Responsible Liberty Day

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

Our sixth annual celebration of June 21, 1788, the day on which the people of nine states had ratified the U.S. Constitution with its preamble’s proposition, establishing the USA is scheduled for Thursday, June 20, 7:30 PM until 9:30 PM at Goodwood library.

U.S. operations began on March 4, 1789, with eleven member states. There were fourteen states when colonial-British influence was re-established with ratification of the Bill of Rights on December 15, 1791.

The citizens since then have left to our generation the privilege of establishing the civic, civil, and legal powers of the U.S. preamble. Our June 21 celebration titles have changed from Ratification Day, to Personal Independence Day, to Individual Independence Day, and now to Responsible Liberty Day.

The U.S. preamble proposes collaboration for Union, Justice, Tranquility, defense and Welfare in order to secure human liberty for living and future fellow citizens. With 2/3 of fellow citizens adopting the U.S. preamble’s proposition, the USA can have an achievable better future.

Join our sixth annual celebration to learn more and the aid the collaboration.



Columns

A lying caption (Byron York) (https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columnists/byron-york-the-personal-cost-of-the-trump-russia-probe)

Byron York seems the exception to this statement:  There are no journalists among American news media. York’s performance seems as impressive on TV as in print.

This reader is constrained to ask: Who is responsible for the caption in my printed newspaper, which I do not even want to name? It reads “Some caught up in Dems’ web, falsely” rather than the Washington Examiner’s online caption and others “The personal cost of the Trump-Russia investigation.”

The former caption annoyingly implies the Dems’ web itself is not false, when it obviously is. The Obama-Clinton-Russia investigation has been underway all the while.

I imagine, perhaps speculate, that both the Dems and my hometown newspaper have invited terminal woe. If so, it won’t bother me at all.

Quora

https://www.quora.com/Is-the-strictly-binary-view-of-politics-and-social-issues-ruining-America

No, but the Democratic Party is ruining its future.

Too many democrats do not understand the U.S. preamble’s proposition: collaborate for responsible, human liberty.

If democratic individuals bone-up on the U.S. preamble, they may grasp that it is this country’s civic, civil, and legal proposition to collaborate for human equity under the pursuit of statutory justice. The U.S. Supreme Court building’s architects were able to fit “Equal Justice Under Law” into the façade, interpreting a 2400 year-old idea from Pericles.

However, it is doubtful that many Supreme Court justices have considered themselves as fellow citizens under the U.S. preamble, because the people have not required it. Democrats who grasp this message may aid the reform the U.S. has needed for 232 years now: widespread, individual adoption of the U.S. preamble’s proposition: responsible, human liberty.

Leadership from the democrats would motivate the conservatives in the GOP to help discover the-objective-truth rather than conflict for a dominant religious opinion.

https://www.quora.com/What-is-something-that-most-people-dont-know-about-the-United-States

The preamble to the U.S. Constitution, the U.S. preamble, is a proposition: willing citizens collaborate to provide Unity, Justice, Tranquility, defense, and Welfare so as to encourage human liberty to living and future fellow citizens. Only the human being can choose to practice responsible liberty. (Citizens of the past obviously do not collaborate for current living.)

Since June 21, 1788, when the people of nine state ratifying conventions established the U.S. preamble, political regimes, beginning with the first Congress, 1789-1793, have preserved colonial English influences, chiefly the traditional church-state partnership that is constitutional in England.

However, anytime they want to, We the People of the United States can practice the responsible human liberty that is proposed and require both elected and appointed officials to either practice the U.S. preamble or be unelected or fired.

If you like this message, aid its proliferation for the sake of the people.



https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-examples-of-civic-issues

When you approach the ticket counter at the airport you get in line and keep your place in line. Same thing at a rock concert or symphony admittance.

When you encounter a stranger, you either look at each other or not and expect silence if not. On the other hand, you do not let earphones prevent your “Hello” if you feel inclined to speak.

No one starts a conversation about Whatever-God-Is, and a civic person does not try to impose God on another person.

A civic person encourages responsible human liberty yet does not deny fellow citizenship when liberty is mistaken for irresponsible freedom.

I hope these examples help.



https://www.quora.com/How-did-America-become-so-divided

America was always divided.

After twelve generations passed the 1787 opportunity, our generation has the privilege of establishing responsible human liberty, the intent of the USA as proposed in the preamble to the U.S. Constitution. We dub the U.S. preamble’s proposition, for short, the U.S. preamble. It seems intent on discovering the-objective-truth, which cannot be humanly constructed and had not yet been articulated.

