Relief from elite stupidity is possible

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 individual happiness with civic integrity more than for the city, state, nation, or society.

Consider writing a personal paraphrase of the preamble, which offers fellow citizens mutual equality:  For discussion, I convert the preamble’s predicate phrases to nouns and paraphrase it for my proposal as follows: We the willing citizens of the United States collaborate for self-discipline regarding integrity, justice, goodwill, defense, prosperity, liberty, and grandchildren and by this amendable constitution limit the U.S.'s service to the people in their states. I want to collaborate with the other citizens on this paraphrase and theirs. I would preserve the original, 1787, text, unless it is amended by the people..

It seems no one has challenged whether or not the preamble is a legal statement. The fact that it changed this independent country from a confederation of states to a union of states deliberately managed by disciplined fellow citizens convinces me the preamble is legal. Equality in opportunity and outcome is shared by the people who collaborate for human justice.

Every citizen has equal opportunity to either trust-in and collaborate-on the goals stated in the preamble or be dissident to the agreement. I think 2/3 of citizens try somewhat to use the preamble but many do not articulate commitment to the goals. However, it seems less than 2/3 understand that “posterity” implies grandchildren. “Freedom of religion,” which fellow citizens have no means to discipline, oppresses freedom to develop integrity.

Selected theme from this week

The November 6 vote by 2/3 margin among about half of Louisiana voters to replace Louisiana’s impartial 10:2 criminal jury verdicts with 12:0 absolutism was born of ignorance among the Louisiana elite. Throughout The Advocate personnel’s campaign beginning Aprils Fools Day, 2018, they steadfastly defended the ignorance. Injustice replaced justice and ineluctably faces correction. At this point, the factions that made it happen will do all they can to hide the increased costs.

Letters

Elite illegality (John Burkhart) (https://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/letters/article_354b5858-e833-11e8-93a9-63438e0089e5.html)

The reality is that if 64% of half Louisiana voters voted on Nov 6, 32% of voters approved 12:0 jury absolutism to replace Louisiana’s gift to the U.S., the unanimous-majority verdict, now at 10:2 rather than the original 9:3.

The unanimous-majority verdict is brilliant in two ways: it fulfills the state’s U.S. responsibility specified in U.S. Constitutional Amendment VI to provide impartial juries and it effects exclusion of jury members who secretively do not want justice.

The perpetrators of the referendum convinced innocent voters to put themselves in the shoes of criminals rather than victims and thus imposed injustice where justice was established for 138 years.

French-influenced Louisiana led the way for other former British colonies to enact unanimous-majority verdict laws so as to lessen crime’s influence on jury trials. England enacted 10:2 juries in 1967. History came through the Jim Crow decades but is only part of the ageless legacy of slavery.

The perpetrators of the referendum contributed to a breach of U.S. Amendment XIV.1, Amendment VI, and Johnson v Louisiana (1972). I hope someone sues the Louisiana Legislature for relief from a referendum predicated on passionate ignorance.

Elite stupidity (Marjorie Esman) (https://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/letters/article_4a9518e4-e779-11e8-ad0d-a7a28787e6e5.html)

To Scuddy LeBlanc:

I agree, Scuddy. Somebody in state government needs to benchmark and start reporting the growth in trial expenses categorized by cause.

For example, with jury absolutism (12:0) we'll see fewer criminals opting for no trial by pleading guilty, exchanging a lesser penalty such as 40 years instead of perhaps life after trial under a unanimous-majority verdict rule (10:2).

I'm hoping somebody will sue the Louisiana State Bar Association and their cohorts such as The Advocate personnel so as to stop the enactment of 2018 Amendment 2 for breach of the U.S Constitution with Amendment XIV.1, Amendment VI, and Johnson v Lousiana (1972).

The U.S. Constitution requires states to provide impartial juries despite the fact that slavery was practiced in 1787-1791, and Louisiana, since 1880, has provided not only impartial juries but juries of peers who wanted statutory justice.  

Ignorant people excited the passions of Jim Crow and influenced voters to think of themselves as the accused subjected to trial rather than the victim experiencing the trial of the offender they identified. Impartial verdicts by a jury comprised of people who collaborate for statutory justice is essential to every individual.

Elites in Louisiana used 2/3 of half of the voters to victimize the people of Louisiana! But the people may stop the tyranny before it happens.

Trust me: I will not file a suit. I have even more important work: promoting widespread use of the civic, civil, and legal agreement that is offered in the U.S. preamble.

Columns

The formula for Christian enslavement (Christopher Simon) (https://www.bethanyclipper.com/wp-content/grand-media/application/111418EntireEdition.pdf /, page 4)

“Submission is a spiritual discipline that is quite out of tune with the modern ethos.”

