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: “Willing citizens collaborate, communicate, and connect to provide 5
public institutions—integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity—so as
to encourage responsible human liberty to living people.” 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
Can a black American, Black American, or African American
imagine being a member of We the People of the United States as defined in the
preamble to the U.S. Constitution (the U.S. preamble)? Do divisive identity
groups understand the U.S. preamble encourages public commitment to both living
and future fellow citizens? In other words, the agreement to live as We the
People of the United States holds no obligations to dead citizens beyond not
repeating their mistakes.
Do other citizens think the U.S. preamble proposes
individual discipline to aid freedom-from oppression so that the continuum of
living people have the liberty-to develop integrity rather than wander into
infidelity? Do other citizens think preserving the cultural adolescence of
colonial-British tradition prevents a civic culture in the U.S.?
Our recent interpretation of the preamble to the U.S.
Constitution is:
We the People of the
United States communicate, collaborate, and connect to provide 5 public
institutions---Union, Justice, Tranquility, defense, and Welfare---in order to
encourage responsible human liberty to living citizens using
the-objective-truth (or better expression of the ineluctable evidence for
actual reality) as standard for justice rather than competing for dominant
political opinion. In our interpretation as well as the original 52-word
sentence, religion is left to private practice if wanted. Citizens may happily
develop integrity to the-objective-truth.
The dominant identity politics at the
U.S. Supreme Court seems Judeo-Christianity. The
Congress seems too divided within its
divisions to assess an identity politics beyond egocentric struggle to be
re-elected so as to continue personal, material gains. The
administration seems focused on power in competition with the other
three. The
press is exempt from
evaluation much less public constraint.
The
people don’t seem to accept their lifetime is their unique opportunity to
develop integrity.
Whatever-God-is
seems to tolerate most people procrastinating for their god or government or
their partnership to deliver them.
Under freedom of religion, is it possible for the entity We
the People of the United States to ever encourage by example integrity to the
nation’s youth? Can the people overcome procrastination to aid freedom-from
oppression in order to secure responsible human liberty?
Only a collection of persons who accept the U.S. preamble’s
discipline to aid 5 public institutions in order to secure responsible human
liberty to living citizens have the opportunity to accelerate a YES.
News
Writers for the
press ought to be journaling progress by We the People of the United States
toward civic integrity (Martha Quillin, The News and Observer, Raleigh, N.C.)
(https://www.chicagotribune.com/lifestyles/sns-tns-bc-med-health-blackchurches-20190827-story.html
and https://www.newsobserver.com/living/health-fitness/article234192737.html)
I’m not certain there’s a more
critical opportunity for minority groups to accept equity---under
communications, collaboration and connection for statutory justice rather than
compete for dominant identity politics---than to accept that they are Americans.
Americans may practice “African-American Christianity” or “Black Christianity” yet
admit that whatever-God-is may not tolerate identity politics. If Christianity
is the body of Christ, does Christ use skin-color to determine discipleship?
It’s one thing to rebuke white fellow citizens and another to try to limit
whatever-God-is to a skin-color.
Writers like Quillin could try to
be journalists by citing this opportunity for “black Americans” to consider adopting
the people’s proposition that is offered in the preamble to the U.S.
Constitution. It’s the same preamble cited by Frederick Douglass who called
himself a “fellow citizen” on July 5, 1852 speaking to 3rd
generation U.S. celebrants including the President of the United States.
Quoting Quillion in both the
Chicago and the Raleigh publications, “There are correlations between religion,
diabetes and obesity within African-American churches, according to a new Duke
University study.”
But the Chicago article substantially edits to “black”
instead of “African” or “African-American”:
“Black Americans identifying as
Baptist are more likely to have diabetes than those identifying as Catholic or
Presbyterian, and
Black men who go to church five or more times a week are
three times more likely to be obese than their counterparts who seldom or
rarely attend.”
“Keisha
L. Bentley-Edwards . . . said considerable health research has been done
comparing the traits of white Christians to black Christians. But relatively
little work has been done looking at differences between denominations of black
Christians, or between black members of the same denomination who have
different roles in the church and participate to different degrees.”
The Chicago article continues the controversy at “Loneke
Blackman Carr, who helped with the research and also teaches at the University
of Connecticut, said the National Institutes of Health provided funding for the
project in part because [African Americans] are disproportionately affected by
diabetes and obesity. Though about a third of all American men and women are
obese, nearly half of African-Americans are obese, increasing their risk for
diabetes and cardiovascular issues, according to the Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention.”
