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 civic people of the united states in order to develop
individual discipline, civic integrity, justice, defense, and prosperity so as
to perpetually preserve liberty, maintain statutory law for the USA.”
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.
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. Equity 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
In 2013, I felt the U.S. preamble’s propositions could be
used to improve Baton Rouge civic reliability (integrity) so as to preserve its
wholeness (integrity) rather than division by St. George City. I held library
meetings to promote use of the U.S. preamble in individual daily life.
However, six years later, it seems to me that Baton Rouge neither
approves nor encourages responsible liberty, the intention of the U.S.
preamble. We the People of the United States, the subject of the U.S. preamble,
takes responsibility for five collaborative provisions---Union, Justice,
Tranquility, defense and Welfare---so as to secure human liberty.
The Baton Rouge mayor expects liberty on church coalition
and dialogues on racism rather than individual responsibility.
In other words, majority voters in Baton Rouge do not
trust-in and commit-to the opportunity for human equity in the U.S. preamble’s
proposition. If citizens of St. George perceive they can encourage responsible
liberty better on their own, let them vote to separate and improve their
responsible liberty. The can always consolidate if the irresponsible people of
Baton Rouge reform. Either way, the responsible people of Baton Rouge will
continue to approve and encourage human liberty.
News
A forum I tried to
resign from, because I adamantly oppose The Advocate personnel’s work for
socialism and against responsible liberty (https://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/news/article_8ededf94-41e7-11e9-9f46-5ff1adcacede.html)
Richard Voivedich
Perhaps the trickster you are addressing removed the post. Regardless, the real
Phil Beaver in Baton Rouge is depicted with MWWW---my wonderful, witty wife.
When the trickster tries to copy and paste one of my pics,
FB deletes the fake account. Otherwise, neither The Advocate nor Facebook nor
BRPD offer relief from what I consider a crime---misrepresenting my views using
a fake account. But the First Amendment does not recognize my opinion about the
crime. I advocate for revising the First Amendment so as to protect responsible
liberty instead of “free speech” and to encourage both individual and corporate
pursuit of integrity rather than religion. The First Amendment represents
colonial British oppression.
As for your opinion, I could not agree with you more. I want
the best for Baton Rouge and don't know the-objective-truth: If my neighbors to
the SE think forming their own city is best, I support them and will continue
to develop responsible liberty in my location.
In 2013, when I first learned of the St. George proposal, I
contacted many politicians and local leaders saying that sincere consideration
of the proposition in the U.S. preamble could save Baton Rouge civic integrity
(both as wholeness and as understanding). One of my points was that if citizens
of South Carolina in 1860 had marched on their state legislature with the
message “Not on my watch will you secede from my country” the Civil War might
not have happened.
With not one response, on June 21, 2014, I started public
library meetings (thank you Steve Crump, Hugh Finklea, and my wonderful family)
to promote the practice of the U.S. preamble’s proposition.
(Back to 1860, I now think if the 1860 people had practiced
the U.S. preamble, Abraham Lincoln might have done the right thing: Emancipate
the slaves on civic integrity that rebukes an erroneous religious belief. See
the conclusion of the 1860 Declaration of Secession. I wrote to local
politicians to affix on monuments plaques about Bible interpretation as the
source of "erroneous religious belief" but do not feel like wasting
my time on Richmond, VA.)
These five years later, with collaboration by over seventy
fellow citizens attending nearly twenty library meetings plus meetings at LSU
and elsewhere, I attest that the U.S. preamble proposes responsible liberty. I
support that point with grammar diagrams in speeches I currently conduct. In
short, a civic people of the USA either coerce or force five
provisions---Union, Justice, Tranquility, defense and Welfare---and encourage
citizens to responsibly practice human liberty. In other words, responsible
citizens accept the liberty they have. The U.S. preamble states that liberty is
not in the catalogue of enforceable practices: Only the individual can practice
liberty, so government's only option is to coerce or force the five provisions
and urge responsible liberty as opposed to infidelity to self. In other words,
responsible liberty requires self-discipline, the U.S. premble's proposition.
