Saturday, April 20, 2019

Responsible, human liberty




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 a civic people of the united states, in order to encourage individual responsibility for integrity, justice, peace, defense, and prosperity so as to secure human liberty for now and for the future, pursue statutory justice in the USA..” I want to collaborate with the other citizens on this paraphrase and theirs yet 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

On Friday, April 19, 2019, my daughter, Holly was off work, and at breakfast I shared with her a review of my quora dialogue with Greg Bailey. See below. My last idea for Bailey was, “perhaps . . .  my work should emphasize ‘responsible, human liberty’ [by] willing fellow citizens’ more than the U.S. preamble’s proposition.”

On hearing that, Holly said, “I like that.”

Holly has collaborated on my work from the beginning---knows how Plato, Ralph Waldo Emerson, Chekhov, Albert Einstein, and many others---influence me. (Rebekah suggested collaboration rather than cooperation, obligation, or subjugation.)

With Holly’s corroboration, it’s a decision and my gratitude for Greg Bailey’s comments is complete and recorded on my appreciation page.



Columns


Civic integrity is established by a contract for equity under the rule of law and enforcement of justice. In a culture of civic integrity, Williams’s phrase “black vote” would not survive. Let’s collaborate to establish responsible human liberty in the USA.

Equity under the U.S. preamble’s proposition appreciates civic humans of all skin colors, ethnicities and both genders. Politicians and ministers have hidden the civic, civil, and legal power of the U.S. preamble for 231 years. It is time for We the People of the United States to establish responsible human liberty for ourselves and future citizens.

Quora

https://www.quora.com/Has-America-gone-from-a-God-fearing-society-at-its-founding-to-a-Godless-society-now Interesting dialogue with an expert skeptic, perhaps self-professed atheist.

My original post: Not at all. On the contrary, it is becoming evident that spirituality and religion are human endeavors for comfort and hope in the face of a confused world. Confused first because most individuals have differing heartfelt concerns and diverse remedies when concerns are similar.

Some people know they are neither omniscient nor omnipotent and therefore make the best choice they perceive in both their daily lives and in their long term goals. However, many people adopt concerns that are presented to them by the world’s cultures and institutional enterprises. Because the enterprises are competitive the concerns and remedies are competitive.

Each human has the individual power, energy, and authority (HIPEA) to develop either integrity to the-objective-truth or infidelity. Some attempt to consign their HIPEA to an enterprise, whether God-fearing or Godless. The-objective-truth about God is that the possible entity has been neither discovered nor disproven.

 No two believers have the same God. In fact, no two priests have the same God, as we observe daily in competitive Christian sects and between priests within a given sect.

 The observations I express are mine. However, they are available to everyone to assess. Happily, there is an achievable, better future, and I hope we are in the transition. Here’s a possibility.

The U.S. preamble’s proposition is for civic citizens to collaborate on the responsibility for freedom-from oppression so that fellow citizens may secure responsible liberty to both living and future citizens; criminals may reform. The only obligations to past citizens is gratitude for their good and prevention of repeating or traditionalizing their mistakes. The U.S. preamble’s proposition is to collaborate to provide Union, Justice, Tranquility, defense, and Welfare so as to secure liberty to both living citizens and future citizens. No $22 trillion debt, for example.

The U.S. preamble’s words are Godless, not to oppress believers, but to assign to both believers and non-believers the responsibility for both Tranquility and liberty. It is left to the individual to accept his or her HIPEA and collaborate for Tranquility including individual spiritual peace and privacy. With at least 2/3 of citizens joining We the People of the United States as defined by the U.S. preamble’s proposition, every Tranquil religion or none may flourish under collaboration by believers rather than conflict under imposition by government.

 We the People of the United States needs 220 million collaborators for the U.S. preamble’s proposition, so if you like these ideas or better (please share), help make this message go viral.





Mr. Beaver….with all due respect, sir, that dialog was the most stoic, apathetic rhetoric I have read in a while. To rattle on as though the United States Constitution bore such altruistic goals and that those goals have been recognized by the people of the United States is just hogwash, sir. Further, you have failed to understand that there are those in the world who have far less than even the poorest in American culture. Watch the link concerning the men and women, children who are engaged in tearing apart the salvaged ships in India [https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=3401&v=5jdEG_ACXLw]. What you write about is naive. I do not say this to be rude but to enlighten you so that you understand that a few million of us in the United States are here by mere accident of birth and by that birth we have great wealth and not by constitutional decree.