That’s right: “black” and “African-Americans” seem
interchangeable. Yet Chicago’s authority to change Quillion’s word choice is
vulnerable before civic, civil, and legal integrity.
The competition between labels “black” and “African
American” hurts the reliability of the reports. The Catholic Churches I
attended seemed universal in their Christianity. In no way would a visitor
represent them as African-American Churches, even though many parishioners have
black skin. There are Catholic Churches here in black communities. I don’t know
if some members are white, but deviation from universality (catholic) seems
possible.
To take the controversy a step further, the abstract of the
original scholarly-group article uses “black” (lower case “b”) rather than
“African American”;
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10943-019-00888-6.
However, the principal author introduces her work using “Black”: “My work
specifically examines how race, culture and racism stress influence how the
world responds to Black Americans and how this influences health and social
disparities” using a capital “B”. It’s a strange confusion of political
identities. Perhaps co-authors would not agree to capital “B”.
At some point, fellow citizens may realize that equity under
statutory justice while impossible perfection is yet a worthy goal for the rule
of law, and that the journey may be accelerated by observing the people’s proposition
that is stated in the U.S. preamble. Every citizen may study the U.S. preamble
and use it to order his or her pursuit of civic, civil, and legal justice.
Post script:
https://bigthink.com/surprising-science/obesity-leading-cause-death-america-shame?rebelltitem=1#rebelltitem1
about ½ million related deaths per year.
Columns
“Slavery the USA’s
greatest sin? Really? How about religion? (Michael Gerson) (
https://www.dailyherald.com/discuss/20190911/historical-context-is-no-excuse-for-the-founders-failure-on-slavery
and
https://www.hoosiertimes.com/herald_times_online/opinion/columns/no-way-to-ignore-u-s-history-of-slavery/article_5b079dbe-ef08-5abb-8481-8824943148a7.html)
There are so many writers for the press who have not the
integrity to address an obvious issue if not the fundamental cause of conflict.
The struggle to affirm with fellow humankind “my God”---to remedy for everyone
the mystery of whatever-God-is---sustains millennial problems like racism and
theism. Accepting ineluctable evidence offers relief.
Hate for abolitionists might
shed light by which to exit the “freedom of religion” tunnel. Abolitionists
were the targets of Bleeding Kansas (1856) and the Civil War (1861).
Only four documents open ineluctable evidence that Christianity
procrastinated slavery-abolition. First, in 1775 Thomas Paine in “African
Slavery in America” objected to “Christianized” people conducting slavery and
collaborated with Benjamin Franklin to found in Philadelphia
The Society for the Relief of Free Negroes
Unlawfully Held in Bondage. Second, Frederick Douglass’ July 5, 1852 speech
praised separately the U.S. preamble and the U.S. Constitution but castigated
the 3
rd generation of “fellow citizens” for the domestic slave
trade. Third, Robert E. Lee’s December 27, 1856 letter to his wife 1) claims
that black slavery is the plan of whatever-God-is and 2) castigates
abolitionists for attempting to modify the plan. Fourth, the CSA’s declaration
of secession concludes that there can be no remedy since the USA believes a
more erroneous religion. A consequence is African-American Christianity,
perhaps dating from 1968 and the assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr.
Chapter XI Machiavellianism provides Gerson an excuse for
not addressing an issue if not the issue concerning racism: Christian doctrine.
“[B]eing exalted and maintained by [whatever-God-is], it would be the act of a
presumptuous and rash man to discuss [American integrity].”
We the People of the United States may amend the First
Amendment so that it protects integrity, a human duty, rather than religion, an
institutional business.
A more subtle issue for writers for the press is
appropriating the word “conservative.” To me, conservation refers to energy and
mass rather than religious doctrine. In other words, the conservative citizen
aids the viability of human life and individual happiness with civic integrity.
Posted on the above URL.
“Our democracy”
the greatest country? Really? (The Advocate) (
https://www.theadvocate. com/baton_rouge/opinion/our_views/article_aba91634-d34c-11e9-acbe-27d1fd13dba3.html)
Since 9/11/201 “As a country, we have also too easily
forgotten the spirit of unity that the attacks inspired. Gone is the sense that
we’re all in it together, regardless of party.”
The vague “together” must be “freedom of religion” or
evolution from Protestantism to Judeo-Christianity or Judeo-Catholicism (USSC).
The Advocate does not choose to defy Chapter XI Machiavellianism: “it would be
the act of a presumptuous and rash man to discuss” the long established
church-state partnership.
