury would not draw from a pool of citizens who are opposed to justice. Why any state would opt for 12-0 when 5-4 is both just and efficient (confirmed by Simerman’s research and writing) I can only imagine (speculate).

 

Today, each citizen may and should consider the preamble's civic agreement, decide whether they agree or not, and if not, know the changes they would require in order to move their position from dissent to agreement. For example, I would like to collaborate to change “unity” to “integrity.” Unity is not even approachable, but integrity is achievable, even for Phil Beaver (joyful as I am in my eighth decade, my path had its share of misery and loss).

Each person on a jury must do the noble work to form impartial opinion based on the evidence and laws presented, and the individual who knows his person declines personal reliability---human authority and power---is not qualified to serve---ought to recuse himself or herself. By all means, a jurors personal fears, biases, and other emotions should not impact the verdict in the dispute between victim and the accused.

FYI: George Weigel, in “Democracy and Its Discontents,” National Affairs, No. 35, Spring, 2018, Page 171 (nationalaffairs.com/publications/detail/democracy-and-its-discontents), writes, “Surveys indicate that one-third of all Americans would favor the authoritarian rule of a leader unconstrained by the checks and balances of our constitutional system . . .” This affirms my past claims that perhaps 2/3 of inhabitants are civic citizens: the agreement that is stated in the preamble is in their genes and memes.

To Marsha Marshal: Staying with Simerman's article, ten jurors recognized right away that two jurors had a purpose. One of the two grandstanded and got nowhere. (I weathered similar futile grandstanding as a juror.) However, the ten open-minded jurors deliberated, discovered an option the DA had not pitched, asked the judge for instructions, then made a unanimous decision. I hope in time all ten of them will look back on it and celebrate that they did not tolerate the disdain for justice by two passionate social advocates.

To Marsha Marshal: If your artificial intelligence (AI) had the ability to appreciate what it reads in my writing, it would know that the blacks I know behave as though the agreement that is stated in the preamble to the constitution for the USA is in their genes, memes and even blood. They, like me, want mutual comprehensive safety and security so that they can responsibly pursue personal preferences and I can, too.

The behavior of the black citizens on the jury is consistent with my experiences with black citizens. Black leaders are un-civic, but most of the people they pretend to represent are civic blacks.

Further, your AI would have addressed my point that Frederick Douglass, in 1852 appreciated the preamble. I understand he used fisticuffs to un-enslave himself.

Civic citizens today (about 220 million Americans) benefitted from a white-on-white Civil War over erroneous religious beliefs and hard-earned civil rights laws a century later. I write that 2/3 of citizens are civic and 2/3 of members of civic associations are civic citizens. That leaves 1/3 dissidents in both categories: individuals and associations.

Finally, where did the arrogance to call me "Phil" come from: AI or a person? If you are sincere, please know: I consider your unauthorized use of my first name a personal abuse. Go back to “Mr. Beaver.” There’s been neither regret nor apology for your AMO affronts and ageism.

LGBTQ promoting “news” article (Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar, AP) (washingtonpost.com/business/health-care-new-front-for-transgender-rights-under-trump/2018/04/29/ba452cf2-4bab-11e8-85c1-9326c4511033_story.html?utm_term=.dea3314dc949)

   

This writing is a great example of abuse of freedom of the press, and it inspires me to label the writer’s actions evil. Thus, “evil,” as of this article, enters my assessment of today’s press, which heretofore was “irresponsible.”

  

Saddling “civic citizens” with the pejorative phrase “social and religious conservatives,” the writer narrows the extent of Trump supporters who have no stake in the religious wars and perceive social morality as evil against civic morality. Civic citizens voluntarily behave for mutual comprehensive safety and security for living in the same era and locale more than for civility as coercion or government as force. We are among Hillary’s “deplorables”.

  

The social phrase “gender dysphoria,” seems a misguided individual perception that is promoted by professionals who stand to gain by servicing the myth. Promotion of personal perception so that a “professional” can offer comfort and hope is the foundation of religious institutions. The technique is to teach speculative fear of unfavorable afterdeath so as to offer (for a fee) comfort and hope for relief, for example, everlasting life in heaven or reincarnation as a better human or an angel.

The writer references opinion from the American Academy of Pediatrics, implicating them in the transgender religion. An opinion that opposes such professional counselling is expressed by John Rosemond’s “Is there a U.S. child and teen mental health crisis?” (http://triblive.com/lifestyles/morelifestyles/13520406-74/living-with-children-is-there-a-us-child-and-teen-mental-health). “The fact is that what I call “postmodern psychological parenting,” the pig in a poke that mental health professionals sold to America in the late 1960s and early 1970s, turned child rearing into never-ending enabling.”