The U.S. preamble’s civic and civil proposition was legally
established on June 21, 1788 when nine states ratified the 1787 Constitution
for the USA. A significant portion of leaders, perhaps 1/3 opposed the U.S.
preamble’s requirement that individual citizens self-discipline for liberty. On
that concern, the first Congress re-instated the colonial-British tradition of
church-state partnership. The twelve or so generations since then have left it
to us to separate church from state so that churches that support responsible
civic liberty may flourish for the spiritual hopes and comforts of their
believers.
This reform can occur in a surprisingly short time, and I
offer a series of discussions titled “An Achievable Better Future.” There are
two key actions: fellow citizens practice the U.S. preamble’s proposition and
use the-objective-truth to discover justice rather than conflict for dominant
opinion.
I appreciate Fred Bear motivating me to write this.
I appreciate Fred Bear motivating me to write this.
Phil Beaver Mr. Beaver-As my
daddy used to say "We shall see what we shall see"
To Charles Mayeux: I hope you
know there's a bogus Phil Beaver in these parts. My FB id is marked by MWWW, my
wondeful witty wife, and if someone copies the pic, I'll go to a different pic
in my files while I report them to FB again.
To Charles Mayeux again: I learned that the perhaps female entity
claiming "Phil Beaver" has the FB address https://www. facebook.com/marsha.marshal.129,
which is not surprising to me. This is the entity I have reported to The
Advocate, Facebook, and BRPD, with no relief from its irresponsible freedom of
expression. Irresponsible liberty begs constraint.
This brings to mind promoting the U.S. preamble. The
proposition that We the People of the United States coerces/forces five
provisions---union, justice, tranquility, defense, and welfare--- "to
secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity" is in some
fellow citizens' genes and memes and not in others. For some fellow citizens,
human liberty is a curse because of the responsibilities involved: Some people
erroneously want another being to take their responsibility.
Many people in the St. George area tend to take
reasonability for liberty. Some perceive that many people in Baton Rouge expect
and demand that government or god provide union, justice, tranquility, defense,
and welfare. Mayor Broome has had ample time to reform from her platform:
church and dialogues on racism. Governor Edwards could not reform if he wanted
to. Together Baton Rouge, a gods collective, takes no responsibility for its
passion. Like churches, AMO pays no civic bills.
Since Pericles, 2,500 years ago, it is well known that
people can collaborate for equity under a civic, civil, and legal agreement,
and in the USA, fellow citizens may join We the People of the United States
according to the U.S. preamble. It is an agreement offered to today’s fellow
citizens for themselves and their posterity rather than for dead citizens, who
can no longer collaborate for civic integrity. The U.S. preamble expresses
responsible people’s civic, civil, and legal power.
I think a better future is achievable right away but
promoting the U.S. preamble has fallen on deaf ears for the past five years and
before that 226 years. It would not surprise me for the people of St. George to
vote for responsible liberty now and leave it to future Baton Rouge citizens to
admit to themselves that personal responsibility for personal liberty is not a
curse.
Quora
https://www.quora.com/What-is-a-valuble-lesson-you-learned-too-late-in-life
I admit misapprehension of the word “oxymoron” and think it
is never too late to learn a valuable lesson. Furthermore, I think the
principle that it is never too late to reform is essential to life.
No matter how low a person’s offense may be, I would be the
last fellow citizen to say it is too late for them to recognize the offense and
reform, with some exceptions: for examples, malice murder and statutory
treason.
https://www.quora.com/Do-you-believe-society-changes-based-on-what-s-marketed-and-why?
I think marketing is effective and have an example that has operated
for 230 years so far and is prime for termination as fast as within two years
if this message goes viral with approval.
