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 willing citizens of the United States collaborate for civic, civil, and legal self-discipline to provide integrity, justice, goodwill, defense, prosperity, liberty, for ourselves and for the nation’s grandchildren and beyond and by this amendable constitution authorize and 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
Passion attack on statutory law: President Trump could change his slogan to "Make American Great At Last."
Columns
Competitive political phrases (Stephanie Grace) (https://www.theadvocate.com/new_orleans/opinion/dan_fagan/)
I work to express civic issues such that fellow citizens may relate them to the civic, civil, and legal agreement that is offered in the preamble to the U.S. Constitution (U.S. preamble).
One of the worst enemies of We the People of the United States, the willing citizens who are represented in the U.S. preamble’s agreement, is the press and other media. Media personnel are either ignorant of the agreement or consider that their aspiration to be journalists places them above fellow citizens. Maybe The Advocate personnel will create a series on why they think writers for the press are above fellow citizens. Every human being has the opportunity to express either infidelity or civic integrity.
At the core of this country’s survival is the competition between phrases like Gov. Edwards’ infamous “the right thing to do,” and each AG Landry’s and Senator Kennedy’s "the legal thing to do."
For the past half century, the AMO-special-interest groups in this country have violently (Alinsky) demonstrated for social democracy (Marxist) rather than the individual civic discipline the U.S. preamble proposes. The U.S. preamble tacitly seeks individual happiness with civic integrity. “Civic integrity” is a collaborative pursuit of the-objective-truth. (People use “truth” to mysteriously compete for dominant opinion.)
As long as most fellow citizens neglect the discipline that is proposed in the U.S. preamble, the nation will continue its rapid decline into anarchy’s right-thing-to-do at the expense of statutory justice.
"Happy season of civic goodwill" is not popular this year.
One of the worst enemies of We the People of the United States, the willing citizens who are represented in the U.S. preamble’s agreement, is the press and other media. Media personnel are either ignorant of the agreement or consider that their aspiration to be journalists places them above fellow citizens. Maybe The Advocate personnel will create a series on why they think writers for the press are above fellow citizens. Every human being has the opportunity to express either infidelity or civic integrity.
At the core of this country’s survival is the competition between phrases like Gov. Edwards’ infamous “the right thing to do,” and each AG Landry’s and Senator Kennedy’s "the legal thing to do."
For the past half century, the AMO-special-interest groups in this country have violently (Alinsky) demonstrated for social democracy (Marxist) rather than the individual civic discipline the U.S. preamble proposes. The U.S. preamble tacitly seeks individual happiness with civic integrity. “Civic integrity” is a collaborative pursuit of the-objective-truth. (People use “truth” to mysteriously compete for dominant opinion.)
As long as most fellow citizens neglect the discipline that is proposed in the U.S. preamble, the nation will continue its rapid decline into anarchy’s right-thing-to-do at the expense of statutory justice.
"Happy season of civic goodwill" is not popular this year.
Other fora
https://www.quora.com/Democracy-is-not-perfect-but-what-would-be-better-than-that?
A culture of individual happiness with civic integrity is better than democracy.
Integrity is widespread collaboration to discover and practice statutory justice based on the-objective-truth rather than conflict for dominant opinion.
Many scholars press their opinion by citing truth or even “The Truth,” but their basis is reason, which some scholars elevate above “nature.” The reason vs nature debate has existed for centuries.
Integrity is widespread collaboration to discover and practice statutory justice based on the-objective-truth rather than conflict for dominant opinion.
Many scholars press their opinion by citing truth or even “The Truth,” but their basis is reason, which some scholars elevate above “nature.” The reason vs nature debate has existed for centuries.
However, “the-objective-truth” exists and can only be discovered. That is, human beings cannot construct the-objective-truth no matter what doctrine they assume: reason, revelation, belief, doctrine, coercion, and force. Imagine using reason to stop a category 5 hurricane.
Everything that exists is controlled by physics, the object of study rather than the study. I understand the source of everything is E=mC squared. The fiction humankind contends with obtains from what has not been discovered. For example, most explorers thought the earth was flat and did not understand gravity and therefore were reluctant to sail into the horizon for fear they would fall off the earth.
Albert Einstein spoke in 1941 about integrity being based on physics and his only illustration was the civic people do not lie so as to reduce human misery and loss. A good illustration is in Rudyard Kipling’s short story “The Man Who Would be King.” The men of the village decide the man is God and prepare to marry him to the prize woman of the tribe. The women rebel and cut the man’s arm to show that he bleeds. The men murder him.