Then the writer references socially moral mendacity from an Obama-era “scholar”. “The case law on whether sex discrimination includes gender identity has been pretty clear for quite a while.” That’s straw-man fallacy that actually asserts that the literature supporting gender identity is prolific. However, readers may find about fifty opposing articles at libertylawsite.org/?s=transgender.

The human species is fantastically powerful, because of the brain-power to discover and articulate the-objective-truth. Expressing it in religious terms, the human individual is a god facing death. In civic terms, each individual has the authority and power to spend his or her energy to develop integrity. By practicing integrity, the individual may develop comprehensive fidelity.

Comprehensive fidelity begins with the-objective-truth and extends to self, immediate family, extended family and friends, the people (nation), humankind, and the world, both respectively and collectively.

Technologists promote individual psychological fear that a female mind originated in a male body, and they can reverse this “travesty”. This religious practice offers great financial rewards to the biological and psychological technologists, at great expense to the subjected individual.

Civic citizens oppose evil. Civic citizens oppose evil writers for the press; it's up to the individual writer to discern evil if evil dominates him or her.

Posted on the site and on facebook.

  

Civic citizens (2/3) support schools and police (Charles Lussier, “EBR school tax wins [and police win] by wide margins,” The Advocate, April 29, 2018 Page 1A) (deleted from theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/news/education/article_24b51d42-49a2-11e8-a312-dbd4ddd25ba2.html)

   

It does not get much more evident than the four EBRP votes on Saturday, three for education and one for police:  Voting citizens were split 2/3 civic and 1/3 dissident, in my opinion, a ratio of historic importance in this country’s history.

Recall theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/news/education/article_33a49a5e-4753-11e8-9280-7b3f94790e93.html and theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/news/education/article_676aad62-4323-11e8-9157-1f0efb34b42c.html. Also, note The Advocate personnel’s bias against St. George advocates, even though a spokesman told The Advocate personnel that they was “not taking a position on whether or not to renew the [school taxes].” The Advocate personnel are divisive: social morality vs civic morality.

I have been writing for five years now that inhabitants seem split 1/3 leaning toward social morality (chaos) vs 2/3 behaving for civic morality (reliable public order). Therein, “civic” means individuals behaving for mutual comprehensive safety and security during the same years in the same locale more than being civil for a social group or a municipality. That’s right: “civic” (human morality) ends with “c” and “civil” (social coercion or government force) ends with “l”. Civic citizens practice morality everywhere---in the city, in the woods, and in private.

In addition, since I attended Jeremiah Wright’s talk at Southern University on February 19, 2015, I have researched and discovered that a few black citizens are erroneously led by AMO---Alinsky Marxist organizations (originating in Chicago). See nola.com/opinions/index.ssf/2015/02/jeremiah_wright_tells_a_southe.html. I continually urge citizens to avoid AMO like the plague, because AMO persuades recruits to march-the-streets then leave soldiers with the consequences---whatever street-crowd passions may bring. The current prince of AMO is Barack Obama with his Chicago and D.C. based OFA; nbcnews.com/storyline/democrats-vs-trump/obama-aligned-organizing-action-relaunches-trump-era-n719311. The local Chicago affiliate, through IAF, is Together Baton Rouge; togetherbr.org/about. Noting the black associations that were among the dissidents against taxation for schools and the police, I now see AMO as malicious toward black civic citizens. This error can be corrected by a civic people.

It has always been plain that most Baton Rouge citizens do not subscribe to AMO violence and terror. Local blacks have played major roles objecting to America’s snail’s-pace to overcome the Holy Bible’s 1700 year-old erroneous passages about master-slave relationships and vice versa: Slavery is immoral, and the Holy Bible became mere opinion when the Church canonized it with those passages. Mitch Landrieu failed the opportunity to admit the facts about the CSA’s claims and conclusion that the North was influenced by “more erroneous religious belief.” Now, we have coming from the AMO crowd since the late 1960s and early 1970s African-American Christianity; wsj.com/articles/dr-kings-radical-biblical-vision-1522970778. This bad leadership comes from the likes of Cornel West and Robert P. George, not Martin Luther King Jr.

Some black leaders demand that American whites assimilate to African-American Christianity. That may work in New York City and in California, but I doubt it is given much support in Baton Rouge; in the pretense of the Louisiana Legislature’s camaraderie, maybe; in the opinions of The Advocate personnel, apparently; but among the people, no. We saw Baton Rouge justice in the summer of 2016, when national AMO could not motivate destruction and personal attacks.