Before September 17, 1787’s draft U.S. Constitution, major European documents on this continent made reference to a Christian God, some documents citing his son Jesus Christ. However, there were many definitions of gods, especially Christian gods, on the continent. Benjamin Franklin suggested religious allegiance through prayer in the early days of the constitutional convention, but the motion did not receive a second. The committee of forms, in the 51-word U.S. preamble, represented the consequence of all the delegates’ discussions as a document without allegiance to a god by a responsible people. In other words, the people have responsibility for liberty.
Before September 17, 1787’s draft U.S. Constitution, major European documents on this continent made reference to a Christian God, some documents citing his son Jesus Christ. However, there were many definitions of gods, especially Christian gods, on the continent. Benjamin Franklin suggested religious allegiance through prayer in the early days of the constitutional convention, but the motion did not receive a second. The committee of forms, in the 51-word U.S. preamble, represented the consequence of all the delegates’ discussions as a document without allegiance to a god by a responsible people. In other words, the people have responsibility for liberty.
The U.S. preamble is neutral to gender, religion, ethnicity,
wealth and other human inequalities. After a couple decades of study and
discussion, I perceive the U.S. preamble propositions individual citizens to
aid five coercible/forcible provisions---Union, Justice, Tranquility, defense
and Welfare---so as to approve and encourage individuals to responsibly
practice human liberty. In other words, responsible citizens accept the liberty
each human has to develop civic integrity rather than nourish infidelities.
The U.S. preamble codifies that liberty is not in the
catalogue of enforceable practices: Only the individual can practice liberty,
so government's only option is to coerce or force the five provisions and urge
responsible liberty as opposed to infidelity to self. In other words,
responsible liberty requires self-discipline, the U.S. premble's proposition.
The U.S. preamble clearly, in my opinion, establishes civic,
civil, and legal power by the people in their states to discipline themselves
by managing the USA so as to approve of and encourage (bless) responsible
liberty. Nine states ratified the U.S. preamble’s proposition on June 21, 1788.
However, the Frist Congress, seated representing eleven states on March 4,
1789, feared approving and encouraging responsible liberty, so they imposed
factional-American Protestantism in a partnership with Congress. Perhaps they
also imagined representing themselves as divine. At the time, probably 99% of
free inhabitants and 100% of the 4% who could vote subscribed to the Christian
formula of fear: Either submit to Christianity or be ostracized in this country;
moreover, in your afterdeath spend eternity in the fires of hell instead of
enjoying refined gold.
Today, this fear formula is marketed despite the obvious:
Christian believers have the human right to pursue the spirituality they choose
but public imposition of their beliefs opposes responsible liberty. Consider
for example, U.S. Rep. Cory Booker’s recent marketing of the phrase “civic
grace.” Compare the second stanza of the beloved propaganda, “Amazing Grace.”
The fear formula is expressed “Twas grace that taught My heart to fear And
grace my Fears relieved.” I could sing that song at a friend’s request but only
to honor my friend. If my opposition to fear drives a friend away, I accept
that I am an ostracizer for now and wait for a better time.
The marketing of “freedom of religion” by the USA’s
political regimes so far has bemused the U.S. preamble’s civic, civil, and
legal power to approve and encourage individual, responsible liberty. Our
generation has the power to amend the First Amendment to approve and encourage
civic integrity leaving spiritual pursuits such as religion or none as an
individual choice for adults.
I hope we delete freedom of religion from the First Amendment and approve and encourage civic, civil, and legal integrity under the U.S. preamble within a couple years.
I hope we delete freedom of religion from the First Amendment and approve and encourage civic, civil, and legal integrity under the U.S. preamble within a couple years.
Can you rephrase this?
Are you saying that the United States Constitution should NOT exercise the
freedom of religion?