Individual happiness may be discovered over a human lifetime (some 80 years) of making choices that comport to physics rather than pursuing beliefs. This way of living promises a better future, and that claim cannot be refuted, because no culture has ever proposed to develop individual happiness with civic integrity.
Albert Einstein spoke in 1941 about integrity being based on physics and his only illustration was the civic people do not lie so as to reduce human misery and loss. A good illustration is in Rudyard Kipling’s short story “The Man Who Would be King.” The men of the village decide the man is God and prepare to marry him to the prize woman of the tribe. The women rebel and cut the man’s arm to show that he bleeds. The men murder him.
Individual happiness may be discovered over a human lifetime (some 80 years) of making choices that comport to physics rather than pursuing beliefs. This way of living promises a better future, and that claim cannot be refuted, because no culture has ever proposed to develop individual happiness with civic integrity.
I think the USA could establish a civic culture very fast, but it would take 2/3 of the people trusting-in and committed to both 1) using the civic, civil, and legal agreement that is offered in the preamble to the U.S. Constitution and 2) collaborating to discover statutory justice using the-objective-truth.
Perhaps another country could move faster.
The short response is that U.S. regimes have tried to unconstitutionally preserve British constitutional Canterbury partnership with Parliament using a U.S. mimic, presently Judeo-Christianity with Congress, the Administration, and the Supreme Court. Statutory justice is possible under the separation of church from state, an expression of an American dream: individual happiness with civic integrity.
The brilliant debates that 1787 framers of the U.S. constitution conducted divided the Philadelphia delegates into 39 signers and 16 dissidents. Adding Rhode Island’s 4 statistical dissent brings the total dissidents to 20. Thus, the 13 eastern seaboard states divided 2/3 for and 1/3 against forming the world’s first nation based on civic discipline by the people. That claim is tacitly stated in the preamble to the U.S. Constitution, hereafter “U.S. preamble.” Factional American Protestantism falsely labeled the agreement proposed in the U.S. preamble “secular.” However, the proposal is neutral to religion, gender, race, skin color, ethnicity, wealth, heritage, integrity, and other human characteristics.
In 1787, the majority of the country was governed by indigenous tribes, Spain, France, Mexico, Russia, Hawaiians, and other powers. Some of those governments were enemies of the British Empire. Within the thirteen states, 20% of inhabitants were African slaves, and only 5% of free citizens could vote.
Former British colonists, the free inhabitants under the U.S. preamble, nevertheless were accustomed to Blackstone common law and the factional Protestant surrogate for Canterbury. According the Chapter XI Machiavellianism, the church-state-partnership is particularly advantageous for controlling the people, and that was obvious to some of the leaders, I suspect James Madison and John Adams.
Since about 400 years BCE, or 2400 years ago, humankind had been informed by the Athenian Greeks that responsibility involves equal justice under statutory law; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_justice_under_law. The U.S. preamble proposes that the fellow citizens develop statutory justice using a constitution that can be amended when injustice is discovered. The tacit, ultimate goal is individual justice with civic morality.
Fellow citizens, free men, who were elected to the First Congress were, respecting the revolutionary civic, civil, and legal agreement that is offered in the U.S. preamble like adolescent procreators who know no better parenting than “doing what Mom and Dad did.” Adolescents are too immature to admit that there are four parenting opinions involved in that concept. Ignorant-of or resistant-to the U.S. preamble’s powers, the First Congress did all they could to impose constitutional British church-state-partnership on We the People of the United States. That erroneous imposition, starting with the hiring of Congressional chaplains in April and May 1789 has been unraveling ever since.
The religion clauses in the 1791 First Amendment may be revised to protect collaboration for civic integrity, a citizen’s duty, rather than religion, an institutional business. In casual terms, civic integrity offers individuals the opportunity to responsibly live and let live.
In 2019, fellow citizens may begin to admit that neither popular government nor their personal god can provide statutory justice. Each human being has the individual power, the individual energy, and the individual authority to develop either infidelity or civic integrity. Civic integrity is based on the-objective-truth rather than popular opinion and is the objective of statutory justice.
Failure to separate church from state has brought the U.S. to the 2018 woe. Only willing fellow citizens can collaborate for the discipline to restore a path to civic integrity.
To Cleve Wright: The problem is that some believers perceive they must impose their god on everyone else, not admitting that God whatever that is (I think it's physics the object of discovery rather than the study) may not agree with the believer who takes that approach for assuring their spiritual salvation. In other words, the person who claims his or her god is God may be defying God whatever that is.
In life, we may observe every day that keeping spiritual pursuits separate from civic integrity is essential to statutory justice.