“The best way to defeat the enemies of representative
government is to show them that it can work well in this, the greatest country
on earth.”
What? The greatest? Is this some disguised slam against MAGA
country? Or just tongue-in-cheek execution of a newspaper-business plan
currently touting social democracy and public policy by press-poles?
Does The Advocate admit the U.S. Constitution guarantees
the states a republican form of government?
And what’s this “in it together, regardless of party”? I
view The Advocate’s business plan as: exploit identity politics. And both
parties are so internally conflicted who can support either one?
Identity politics, while seeming Marxist, is only the latest
version of political correctness or ideology politics. Going back to recorded
history we discover the politics of human sacrifice. Being the parent of the
city-state’s child who was elected as sufficient to win the favor of
whatever-God-is was something to celebrate! But there is something actually
real to celebrate in Baton Rouge.
An achievable better future has been proposed for the past
six years in bi-annual public meetings at EBRP libraries hosted by A Civic
People of the United States. In this, our sixth year we discovered an
interpretation of the U.S. preamble’s proposition. It suggests individual and
collective discipline for sincere liberty: We the People of the United States
communicate, collaborate, and connect to aid five public institutions
(integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity) so as to encourage
responsible human liberty to living citizens now and in the future.
The original public goals (Union, Justice, Tranquility,
defense, and Welfare) are collective endeavors, but liberty is innate to
evolution’s most powerful species; the human integrity to avoid wandering into
infidelity to the-objective-truth must be individually learned yet can be
encouraged and coached. The U.S. preamble proposes encouragement.
From the start, June 21, 2014, we advocated
the-objective-truth (described now as ineluctable evidence), as the standard
for statutory justice. Ineluctable evidence does not yield to reason. Reforming
un-just statutory law is the perfection the U.S. Constitution pursues through amendment
on discovery of injustice.
These ideas are being followed worldwide, so it would not be
a surprise for The Advocate, Mayor Broome, Louisiana elected officials and
Louisiana federal representatives to read about an achievable better future
emerging from another U.S. city or a foreign civic people or nation. We would
be disappointed yet have requested aid.
What is needed for the U.S. preamble’s proposition under
the-objective-truth to accelerate into actual development is for enough
citizens to accept that it is a proposition for individual discipline so as to
use the five public institutions to empower responsible human liberty.
Self-governance is corrupt without the reliable standard. Using
the-objective-truth as standard for justice gives the people civic focus their
hopes-for-eternity cannot offer.
(The last time I
tried to discuss the U.S. preamble with a Christian, we could not get past the
fundamental that I am “a lost soul”. The mystery of “soul” has no place in the
U.S. preamble’s proposition. Whether they speak or stonewall civic integrity,
fundamentalists turn their backs on the mystery of whatever-God-is.) Whatever-God-is
leaves it to the people to decide to develop discipline for integrity.
The U.S. preamble’s people’s proposition under
the-objective-truth is what makes America’s greatness achievable. President
Trump perhaps has not yet noticed this opportunity, and we hope he will.
“Freedom of religion” stands in the way of the people’s
discipline to develop integrity. Only the people can hold government and
whatever-God-is accountable, and We the People of the United States can encourage
each other to develop by example integrity to the-objective-truth.
Quora
https://www.quora.com/Where-does-liberalism-stand-today-As-said-by-the-Russian-President-has-it-really-become-obsolete-in-the-modern-world?
With less war than ever before yet political chaos, it seems
to me conditions are ripe to establish responsible human liberty at last. If
the people of one municipality develop appreciation for a simple order of civic
concerns and a reliable standard for discovering justice, liberty may flourish
there and spread to that nation and from there to most of the world. There will
always be people who think innovative criminality pays, so statutory law must
be enforced as statutory justice is developed.
A possible candidate for the emergence of a civic culture is
the United States, which owns a dormant people’s proposition and after 231
years of divergence might observe that a standard for justice is needed. In the
USA, a civic people is defined by the preamble to the U.S. Constitution (the
U.S. preamble).
My interpretation is:
We the People of the United States
communicate, collaborate, and connect to aid five public
institutions---integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity---in order
to secure responsible human liberty to living people now and into the future. It
seems the U.S. preamble asserts that religion is not a civic, civil, or legal
practice. By all means there’s no human liberty if every citizen must accept
one speculation about the mystery whatever-God-is. The U.S. may amend the First
Amendment to protect integrity rather than religion.