  

People immigrate to America because of its global reputation for relief from oppression. Mendacious religious philanthropy empowered by coyote agents has violence-victims from Mexico’s southern border in misery at the northern border as I write. But people who actually get to America find unexpected chaos. They cannot imagine the diminished public integrity. Read Luma Simms’ “Identity an Assimilation,” National Affairs, No. 35, Spring 2018, page 90. Then ask “What would it take for born Americans to assimilate? She’s a Christian who can’t imagine her future here.

America offers a civic agreement that has not been promoted in 229 years of operation, yet it operates in some civic citizens’ genes and memes. Most citizens may consider the idea that approaching someone to assert that assimilation in America requires conversion to the American religion is psychological violence of the worst kind. The only culture that is important for living during the same years in the same place is the culture of mutual, comprehensive safety and security. The 1/3 dissidents might be influenced to join a civic culture, knowing that their personal happiness will be enhanced---rather than lessened by the demand to convert to a religion they do not believe. Such a culture is possible if the 2/3 stop accepting the coercion by political regimes that the preamble to the constitution for the USA is a secular agreement: The preamble is a civic agreement that is neutral to religion, race, gender, and individual human authority. That’s right: Every individual has the authority, power, and personal energy to develop integrity.

On June 7, 2015, I recorded the essay, “The Advocate could earn a Pultizer Prize.” Yesterday’s 2/3 vote in favor of schools and police is an appropriate occasion for someone to celebrate the excellence of Baton Rouge citizens despite terrible local, state, and national leadership. I know it is an anecdotal event, but its significance cannot be overlooked. Are The Advocate personnel up for a positive view? I don’t think so.

I doubt any of The Advocate personnel cares one whit about the civic agreement that is offered the individual citizen, the nation and the world in the preamble to the constitution for the USA. In fact, The Advocate personnel may see the preamble as a threat to some perceived special-interest. Far from threat, the preamble offers an achievable better future if coupled with fidelity to the-objective-truth rather than dominant opinion that cannot stand the test of 1700 years of moral discovery.

Think I am arrogant and proud? I think not: I am humble and ashamed of the ruin the Firs Congress begged when it hired factional-Protestant ministers for the pretense that Congress was as divine as Parliament. I oppose the damage done to We the People of the United States by the political regimes that have and do suppress the purpose and goals of the constitution for the USA. Most egregious is the influence of Christianity, and therein is an avenue to an achievable better future: Civic citizens may separate religious morality from civic morality; person from “soul”; human justice in life from hope for personally favored afterdeath; racial supremacy for civic morality.

I’m celebrating Saturday’s vote and the civic people of Baton Rouge.

  

Other fora

libertylawsite.org/2018/05/03/the-death-of-alfie-evans-and-the-death-of-natural-rights/#comment-1663888

Techera refers to Antigone, who said, “I owe a longer allegiance to the dead than to the living; I must dwell with them forever. You, if you wish, may dishonor the laws which gods have established.” 

Gods exist in the minds of the believers, and if it’s really dust to dust Antigone does not dwell with Polynices.

Antigone received a reprieve from stoning but was put into a cave. She committed suicide, perhaps to avoid starvation.

It seems to me Techera, like Antigone confuses personally constructed compassion with responsibility for a nation’s healthcare and independence from papal grandstanding. How long could the pope’s wealth hold out if he took on all the world’s tragedies?

There’s a place for religion in comfort and hope against the unknowns. In taking responsibility for medical decisions, medical doctors have the call on the-objective-truth and popes represent undelivered eternal promises.

Another Greek, Plato, had Agathon inform us, in my paraphrase: in every thought, every word, every act, neither initiate nor tolerate harm. Accepting national health services and then refusing its provisions would seem harmful, and the state ought not tolerate such harm.

quora.com/Why-do-Catholics-pray-to-saints

To Ian MacKinnell:

I don’t know about the Church’s sophistries in contention with earlier writers and thinkers. For example, Plato’s report of Agathon’s speech in “Symposium” seems either evidence of Jesus reported claim, “Before Abraham I am,” or plagiarism by the Church before plagiarism was a word. I don’t know.

But the Catholics I know pray as an expression of personal humility. I have no idea about their individual privacy. I think there are as many Christianities as there are believers.

Maybe there are about six major branches, seven since African-American Christianity emerged in the late 1960s or early 1970s. But there are over 20,000 sects, among whom no two believers have the same honesty about Jesus. There’s no place for integrity in the discussions—-no place for “We don’t know.”

I think civic morality (collaboration for living) is a better public topic than trying to explore the privacy of salvation (hopes for favorable afterdeath).

Facebook messenger: I recently articulated this idea: Each human individual has the authority, power, and personal energy to develop during one life integrity: both personal integrity and public integrity. What's on your mind, friend Nelia Abad?

 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.