“In spiritual submission we are giving our lives over to a higher power and trusting that God will take care of us.”

“'Remind the people to be subject to rulers and authorities, to be obedient, to be ready to do whatever is good, to slander no one, to be peaceable and considerate, and always to be gentle toward everyone.' —Titus 3:1-2 NIV"

I thought Christianity was about the salvation of the soul rather than “God will take care of us.” I think people are no longer falling for religious enslavement and a better future is therefore available.

Unsubstantiated claims beg more woe (Cal Thomas) (https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/nov/14/the-shame-of-the-catholic-church/)

“One doesn’t have to be Roman Catholic or even Christian to recognize the great good the Catholic Church has done.” 

I think the data would show the bad far outweighs the good. Consider for example the 15th-century “authorizations” of colonization with the African-slave trade or the Doctrine of Discovery.

Other fora

https://www.facebook.com/groups/classicalsociologicaltheory/?multi_permalinks=2164587623868119&notif_id=1543067314486138&notif_t=group_highlights

To Najib Bouhout: I think the only common cause is individual happiness with civic integrity. I do not think today's media and "journalism" schools are legitimate forces. The best way to read or listen is to count the lies as discerned from either the-objective-truth or the interconnected theory of existing discoveries.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/classicalsociologicaltheory/permalink/2084678411859041/

Guided by my interpretation of Albert Einstein’s 1941 speech, “The Laws of Science and The Laws of Ethics,” reprinted online at https://samharris.org/my-friend-einstein/, I think this question is best considered as physics, the object of study rather than the study, and integrity to the-objective-truth. Since I am not using Einstein’s words and phrases, I do not consider my reference to them as consigning responsibility for my ideas: they are mine, not Einstein’s.

My specific word uses are intended to remove the competition for the dominant opinion so as to establish collaboration. In other words, so that those human beings who admit to themselves and to fellow humans that they do not know the whole of the-objective-truth may collaborate for best behaviors for mutual, comprehensive safety and security yet responsibly pursue individual happiness.

   

To consider questions regarding human procreation, I think the perspective of the ovum and the spermatozoon that will fertilize that ovum establishes individual dignity and civic equality. In other words, the resulting conception is due the best chances of becoming a complete human being. That is, the individual who was gestated, born, transitioned from feral infant to mature young adult with the understanding and intent to live a full lifetime developing integrity. Anything less tends away from humanity towards banality.

In this context, the man and woman who conceive an embryo were in a monogamy for life and intend to include the child in their fidelity and as a family develop a promising future for the parents’ grandchildren (the children’s children), all the while maintaining the quest for each one’s personal integrity and civic integrity.

Adult contracts that challenge the above principles or better ones beg difficulties, much as people who tried to fly by mimicking birds experienced the errors that led to aerodynamics and jet propulsion. Moreover, challenging these principles requires the discovery of replacements for human bonding in monogamy for life, inclusion of grandchildren and beyond in the bond, and developing the integrity required for fidelity. However, unlike flying, technologies to mimic mom and dad’s appreciation for their child such that the child’s dignity and equality are preserved may not obtain. In fact, in a technologically formed family, there is nothing wrong with the romance between parent and child, whether that leads to the separation of the original partners or not. In other words, infidelity begets infidelity.

Thus, partners in monogamy for life ought not to use technology for procreation without providing for the dignity and equality for the child. Beyond heritage and personal fidelity, there’s the challenge of partners providing the child the experience of a heterosexual monogamy for life. Maybe the ultra-rich can accomplish it, but I doubt that is so. When non-heterosexual partners want monogamy for life, my suggestion is to go childless.

As Mr. Ashley suggests, people who cannot regard my expressions as worthy speech rather than harmful intentions are requested to respond to the issues I raised rather than my person. I sincerely seek to collaborate for civic, civil, and legal justice and think neither spirituality nor religion is involved.

http://cdn4.creativecirclemedia.com/madisonville/files/20180501-201335-MM%20050218%20-%20full.pdf, page 7

“And while there may be a bit of larceny in every heart, most of us [want] to become better human beings and to help our fellow human beings more than fleece them.” But until we reform, we’ll claim we’re Christians so as to take all we can get.

When will proprietors recognize that the jig is up? A vendor’s talk of Christianity inspires me to confirm that my wallet is there.

Phil Beaver does not “know.” He trusts in and is committed to the-objective-truth which can only be discovered. Conventional wisdom has truth founded on reason, but it obviously does not work.

Phil is agent for A Civic People of the United States, a Louisiana, education non-profit corporation. See online at promotethepreamble.blogspot.com, and consider essays from the latest and going back as far as you like.