Peace to you.


Original Author · Tue

I hope you think more about the particular ideas, for example, “The U.S. preamble’s proposition is to collaborate to provide Union, Justice, Tranquility, defense, and Welfare so as to secure liberty to both living citizens and future citizens. No $22 trillion debt, for example.” I think a future with no debt to U.S. children is a bold challenge to U.S. fellow citizens.

I watched the video and in my view it verifies my objection to “Some [humans] attempt to consign their HIPEA to an enterprise, whether God-fearing or Godless. The-objective-truth about God is that the possible entity has been neither discovered nor disproven.” The boy’s family asked him to get an education rather than counting on God to see him through shipbreaking.

I did not get your point.



Phil, you say you do not get my point and I have to say the same of your dialog.

The Indians God of choice in the shipyards is Kali. I have never seen any mention of a Christian God in any of the videos I have watched concerning the terribleness that is occurring there. I do know there are Christian missionaries who are in India but where are they in this mess of humanity? I wonder where my fellow humanists are? I did see that the Red Cross shows up one day a week with a doctor. I just hope that Indians bleed slowly there.

You mentioned that objective truth about the Abrahamic God has not been discovered nor disproven. I suppose I will have to agree with that statement, as I can not disprove it. However, you must keep in mind that it is not the bailiwick of the non-believer to hold the burden of proof but the one who asserts the belief. Thus, if you believe in the Abrahamic God, it falls to you to prove that assertion. In some 2,000 years now, Christians have been unable to come even microscopically close to proving the existence of their God, ever while, science has made great strides and shown there are more and more reasons not to believe in magic, fantasy and the supernatural.

Peace to you.


Original Author · Wed

Greg, it occurred to me last night that your response to my post wonderfully illustrates the points I was making in specific phrases I collaborate to develop so as to make statements in words that everyone can understand.

It takes two to communicate. We have learned over the last six years conducting civic (which leads to civil and legal) meetings a public libraries to state a heartfelt concern, present a well-grounded solution, and LISTEN for collaboration to either improve or negate the concern. Often, the negative is more collaborative than the positive, and either way, iteration is required to reach a solution that encourages individual happiness with civic integrity (those five words comprise one of our specific expressions).

An important and difficult aspect of the procedure—-express a civic concern, do the work to offer a viable solution, and iteratively LISTEN is that the two parties collaborate on the originally stated concern. In 2006, Harold Weingarten, PhD, chemistry, asked me, “By truth do you mean absolute truth, ultimate truth, God’s truth, or Phil’s truth?” I answered, “None of those, but the objective truth.” I’ve been through many discussions wherein people deny the phrase “the objective truth,” most often by dropping the article. Therefore, I either write “the-objective-truth” or say it along with “including two hyphens to connect the three words into a representation of actual-reality.

I am grateful that you have not allowed writing which is plain to me and a handful of collaborators but difficult for you motivate you to stonewall me. I also appreciated your post and watched the documentary.

I realized after sleeping on the experience that the documentary powerfully supports our work. A young man leaves his village and family who are encouraging him to use education to climb out of poverty. He erroneously applies his HIPEA to depart and join a like-minded crowd who perform rituals and pray to quite contradictory representations of mystery. Respecting poverty and living, the Gods merely delude the worshippers, some of whom are mortally injured. The movie also depicts a ship’s captain whose God goes down with the ship.

Also, the documentary makes the point that the entire enterprise happened because entrepreneurs in a country with less regulation of environmental impacts and worker safety take advantage of poor decisions by the USA and other wealthy countries. The wealthy nations effect the dumping of environmental harm and human abuse onto a poor country with the will to pollute and harm.

By taking the issue global, you both expand beyond the scope of my work and allow me to express my focus on the USA not as an isolationist or exceptionalism but to say: We the People of the United States have willfully neglected our civic, civil, and legal proposition—-the U.S. preamble—-for 231 years. If 2/3 of voters choose to adopt the U.S. preamble's proposition, an achievable better future will be realized.