My experience is that you, Cleve, are not among the imposing believers but rather practice responsible live-and-let-live with "don't tread on me." That’s the same as Agathon's statement 2400 years ago (speech in Plato’s “Symposium”), in my paraphrase: neither initiate nor tolerate coercion/force to or from any person or other entity.
In life, we may observe every day that keeping spiritual pursuits separate from civic integrity is essential to statutory justice.
My experience is that you, Cleve, are not among the imposing believers but rather practice responsible live-and-let-live with "don't tread on me." That’s the same as Agathon's statement 2400 years ago (speech in Plato’s “Symposium”), in my paraphrase: neither initiate nor tolerate coercion/force to or from any person or other entity.
https://www.quora.com/What-response-expresses-civic-integrity-when-a-child-asks-Is-Santa-real
depends on the age of the child and on how integrated in the local society the parents want to be themselves and their child. i have the same problem but i obey what my son tells me to tell or not tell his little boy when i am with him. i tried to make him doubt about santa but my son…his wife actually, forbid me to. i hope that my rational influence at the little one will help him become rational when he grows up. it may not be good for his mum but i am sure it is better for him to live less integrated with the local society but in reality, than good with society and its lies. lie is never good.
“What do you think?” Followed by, “That’s interesting. Tell me more.”
Niki Kapetanou’s response reflected some of the issues. However, my question is quite specific, and I think you appropriately ask for more definition.
First, the person who would share a response might consider the meaning of “civic integrity.” I mean responsibly living and letting live more than upholding a civilization or other norm.
Second, “expresses” implies both the personal integrity of the speaker and encouraging the child to develop integrity and self-confidence more than pride.
With those clarifications, I look forward to suggestions as to how to respond.
I don’t see it as a question that has an impact beyond the child.
You don’t specify whether it’s a child asking their parent or a child asking a non-parent adult.
If it’s a child asking a non-parent, I’d turn the question around as I wrote in my answer. It’s not up to me to support or dash a child’s ideas about Santa.
If it’s a child asking their parent, it all depends on what the child believes and what the parent has said in the past. I like how Neil deGrasse Tyson handled the Easter Bunny. It was presented as a puzzle for the child to work out, without actually saying it’s a puzzle.
Buddy Thornton, Owner-BCT Mediations PLUS-Mediator-Parenting Coach at Brav Ambassador (2012-present)
Just like any other imaginary play person, Santa is real if you make him real in your mind and heart.
If a child is asking that, they are seeking reassurance rather than a real answer.
Same goes for Easter bunny, unicorns, and other mythical creatures.
If you are absolutely sure that the child is ready for the truth (aka their caregivers lying to them for years about the magical things), you should proceed with caution.
To Margaret Weiss: When I faced the question, my child was preparing for the next day’s debate with her good friend at elementary school. My response would impact my child, her friend, their connection for life, and my civic integrity.
Moreover, it would either strengthen or lessen my daughter’s trust in me to give her my best.
I needed to position my child to respond with civic integrity, even though I could have honestly left it to her own creative thoughts. (Recalling some bad advice from high places. Ruined human connections are difficult to patch.)
I chose an alternative and would like to learn other options.
I told MWW that Santa is a metaphor for appreciation and goodwill among people. I admitted that her mom oversaw the selection of presents and I put the cookies and milk out.
She smiled her appreciation for civic integrity, even though we did not discuss it with that phrase. Maybe we should have.
https://www.quora.com/Which-is-the-greater-thing-that-a-society-can-bestow-upon-its-people-justice-freedom-or-wealth?
Fellow citizens may collaborate for mutual, individual freedom to develop civic integrity.
The question: What disappoints you most about today’s society?
Second, I do not like the term “society.”
Society means “a part of the community that sets itself apart as a leisure class and that regards itself as the arbiter of fashion and manners.” Wait! That’s ridiculous! It means, “a community, nation, or broad grouping of people having common traditions, institutions, and collective activities and interests.” Good grief! It means, “a voluntary association of individuals for common ends.” Alas, it means, “companionship or association with one's fellows.” I retreat: What did you mean by “society?”
First, I was born in the U.S. and in my eighth decade realize that most people have no desire for equal justice under statutory law. Most fellow citizens could not care less about the agreement to develop statutory justice that is offered in the preamble to the U.S. Constitution. The last of the stated goals, “to our Posterity,” promises a better future for grandchildren and beyond, and their debt to satisfy adults now approaches $22 trillion.
It seems that we, the people, will never establish We the People of the United States. Yet I work to promote the U.S. preamble’s agreement.
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.
No comments:
Post a Comment