No. I am saying the First Amendment is unconstitutional
according to the U.S. preamble, which intends and offers civic, civil, and
legal approval and encouragement of responsible liberty. To conform to the U.S.
preamble, the First Amendment would be silent on religion and spirituality in
order to approve of and encourage civic integrity. The First Amendment imposes
colonial British civic psychology that the U.S. preamble forbids. Religion and
spirituality are private pursuits for mature human beings. I am not willing to
participate in a public forum to evaluate another citizen’s private pursuits
and do not want to compromise mine. However, I do want to collaborate for
responsible liberty.
https://www.quora.com/unanswered/What-reasonable-political-view-that-you-have-makes-people-unreasonably-angry?
The First Amendment to the Constitution for the United
States must be amended so as to protect the individual citizen’s opportunity
and duty to develop responsible liberty under the U.S. preamble. The U.S.
preamble is neutral to religion, a business institution that exists on
believers’ private wishes but causes public misery and loss.
This 1791 fundamental flaw in civic, civil, and legal self-discipline under the 1788 U.S. preamble must be reformed as soon as possible. Fellow citizens need only consider the current congressional nonsense (https://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/house/429895-house-approves-motion-condemning-anti-semitism) over anti-Semitism, indeed an egregious offense, but an extension of long-standing failure to approve and encourage responsible liberty and civic integrity under the U.S. preamble. The First Amendment is the major cause of that failure.
This 1791 fundamental flaw in civic, civil, and legal self-discipline under the 1788 U.S. preamble must be reformed as soon as possible. Fellow citizens need only consider the current congressional nonsense (https://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/house/429895-house-approves-motion-condemning-anti-semitism) over anti-Semitism, indeed an egregious offense, but an extension of long-standing failure to approve and encourage responsible liberty and civic integrity under the U.S. preamble. The First Amendment is the major cause of that failure.
https://www.quora.com/Is-is-true-that-freedom-is-not-given-but-must-be-demanded-from-the-people?
About 2500 years ago Pericles suggested, in my
interpretation, that human beings have the individual and collective power to
collaborate for equity under statutory justice. That’s a packed sentence, and
the key words worthy of explanation include power, collaborate, equity, and
justice. The U.S. Supreme Court building is adorned with “Equal justice under
law,” which I do not appreciate at all. For example, I think the First
Amendment should encourage each individual to develop civic integrity rather
than civil religion.
About 2400 years ago Agathon said, in my interpretation,
individuals who appreciate being human neither initiate nor tolerate harm to or
from any person or god. For example, I think the First Amendment errs to allow
citizens to speak without conformance to Agathon’s idea. That is, speech should
be responsible and free.
The civic, civil, and legal powers granted the USA are
plainly stated in the preamble to the Constitution for the USA, or the U.S.
preamble. My paraphrase today (I continually improve my understanding by
stating my paraphrase then listening to fellow citizens) follows: We the civic people of the united states in
order to develop individual discipline, civic integrity, justice, defense, and
prosperity so as to perpetually preserve liberty, maintain statutory law for
the USA. My 32 word interpretation of the U.S. preamble’s 51 words asserts that
civic citizens use coercion/force for five provisions that encourage and
approve human liberty. In other words, freedom-from oppression empowers the
human practice of responsible liberty.
Study the actual preamble (which I would not change) and
write your own paraphrase. Especially consider who can provide the civil freedom
so you, an individual, may practice responsible liberty. If you like the
results of the exercise, aid acceleration of an achievable better future.
https://www.quora.com/Do-you-believe-some-people-are-more-equal-than-others-What-makes-them-more-equal?
I view this question on the basis of ova. Of about 800
million U.S. ova per year, only 4 million become infants. Thus, 0.5 % of ova
survive. Perhaps the survivors are more equal than the terminated ova. If we
accept the ova view, the ova survivor view may be analogous for humans. That
is, 99.5% of humans fail to develop their potential.
How might this be so?