I already expressed the U.S. preamble’s proposition in its language, and want to express it as I practice it: civic people take responsibility to provide integrity, justice, peace, defense, and prosperity so as to secure human liberty to ourselves and future citizens. Returning to the original U.S. preamble, there is nothing about obligations to either mysteries such as God or none or citizens of the past, who can no longer collaborate.

I appreciate your concerns and want to share a story. My friend said, “No. I’ve been an atheist for decades and don’t care to read another word about it.” I responded, “That’s a leap of faith I cannot take.” He stopped his exit, turned, and said, “That’s interesting.” Then departed. I appreciate you, Greg.

With your advice and consent, I want to add “Greg Bailey, 4/16/19” to our appreciations page. If you do not wish that much ID, I will reduce it to “Greg, 4/16/19” so as to maintain the appreciation. Here’s what you helped me see and it is coincidental with my current reading: groups who do not practice civic integrity as a result of the comfort and hopes they gain by associating with like minded people harm their fellow citizens. First, the fellow citizens in their community and second fellow citizens of the world. Neither Gods nor governments take responsibility for the harms done. In a civic culture, each individual may apply HIPEA to collaborate for civic integrity, keeping any private pursuits private. In the USA, this proposition is offered in the U.S. preamble.



Phil, you speak of objective truth….I know what that is. I think we all know what that is when we see it or hear it. It is hard, cold, with definitive edges. No room for error or debate. Right and wrong.

In the reality of our world, a naturalistic world, we do not live in an objective, moralistic world. Out of all of the animals on Earth, it is only humankind, so far as we know, that has developed this view of morality and most often times, only because of religious influence, a most flawed and ingenious institution, based on lies. Even our criminal laws are not objective. They are subjective. Take any law that you might select and you will find degrees of guilt applied to them.

So, unfortunately for you and me, unless we can find some mid ground, some compromise, I do not see how we can come to a resolution or progress. I hope you see the issue now with what it is to be atheist versus religious. How religious belief corrupts the governing of people. The religious desire objective truth. It is a requirement of their Abrahamic God and the 613 Commandments of Jewry. Atheists demand nothing more than to state a lack of belief in gods; the understanding of morality is left to each and every atheist to ponder on his or her own accord. For me, I see subjective morality as reality and necessary for the common good.


Original Author · 20h ago

Greg, according to both objective truth and subjective truth the sun’ll come up tomorrow, cross the sky, and set again in the evening. But according to the-objective-truth, the earth’s rotation on its axis will unhide the sun in the morning and hide it again in the evening. My statement is somewhat circular, since “morning” and “evening” are defined by the consequences of the daily, axial rotation.

The-objective-truth exists and does not react to reason, revelation, metaphysics, or any other human construct. Neither theist nor atheist can influence the-objective-truth.

Men can influence behavior and set forth consequences. For example, President George W. Bush ordered the invasion of Iraq but the consequences draw humankind to the-objective-truth.



Yes, it is true the certain phenomenon of nature, the Laws of Physics, those things have some temporary, objective truth about the manner in which they exist in our Universe. However, I might point out to you that the Quantum Nature of the Universe is also part of what you speak and I would not care to guess about how it exists or how it works. Not even the most learned of the cosmologists and the physicists among us know exactly how the quantum nature of the Universe functions. Electrons pop into and out of existence…a pair of electrons change at the same time even though one is on the Earth and the other on the space station….electrons behave differently when they are being observed….what is that all about? Some physicist say that understanding what they do know, means that we cannot truly understand anything that we think we might understand. Suddenly, it is not about the atomic nature of the Universe being held together but as many as some 15 or so particle fields that float all about us, adhering to these atoms and keeping everything together in one mass. So, you see, Phil, your accreditation of the natural world being a consummate place of objective truth is flawed thinking, my dear sir. Even your beloved Sun analogy will falter in a mere 5 billion years from now, a speck of time for the Universe, our Sun will swell into a giant and consume Mercury, Venus, and the Earth. Then it will die and become a white dwarf. With the Earth consumed, where will your Sunrise and Sunset be?


And at last, we come to the Iraq War. I think this is a Red Herring fallacious argument, as all of humankind has not agreed on the manner, nor the outcome of that war. Debate still continues as to the nature of George Bush and the need and or the criminality of the invasion.


Original Author · 16h ago

I agree. the-objective-truth about the earth’s rotation will change when it stops, but the facts about its daily rotation on its axis hiding and unhiding the sun during this era will remain.