There is a reliable standard for justice: the discovered,
ineluctable evidence, which we call “the-objective-truth”. The hyphens are used
to encourage retention of this very specific phrase, intended to express the
actual reality by which truth and justice is each measured.
The USA has a significant disadvantage. Political regimes
promote Chapter XI Machiavellianism, and only an individual who is prepared to
be accused of folly would object. The Chapter XI principle is that church-state
partnership empowers the clergy and government officials to pick the people’s
pockets and the people neither rebel nor leave the country, believing that
whatever-God-is is in charge and will relieve them eventually. It’s a coerced
procrastination that the people perceive and tolerate.
Chapter XI Machiavellianism, in my experience and observations,
is powerful. The culture inculcates concern or fear about afterdeath that
surpasses concern about life. In one form, a believer would sacrifice his or
her person to preserve the mystery of “soul”. Some believers are concerned
about favorable afterdeath and others seek favorable reincarnation. Their
scripture may advocate separation of church and state, but the believer feels
that eventually state will
be church.
The individual feels secure by acting for church at the expense of state,
essentially overlooking/abusing fellow citizens who have differing beliefs.
Evolution has developed one species with the awareness and
psychology to demand independence from church: the human being. Each human has
the individual power, energy, and authority (HIPEA) to develop integrity to the-objective-truth
rather than nourish infidelity. The human who thinks life ends when the body,
mind, and person stop functioning, cannot be coerced into sacrificing
responsible human liberty for the mystery of soul. By the same psychology, the
person who is convinced he or she should favor soul at all personal costs yet
observes statutory law ought not be constrained.
I don’t know how many other people take interest in these
ideas, and my blogs are being read worldwide. I constantly appeal for interest
in my hometown, and am not impressed with the response. Yet I perceive interest
and approval.
I think most people want mutual, comprehensive safety and
security (Security). Security can be aided with adoption of a brief statement
of civic discipline such as the U.S. preamble’s five public institutions, plus
a reliable standard, such as the-objective-truth by which to discover liberty.
I think the Russian President is wishing and hoping, but the
idea of HIPEA-to-develop-integrity being defeated is what’s obsolete.
https://www.quora.com/Why-do-people-think-the-Founding-Fathers-advocated-for-a-secular-society-when-there-are-quotes-that-disprove-this-They-wanted-a-secular-government-not-society?
Thinking of “founding father” intentions is more than I can
handle, so I reduced my interest to the framers of the U.S. Constitution. The
articles are amendable, so I take interest in them only when there is a vital
issue, such as impartial vs unanimous criminal-jury verdicts. U.S. Amendment VI
specifies impartiality, which is not likely with unanimity. Even England knows
this, adopting a 10:2 majority verdict in 1967.
Therefore, I focus on the preamble to the U.S. Constitution.
Why did the five-person Committee of Style write a civic, civil, and legal
proposition to express the consequence of the 1787 Constitutional Convention in
Philadelphia?
Here’s my interpretation today:
We the People of the United States
communicate, collaborate, and connect to aid five public
institutions---integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity---in order
to secure responsible human liberty to living people now and into the future. Maybe
the U.S. preamble asserts that religion is not a civic, civil, or legal
practice.
The individual citizen who does not interpret the U.S.
preamble so as to order his or her civic, civil, and legal conduct is an alien
to the agreement yet still a fellow citizen. In 1790, 99% of free citizens were
factional American Protestants who related victory in the war for independence
as confirmation of their God, regardless of whatever-God-is. Looking at the
Declaration of Independence, you might say that “Nature’s God” had defeated the
king’s reformed-Catholic Trinity.
In 1790, 99% of free citizens were factional American
Protestants, so they did not think much about it when Congress hired Protestant
ministers to serve legislators. Congress was establishing the English tradition
that legislators are divine agents of whatever-God-is. The church-state
partnership was ordained by whatever-God-is on both sides. Anyone who would
object to this divine arrangement is a fool.
By Congressional legislation, especially the religion
clauses in the First Amendment, the people’s proposition in the preamble to the
U.S. Constitution was set aside and remains ineffective. The U.S. preamble proposes
individual happiness with civic integrity instead of imposition of an
institutionally coerced happiness such as one kind of Christianity or another.
The colonial-English thought was theism, in particular
competition between deism and factional Christianity. We have a 230 year
advanced perspective with evidence that integrity is provided by people and
whatever-God-is will not usurp human authority. Perhaps it is time to accept
the U.S. preamble’s proposition under the-objective-truth. In other words,
under ineluctable evidence rather than religious doctrine.