It seems the human being is the most powerful living
species. Every human has the individual power, the individual energy, and the
individual authority (IPEA) to develop either infidelity or integrity to
the-objective-truth. Most cultures teach their young to seek higher power---a
government, a philosophy, or a god. Therefore IPEA never occurs to most people
and few even care about the-objective-truth.
The-objective-truth exists and can only be discovered.
However, most people are not satisfied to admit to themselves, “I do not know
when they do not know.” Most people choose to believe something. Yet because
IPEA is real and cannot be consigned, they have a nagging doubt in the belief.
Therefore, there is a slight chance the believer will be motivated to discover
and develop IPEA. If so, they may choose integrity rather than infidelity.
(Some people use IPEA to develop crime unless their actual harm is discovered.)
I often write that I do not believe in believing, yet I believe in believers’
chance for reform.
The more serious concern is that existing cultures I know of
do not inculcate IPEA by encouraging newborns to develop responsible liberty.
People who develop responsible liberty may collaborate for statutory justice,
an impossible perfection yet a worthy goal. Without early coaching and
encouragement, it is doubtful that an infant will discover and develop IPEA,
much less choose to practice civic integrity. Civic integrity requires the
person to understand the-objective-truth in every choice he or she makes.
The chance of two humans reaching their individual, ultimate human maturity is so slim I do not think it can be said that any two humans are equal.
The chance of two humans reaching their individual, ultimate human maturity is so slim I do not think it can be said that any two humans are equal.
https://www.quora.com/What-can-you-do-to-make-a-possitive-change-in-society-today?
The first liberty fellow citizens can take is to realize
that associations/societies do not determine---may oppose---civic integrity.
Even collaboration for responsible liberty can be misleading, for example, when
neither party understands the-objective-truth. Under the-objective-truth, when
neither party understands, they agree, “We do not know.” Every human being has
the individual power, the individual energy, and the individual authority
(IPEA) to develop either integrity or infidelity to the-objective-truth. Some
people think crime pays and therefore use IPEA to perfect their scheme until
actual harm comes to the attention of fellow citizens.
Some scholars rebuke the-objective-truth by insisting on The
Truth or the objective truth or ultimate truth or the Almighty truth or
absolute truth or some coercion/force for dominant opinion. Fear is their most
powerful tool, and they do not accept that the human being is too
psychologically powerful to ultimately compromise or subjugate to fear. And the
person who accepts his or her IPEA is intolerant of tolerance from purveyors of
fear.
Civic citizens encourage each other to use IPEA to develop
responsible liberty. Criminals and other dissidents to statutory justice resist
the encouragement for reasons they may or may not understand, but often merely
to nourish banal habits, sometimes abusing other humans.
Many individuals are persuaded to be dissident by societies
who oppose justice. Individuals excuse self-defeating habits by attempting to
consign IPEA to the errant society, even though they perceive it won’t work. I
think the human being is so psychologically powerful that the individual knows
when he or she is subjugating or compromising for a society. Persons in
voluntary enslavement perceive their denial of IPEA.
About 2,500 years ago, Pericles suggested that humans may
enjoy equity by collaborating for statutory justice, a perfection. In the
meantime, they may make the most of a worthy cause by collaborating on
statutory law. This interpretation of Pericles’ ideas does not benefit
societies who oppose human, responsible liberty.
In the USA, the preamble to the Constitution for the USA
offers the agreement to practice civic, civil, and legal statutory law while
pursuing statutory justice. The discovery of statutory justice comes from
fidelity to the-objective truth. Wonderfully, fellow citizens can prefer not to
contribute to responsible liberty, which is necessary since statutory justice
is a continuing discovery. If dissidents do not observe statutory law, they may
encounter civic, civil, or legal encouragement to reform. Fortunate are the
dissidents who reform early.
The U.S. preamble’s proposition for responsible liberty
under statutory justice was offered only 231 yeas ago and so far has been
repressed by political regimes and neglected by most people.
Improving these ideas and practicing the improvements can
help individuals collaborate for an achievable better future here and among
humankind.
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