Consider the U.S. preamble; understand its 1787 creation in 4 days by 5 men formalizing the 4 months’ constitutional convention in Philadelphia. Paraphrase it such that you would publicly collaborate for acceptance of your ideas yet return to the original words. Choose to work to secure your liberty and liberty to your children, grandchildren, and beyond as proposed therein.

My preamble-paraphrase today is:  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. My paraphrase is a suggestion for fellow citizens but represents what I collaborate for: responsible human liberty.

Only humans have the individual power, energy, and authority (HIPEA) to establish responsible liberty. In my paraphrase, willing people take responsibility for peace so as to enjoy human liberty and encourage future human liberty. Civic peace begins with personal tranquility regarding responsible private hopes and comforts against existing unknowns or whatever has not yet been discovered.

Here are some points about division of this land in 1787. Only 39 of 55 of the delegates from only 12 of 13 eastern seaboard states (former English colonies) signed the 1787 constitution and the U.S. preamble. Less than 80% of former English colonial inhabitants were free among slaves and indigenous Americans also on the land. Among the free persons, 99% were factional American Protestant Christians. Only 5%, men, could vote. The rest of the U.S. was under Spanish, French, Mexican, Russian and other political powers.

Nine states provisionally established the USA by ratifying the U.S. Constitution on June 21, 1788. The fateful provision was that the first congress would mimic the Massachusetts Bill of Rights if not the English Bill of Rights. The First Congress began on March 4, 1789 with eleven of the eastern seaboard states and added 3 before the Bill of Rights was ratified on December 15, 1791. The First Congress re-established many English colonial impositions---for example, initiating legislative prayer to make Congressmen seem divine like members of the English Parliament---instead of upholding the U.S. preamble, which is godless---humbly admits to Whatever-God-Is, whether that be chaos or not.

Today, less than 14% of citizens associate in the original American Protestant factions with 50% either non-believers or Catholic. And 100% of non-criminal adults may vote. Among the Protestant factions is one that developed after 1968: African-American Christianity. To some African-American Christians, Whatever-God-Is prefers black skin if not brown skin. It seems evident that America is and was divided on Whatever-God-Is.

If most fellow citizens adopt and develop the U.S. preamble’s proposition there can be an achievable better future as soon as most people find peace in their beliefs about Whatever-God-Is, whether worship and praise is involved or not. With relief from coercion to claim to know what no one knows, most fellow citizens may appreciate each other as each peaceful person is and wherever they may be on their paths to human maturity.

https://www.quora.com/unanswered/How-could-you-most-simply-phrase-Individual-over-society-vs-society-over-individual-in-terms-of-the-psychologist-philosophers-who-pioneered-the-idea-Ex-Freudian-vs-Jungian?

Taking the liberty to duck scholarly religious debate, each human being is unique yet is connected to humankind through either appreciation or competition. The choice to appreciate fellow citizens is up to the individual. The consequences are delivered by the fellow citizens, who perceive in connections and transactions either appreciation or conflict.

Each human has individual power, energy, and authority (HIPEA) to develop either integrity or infidelity to the-objective-truth. Just as the human who is developing integrity knows he or she may earn the quality of food he or she wants rather than thank bureaucrats for what they deliver, he or she may collaborate to responsibly provide mutual, comprehensive safety and security so that fellow citizens may choose to pursue the happiness they perceive rather than accept the happiness others would impose on them. Individuals collaborate so as to provide civic integrity.

This concept, responsible human liberty, is my articulation after two decades’ study and five-years’ collaboration to understand the preamble to the U.S. Constitution. My current paraphrase is: 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.

The value of studying past expressions is to discover the-objective-truth through observation rather than experience and to comprehend past errors and neither repeat them or make them traditions.

Let’s each accept HIPEA and collaborate for a better future.

https://www.quora.com/What-is-individual-diffrence

Individual difference refers to the personal psychology that each human being is developing: each human is unique and the psychology he or she is developing will determine his or her life outcome.

Broadly speaking, a person’s choices tend toward either integrity or infidelity respecting the-objective-truth. Integrity is the practice of lessening mistakes by being aware, doing the work to understand the moment, and rejecting false judgement.