Also, the-objective-truth about quantum mechanics exists and remains to be discovered.

Before the-objective-truth, objective truth remains a human construct. Perhaps you will think of a term that expresses this point better than the-objective-truth does. I am collaborating for such a term and will jump on it when it is discovered.



But Phil, you never said anything in your previous dialog about the Sunrise and Sunset “in this era”…you only said it was objective truth. Now, when I point out to you your error, you move the goal post. This is a fallacious argument tactic and a dishonest one. You have likewise done the same with the quantum nature issue, but you missed the point of my discourse about quantum nature entirely; because it is a mystery and seems to have no rhyme or reason, and thus, could never be seen as an objective truth.

You say that objective truth is a human construct and this may be correct, but you do not know this for certain. It could be that higher forms of animal life or even plant life, for all we know, has a construct of truths and facts. Plant life on Earth is the most evolve species of all living things on Earth. I hate to keep shooting you in the foot, but your premise is again, flawed.

How do you feel about free will? Do you have it or not? Is it a natural thing or did the Abrahamic God give it to all of humankind?


Original Author · 1h ago

Dear Greg, your innocence is astounding.

I cited the subjective truth “the sun’ll come up tomorrow” to make the case for the-objective-truth that the earth’s rotation on its axis will un-hide the sun tomorrow. You demonstrated weak objective truth by introducing pseudo-metaphysics by “Schroder and Smith, when the Sun becomes a red giant star in 7.59 billion years . . .“ to take my statement beyond tomorrow. I did not and do not allow you to deny my claim about tomorrow versus your mysticism for 7.6 billion years from now. I regret your propensity to write embarrassing statements.

You seem to be innocent of the hearsay that Albert Einstein fell victim to belief. He held conviction about his universe-paradigm and later called it the biggest blunder of his life. In building his mathematical model for the theory of general relativity, he assumed that the universe was static. When his brilliant model informed him that the universe is not only dynamic but expanding, he introduced a “cosmological factor”---a fudge factor---to force his brilliant mathematics into his erroneous paradigm. When Edwin Hubble, ten years later discovered red shifts, evidence that the universe is expanding, Einstein admitted his error to himself and to the world. Humility goes a long way in the research to discover the-objective-truth. Einstein expressed that idea in 1941, in my paraphrase: Civic people don’t lie so as to lessen human misery and loss.

You seem to think Alinsky Rule No. 5---ridicule your fellow citizen---empowers you. I disagree with Alinsky, Alinsky-Marxist organizers, and self-developing skeptics.

 I hope you will join the work to establish the U.S. preamble’s proposition: responsible, human liberty for willing fellow citizens in the USA.



Phil, I do not think that I would fit in with anything that you are involved in, such as this preamble proposition. If you wrap yourself in the flag of patriotism too tightly, it cuts the blood flow off to the brain and turns one into a science denier.

I think we have exhausted about as much ideology as we can both stand so I will bid you a good day and hope you have a great weekend.


Original Author · Just now

Greg, once again, I am grateful for your work—-both time and thought—-on this thread. In your closing for now, goodwill message, which I return, I am most grateful for the suggestion, perhaps unintended, that my work should emphasize “responsible, human liberty for willing fellow citizens” rather than the U.S. preamble’s proposition. Thank you for that, too.




No.

The U.S. Constitution promises a republican form of government. See Article IV. Section 4. “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.”

In 1790 perhaps 5% of free citizens could vote. There had to be some evidence of responsibility: gender (male), wealth, and land holding were evidences. Viable candidacy for office erroneously required practice of religion, specifically theism, specifically Christianity, particularly factional-American Protestantism.

The 55 framers of the constitution specified the representative republic, and the 39 signers endorsed the work of the 5-man Committee of Forms, who expressed the consequences of the convention in the U.S. preamble’s proposition: individuals choose to collaborate for Union, Justice, Tranquility, defense, and Welfare so as to secure liberty to both living and future citizens. Fellow citizens who oppose or do not care about the U.S. preamble’s proposition ought not vote or otherwise hold office.

Citizens who want equity know and collaborate for statutory law and its enforcement and continually seek statutory justice. In the U.S. the agreement to collaborate is offered in the U.S. preamble’s proposition. I propose a constitutional amendment to the effect: Fellow citizens who do not collaborate for the U.S. preamble’s proposition cannot vote much less serve jury duty or hold elected or appointed office.