To Rick Grassi: I do not rely on reason and did not suggest
I did. The-objective-truth responds to neither reason nor to Revelation.
And there’s
no reason for sorrow as long as no harm is done.
However, the
hate passages in the Bible, especially John 15:18–23 I cannot abide for any
purpose. I does not bother me if you can abide such hate, again, as long as it
does not inspire actually real harm.
Christians
“can make a better world for one another” but I am not in that society: I am a
member of We the People of the United States as defined by the U.S. preamble.
To Rick Grassi again: I don’t know much about We the People
“back then” and feel little need to know, beyond being aware of mistakes by We
the People of the United States, an entity that is defined by the preamble to
the U.S. Constitution (the U.S. preamble). People who claim We the People
(fellow citizens) may be dissident to We the People of the United States (civic
citizens).
I write to promote civic integrity regarding the U.S.
preamble’s proposition. Its stated purpose when representatives of the people
of nine states activated it, as of June 21, 1788, was to secure liberty to them
and to posterity. Posterity includes me, a citizen in 2019 with neither means
nor incentives to communicate, collaborate, and connect with citizens of 1788.
Therefore, I write to influence you and others fellow
citizens to have civic integrity as well as hopes for the responsible
afterdeath you desire. By “responsible” I mean not obtained by harming other
humans.
https://www.quora.com/unanswered/What-are-some-of-the-ways-in-which-contemporary-Americans-avoid-self-responsibility-disempower-themselves-and-invoke-government-to-solve-lifes-problems?
Foremost and first, fellow citizens do not encourage each
other to accept human, individual power, energy, and authority (HIPEA) to
choose to develop integrity rather than drift into infidelity.
Second, fellow citizens do not communicate, collaborate, and
connect in order to discover the-objective-truth. That is, the ineluctable
evidence by which truth and justice are measured.
Third, fellow citizens procrastinate to separate church from
state. That is, most people do not accept responsible, human liberty.
Viewed another way, elected and appointed government
officials consider themselves more than fellow citizens. Perhaps they view
themselves as divine and thereby deserving of regal living. Political regimes
keep the people bemused with “freedom of religion” when they could exemplify
integrity, both individually and collectively.
I propose amendment of the First Amendment so as to
encourage integrity rather than promote religion, after considering Chapter XI
Machiavellianism: “[B]being upheld by powers, to which the human mind cannot
reach . . . exalted and maintained by God, it would be the act of a
presumptuous and rash man to discuss [the church-state partnership].”
By HIPEA I reject the adage “do not discuss religion and
politics.”
https://www.quora.com/Why-has-the-human-rights-movement-developed-more-as-a-right-oriented-rather-than-duty-oriented-Why-is-there-no-human-duties-movement?
I think there is a duty-oriented proposal that is accelerating
as I write: It is the U.S. preamble’s proposition under collaboration for
the-objective-truth rather than under conflict for dominant religious opinion. The
proposition was established on June 21, 1788 when the people’s representatives
of the ninth required state ratified the preamble to the U.S. Constitution and
its amendable articles. I write it in this purpose-before-the-system order to
emphasize the civic, civil, and legal power of the world’s greatest political
sentence,
the preamble to the U.S.
Constitution.
Every person on earth could benefit from studying the U.S.
preamble and paraphrasing it to accommodate the way of living he or she would
like to live in order to communicate, collaborate, and connect with fellow
citizens, first within their nation and then in the world. After doing so, an
individual can read the U.S. preamble in unison with people who’ve never
considered it before and perceive inspiration and motivation to aid an
achievable better future of unknown limits.
Here’s my interpretation today:
We the People of the United States
communicate, collaborate, and connect to aid five public
institutions---integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity---in order
to secure responsible human liberty to living people now and into the future.
This is a proposal for both individual and collective civic, civil, and legal
discipline. It cares about the past foremost to avoid avoidable mistakes and to
know early discoveries.
The U.S. preamble’s people’s proposition may concisely
reflect the May to September 1787 debates by the 55 framers representing 12
states. Only 39 of them signed the amendable 1787 Constitution. The draft
preamble the delegates presented to the 5-person Committee of Style and
Arrangement seems factually erroneous and without a proposition. It is doubtful
that all 5 members consented to the proposition they added or the existing U.S.
preamble. Finally, having the subject We the People of the United States rather
than the states was controversial and the reason some framers did not sign the
constitution. Whatever the actual events, the U.S. preamble holds promise for
an achievable better future, the limits of which no one can predict.