Cultures wrong the individual by inculcating the pursuit of higher authority: whatever government is or Whatever-God-Is. Some fortunate persons accept their individual human power, energy, and authority (IHPEA) to develop integrity rather than infidelity.

Michael Polanyi, in his book “Personal Knowledge,” 1958, claims, in my paraphrase, that collaboration to discover the-objective-truth and worshipping the Christian God are equivalent practices of IHPEA. I think Polanyi did not leave to Whatever-God-Is the freedom to appreciate discovery more than worship.

For all I know, Polanyi has it correct, and for all I know, Polanyi and I express the same pursuit with individual difference. I doubt it, but don’t know.

https://www.quora.com/How-can-a-mistake-be-a-mistake-if-no-consequences-occur-from-the-mistake

The dictionary (Merriam-Webster online) informed me that “mistake” (noun) is “a wrong action or statement proceeding from faulty judgment, inadequate knowledge, or inattention.”

For example, it’s common for someone who is attracted to an individual to express the exaggeration “I am in love with him/her.” However, “in love with” is a mutual intimacy, not a mere attraction.

The comment is often ignored, such that there is no observable consequence. Yet the folly, perhaps offense, remains, and anyone who notices may lessen his or her regard for the speaker.

Also, if the speaker learns of or simply realizes the folly he or she spoke, chagrin may be experienced. Perhaps an apology is forthcoming.

 https://www.quora.com/How-can-American-jurors-be-considered-reliable-enough-to-decide-someones-fate-when-jurors-have-no-professional-knowledge-of-the-law

A nation, meaning both a people and their government, need a civic agreement that is considered by each citizen. One way or another, civic citizens may agree to collaborate for equity under statutory justice. In the USA, each citizen is offered the proposition stated in the preamble to the U.S. Constitution. It proposes responsible, human liberty to living citizens and future citizens.

Fellow citizens who do not trust-in and commit-to the U.S. preamble’s proposition ought not be allowed to vote, serve on a jury, or hold public office, whether by election or by appointment.

In America as elsewhere, there are degrees of dissidence against civic citizenship. For example, some fellow citizens think crime pays.

U.S. Amendment VI requires states to provide impartial juries. Most states require unanimous criminal-jury verdicts, following English tradition. Unanimous verdicts favor criminals. In 1967, England enacted 10:2 majority verdicts to lessen organized crime’s influence. Oregon uses 10:2 majority verdicts. I propose reinstating Louisiana’s 10:2 or even 9:3 majority verdicts.

  

Law professors

https://www.lawliberty.org/2019/04/19/good-riddance-cultural-christianity-religious-right  from last week

This comment seems to express LGBT the victor over victimization by Christians such that Christians are now on the run. I think it is a misguided way of thinking.



One of the contenders in Plato's "Symposium" claimed that the best eroticism is with a young boy and that the adult must provide for the boy for life. It's a 2400 year-old expression of trust-in and commitment-to another human being.



Human equity is the subject of written law, and its object may be statutory justice rather than bargains that justify subjugation. I doubt that 2019 thinking would approve of a life-long contract with a person too-young to comprehend the consequences of the obligation.



I prefer Agathon's speech, which I interpret as:  Human equity requires that a person neither initiate nor tolerate offense to or from any human or Whatever-God-Is.



Whatever-God-Is controls both the consequences of all action and each individual's expectations respecting the unknowns. As an adolescent, I was offered LGBT fun but turned it down because I thought it could alter my future desires and fulfillment. Additionally, a couple girls offered me sex, but I had the same notion:  My future realization seemed threatened.



After a quarter century and a few rejections of my interest in intimacy I thought a person could dedicate himself or herself to another person's life, and by being faithful for life, create mutual happiness. A couple years later, I met a serene, confident woman. We anticipate our sixth decade of marriage with three children.



Today, I think the key to personal happiness is fidelity to the-objective-truth. If single life is happiness, fine. If intimacy is wanted, fidelity is key to personal success. Mutual fidelity is essential.



When we were courting, I wanted to hold hands, but my date felt some people in public might be intimidated by our expression of mutual interest. I began then to collaborate with her, and nearly two decades later realized her Christian hope for Whatever-God-Is differed from mine. Thereby, I discovered the path toward developing the real Phil Beaver. I knew then how fortunate I was that I had never risked casual intimacy.



The point of my story is that the human individual is not alone and that wayward connections may effect early termination of the hope for self-discovery or perhaps self-realization.  Some seemingly innocent errors lead to early death.