I work to persuade fellow citizens to collaborate for mutual, comprehensive safety and security, the proposition that is expressed in the preamble to the U.S. Constitution. With most fellow citizens so collaborating we would be continually developing individual happiness with civic integrity rather than conflicting for dominant opinion. Responsible liberty would establish the-objective-truth as the standard for collaboration rather than resistance. The society of collaborators are civic citizens under the U.S. preamble’s proposition.


When you don’t know something, you are better off admitting to yourself and to the public, “I do not know” then doing the work to comprehend whether you learned or discovered the-objective-truth or must maintain “I do not know.”


The idea “social justice” is erroneous in itself. Merriam-Webster defines the phrase “a state or doctrine of egalitarianism.” Humankind cannot contrive a way to provide equity much less equality.

The question can be examined from the view of the prosperous ovum. For example, during these years, the U.S. has about 800 million viable ova per year and 4 million births per year. That’s an 0.5% survival rate.

If we back up to conceptions, about 9 million were reported, so there was a 44% survival rate. However, how many conceptions failed to attach to the mother’s womb and were thus lost?

Each human has the individual power, the individual energy, and the individual authority (HIPEA) to develop either integrity or infidelity to the-objective-truth. Those who make choices that accumulate infidelity probably suffer misery and loss:  No one can restore their chance to develop integrity.


Appreciation for civic fellow citizens increases as an individual psychologically matures, not necessarily as the quarter centuries accumulate. Some people seem adolescent in their fourth quarter-century and beyond.

https://www.quora.com/What-are-a-few-bitter-truths-of-life

The human has the individual power, the individual energy, and the individual authority (HIPEA) to develop either integrity to the-objective-truth or infidelity. Unfortunately, most cultures erroneously indoctrinate children to seek higher power, and most individuals live without accepting their HIPEA.

The body does not complete the construction of the wisdom parts of the brain until a quart century has passed, and it takes another quarter century to experience and observe enough to begin to build wisdom. After yet another quarter century, the mature adult realizes he learns more from youth than he or she knows and is humbled. On reflection, I do not consider this one bitter, and I do not want to delete it.

Law professors


Rogers wonderfully touches on major issues and, with a different perspective, outlines the possibility that this is the best of times for Christians who happen to be fellow citizens in the U.S. Christians as well as other fellow citizens may adopt the U.S. preamble’s proposition, which is not offered in other countries.

The U.S. is distinguished by some willing citizens collaborating to provide freedom-from oppression so that living individuals and future citizens may encourage human liberty to pursue the happiness each perceives rather than the dictates of someone else. Many civic citizens live this way, but few would articulate it; I call it civic integrity. Dissident citizens are not aware of a U.S. citizens’ contract that offers responsible human liberty.

The preamble to the U.S. constitution, in my paraphrase, states: Willing fellow citizens civically, civilly, and legally collaborate to provide integrity, justice, peace, defense, and prosperity so that living individuals and future citizens may pursue human liberty. (My daughter, Holly, and I agreed this morning that in future, my work will promote “responsible human liberty” more than the U.S. preamble’s proposition. The thought emerged in a quora.com discussion with Greg Bailey; https://www.quora.com/Has-America-gone-from-a-God-fearing-society-at-its-founding-to-a-Godless-society-now. Incidentally, my daughter Rebekah first called this work “civic collaboration.” No one is asked to cooperate or subjugate---only collaborate.)

For two decades, I have advocated amending the First Amendment to delete the two religion clauses, never realizing as I do now that the U.S. preamble does not invoke religion at all. Gail Fink wrote, “Hence the First Amendment: Government cannot make laws that oblige people to disregard their duties to God, because duties to God come first.” Perhaps she shares that opinion with James Madison’s legacy. However, Fink fails to address Whatever-God-Is: Rogers’ touched on two Gods in “eternity is flitting about heaven like a bodiless angel, instead of a new physical heaven and earth and resurrected bodies.”

More importantly, I now propose:  The First Amendment should relegate religion and spirituality to individual privacy (drop both phrases) and encourage individual civic integrity.

An important element in a civic culture is a proposition to collaborate for human equity under written law with continual improvement toward statutory justice. In this country the U.S. preamble’s proposition is offered to each fellow citizen. That includes elected and appointed officers in local, state, and federal governments and clergypersons. People who consider themselves above the U.S. preamble’s proposition are dissidents against justice.

In human equity, every religious or spiritual association flourishes, provided any institution the believers develop conforms to the proposition for statutory justice. Human equity is evaluated using the-objective-truth. The-objective-truth exists and can be discovered but cannot be constructed by human reason, revelation, mysticism, or any other human construct.

The very articulation of these ideas offers an achievable better future if civic collaboration leads to a super majority of citizens who want mutual, comprehensive safety and security; individual happiness with civic integrity.

I write to learn and would appreciate comments. I learned much from Greg Bailey over a couple days.

Sorry. I omitted a difficult issue I had researched: “hate” in the Old Testament.

In my eighth decade, having spent five decades pursuing two Christianities, Mom and Dad’s So. Baptism and my family’s Louisiana French Catholicism, I have a strong aversion to the use of the word “hate” in all forms. I learned this aversion from Agathon’s speech in Plato’s “Symposium.”

I often use a search engine for “Jesus+hate” or “Old Testament+hate.” I reject the author’s thoughts in every case, and do not suppose that Jesus uttered the word, admitting to myself I could be wrong. However, not one of the search results included John 15:18-24. I reject the argument John makes.

I wonder if Rogers would apply John 15:18-24 to me, a non-Christian.




I think Latecomer’s post misses the actual reality: The standard for domestic peace is neither God nor government but the U.S. preamble’s proposition. On that proposition, fellow citizens are divided: civic citizens vs dissidents.



The representative republic that was created by the 55 framers of the 1787 U.S. Constitution remains the world’s best hope for success: mutual, comprehensive safety and security for most citizens. Hopefully, the nation that was thereby created is at its nadir and restoration is imminent.



If so, we may be grateful to the 1787 committee of 5 who authored the U.S. preamble, which expresses the proposition that was signed by only 39 of the delegates of only 12 states, setting the precedent for a 2/3 majority rather than two-party division. Further, we may be grateful for the 9 states’ citizens whose ratification conventions established the USA as of June 21, 1788.



The stated proposition is: willing citizens take responsibility for Union, Justice, Tranquility, defense, and Welfare so as to secure human liberty to ourselves and to our posterity (including children and grandchildren and beyond). The globally outstanding feature of this political statement is that it leaves discovery, evaluation, and acceptance of the proposition to the individual citizen.



If an individual wants equity under some other proposition, he or she may collaborate for the alternative. For 2020, many people are clamoring for the chaos of social democracy; in other words, different groups compete for attention to “rights” they prefer rather than collaborate to discover statutory justice under the rule of law. Alinsky-Marxist trained organizers falsely claim that coalitions of groups with competing "rights" can rule.



I express the U.S. preamble's proposition as civic people collaborating for integrity, justice, defense, peace, and prosperity so as to secure responsible, individual liberty to current and future citizens. The commitment to past citizens is to benefit from their accomplishments and prevent repeating their mistakes. When fellow citizens deviate from the commitment and cause harm, they may be constrained by statutory law, which a civic people continually improve toward statutory justice.



The standard for statutory justice, or the worthy goal of civic perfection, is the-objective-truth---the actual reality by which truth in all modifications is evaluated. The entities people refer to as “God” do not enjoy the discovery that is needed to employ those entities as standards for statutory justice. Therefore, the U.S. preamble relegates theism, spiritualism, philosophy, metaphysics, and other mysteries to private pursuits by adults.



After 231 years neglecting the U.S. preamble’s proposition, the USA’s representative republic is under attack by social democracy---the notion that groups with their opinion of human rights can organize their way into dominance by negotiating agreements today that they intend to deny tomorrow. They imagine that in time they will dominate. The individual human is too psychologically powerful to cooperate-with, submit-to, or otherwise tolerate chaos from Alinsky-Marxist organizations or any other political scheme. The people demand civic integrity.



We think the year to establish widespread understanding-of, commitment-to, and trust-in the civic, civil, and legal powers of the U.S. preamble has arrived: 2019. We need 220 million people collaborating for the U.S. preamble’s achievable, better future. If you like this message, help it go viral for collaboration, for the peoples’ sake and incidentally for this country and the world's best hope for the rule of law.



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.
Posted by at
Labels:

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)