Scripture is an early effort to express the need for fidelity to-the-objective-truth. The ancient writers made mistakes, and the reader has the human, individual power, energy, and authority (HIPEA) to benefit from the good ideas and reject the errors. When a human begin reaches an understanding of a given scripture that empowers him or her to develop fidelity to the-objective-truth despite the errors of the writers, his or her connections will be good, and there is no excuse for objections by other parties. In other words, believers who collaborate for mutual, comprehensive safety and security may appreciate non-believers who collaborate with believers.



When scripture warns against intimacy that can lead to infidelity, it may be making some errors in detail, and the reader may note the errors yet take advantage of the overall message. Infidelity speaks for itself, and it is up to the actor to take advantage of the signals. I am not talking here of "conscience" but rather of HIPEA.



One other comment. The minority groups such as LGBT that today make so much of their victimization by Christianity or any other have religion have no corner on the market. In the cultures that have  developed, children, adolescents, and adults are taught to develop dependency. I do not know of a culture that approves-of and encourages HIPEA rather than higher power: Whatever-God-Is, government, or a tyrant. If there is such a civilization, let's go there. Meanwhile, I think it is offered by the U.S. preamble's proposition, and that is what I work to express.

Second: “He puts you in situations to advance the kingdom, whether in a public or private way. Forceful men and women advance it.”

This claim is uncivic, uncivil, and illegal according to the U.S. preamble’s proposition. I ask, “Mr. Schaefer what civic, civil, and legal agreement authorizes your view ‘Forceful . . .'” Civic, civil, and legal persons collaborate for equity under the rule of law. In equity, each individual has his or her Whatever-God-Is or none.

My interpretation of the U. S. preamble is: 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.

What’s your interpretation of the U.S. preamble?



Linked, Facebook, and Twitter

America’s outstanding opportunity is to revolt from English influence by adopting the U.S. preamble. We the People of the United States may reform American conservatism so that its English influences are put to rest. America proposes responsible human liberty.

Andy Hamilton* surveys today’s Western competitors---conservatism, liberalism, and socialism.  “Conservatism’s “organic” [English] social vision is inherently [skeptical] of the state and puts faith instead in the family, private property and religion.” According to the U.S. preamble, American conservatism privatizes religion and encourages the people to self-discipline: to discover and use the-objective-truth.

It seems delegates to the 1787 constitutional convention in Philadelphia ineluctably discussed the world’s political evidence that self-discipline of by and for the people was politically promising. Articulating the consequences of the convention was nearly impossible, yet the committee of forms expressed it in the 51-word U.S. preamble. Only 2/3 of delegates signed the document, so dissidence has always existed.

The U.S. preamble civically, civilly, and legally proposes that willing fellow citizens, “We the People of the United States,” collaborate for Union, Justice, Tranquility, defense, and Welfare, so as to secure “the blessings of liberty.” Civic citizens collaborate on five public provisions so as to secure a human condition: liberty. In other words, a civic people approve and encourage human liberty. Since dead people cannot collaborate, the liberty accrues to both living and future citizens as they are and where they are. Dissidents are encouraged to either do-no-harm or reform if they suffer legal constraints.

It seems clear that religion as a civic or civil rather than private practice is divisive if not ruinous. Within religion there’s a major divider: theism. Theism is at best a belief in Whatever-God-Is, which everyone knows no one knows. The individual theist merely wants comfort and hope against the unknown and appreciates Whatever-God-Is. Yet theist associations require their subscribers to claim that they know what they know they do not know, pitting believers against each other and against non-theists in a competition everyone doubts! Religion is a good practice only if it helps the human practice responsible liberty. It seems that responsible liberty requires each human to admit to himself or herself that he or she would not willingly rebuke Whatever-God-Is and therefore would not rebuke a fellow citizen’s religion or none, even if the fellow citizen suffers the law’s constraints.

It seems individual tranquility in the appreciation for Whatever-God-Is offers civic peace, and that assertion can be discovered in the U.S. preamble’s silence on religion and spirituality.

I cannot imagine a group of fellow citizens who could develop these ideas faster than American conservatives. The question is: Do they consider themselves fellow citizens and therefore persons with interest in mutual, comprehensive safety and security so as to encourage human liberty now and tomorrow?

*Hamilton, Andy, "Conservatism", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2016 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2016/entries/conservatism/>.

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.