Everything that has happened had to happen to bring the USA
to this point, perhaps an abyss to the consequences of the First Congress,
1789-1791. The future may be better. Like adolescent parents who know no more
than to conflict over what Mom and Dad (4 grandparents) would do to rear
children, Congress did all they could to re-instate colonial English tradition.
Today, many people ignore the U.S. preamble (1787) and substitute the preamble
to the Declaration of Independence (1776) as the foundation of the USA. They
refer to “founders,” perhaps 250 persons, rather than the signers, the 39
mentioned above. They miss-label the U.S. preamble as “secular” for identity
politics---factional American Protestant politics morphed to Judeo-Christian
politics. The U.S. preamble is neutral to religion, race, gender, wealth, and
class and defines its own identity politics: fellow citizens who accept the
agreement and aid its achievement under the-objective-truth. That is the
ineluctable evidence in all human connections and transactions.
A duty-oriented proposal, the preamble to the U.S.
Constitution, still offers an achievable, better future: responsible human
liberty. I think the reason civic discipline has not been activated is
widespread people’s-procrastination to separate church from state. Evolution
produced human beings with individual power, energy, and authority (HIPEA) to
develop integrity. American political regimes egregiously encourage people to
look to whatever-God-is to deliver them from the ruinous church-state
partnership most citizens impose on their children, grandchildren, and beyond.
Unfortunately, beginning perhaps in 1968 there has emerged
an African-American Christianity, and ironically, it is influencing England---reminds
me of the saying “what goes down comes around”. Black Americans have time to
save themselves from divisiveness on par with factional-white-Christian hatred
for white abolitionists in 1850 America.
Separation of church and state is essential to both civic,
civil, and legal integrity and humility-toward, if not appreciation-for,
whatever-God-is.
https://www.quora.com/Why-would-anybody-in-the-US-want-to-live-in-a-socialist-society-Is-it-due-to-a-lack-of-education-or-something-else?
I think too many Americans are influenced by Europeans.
We are 231 years or about 12 generations removed from the
required 9 states establishing the USA as a global nation on June 21, 1788.
However, we are only 230 years removed from the 1789-1791
Congress re-instituting colonial-English tradition in the eastern seaboard
states. The USA is physically independent from England but psychologically have
yet to establish freedom.
The American people’s proposition is stated in the preamble
to the U.S. Constitution. My interpretation is:
We the People of the United States communicate, collaborate, and connect
to aid five public institutions---unity, justice, tranquility, defense, and
welfare---in order to encourage responsible human liberty to living people now
and in the future.
Few Americans accept the civic, civil, and legal importance
of the U.S. preamble enough to interpret it to help order their way of living
and maintain awareness to aid civic integrity. Responsible human liberty is
threatened by civic citizens’ apathy.
I think the cancer that prevents acceptance of the U.S.
preamble is procrastination for whatever-God-is to take charge of responsible
human liberty:
It won’t happen. The
individual is responsible for human integrity.
https://www.quora.com/What-stops-one-branch-of-government-from-becoming-too-strong-or-powerful?
It seems to me the U.S. is controlled in competition by
political oligopolies. Wealth-elites have political ideologies (see
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_political_ideologies
to order a study). They group ideologies with related appeal and find
like-minded elites to form an alliance to build political power. The winner can
control an election, first by influencing the selection of candidates.
Wealth is the power-driver. The elite group with the most
money has the advantage.
The second line of control is the judges and lawyers. What a
drain on the people at all levels—municipality, state, and federal. And the
federal branches keep each other dysfunctional with lawsuits.
Only the press can work its evil with impunity. And
“journalism schools” conduct polls statistically designed to prove a point; run
the survey; and analyze the results so as to bend toward their intentions. The
press publishes their study to prove the journalism-school point:
Public policy is controlled by polls, which
are controlled by the press.
Perhaps we are at the abyss and an achievable better future
will begin. I think it is possible through acceptance of the U.S. preamble’s
proposition under the-objective-truth. If it happens, most of the bad actors
cited above will reform to fellow citizenship.
According to the preamble to the U.S. Constitution, We the
People of the United States maintains government accountability---keeps the
powers in balance. In the case of the press, amendment of their speech to
responsible human liberty is required.
https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-number-one-cause-of-suffering-in-American-society?
Chapter XI Machiavellianism or the people’s procrastination in
a church-state partnership.
“
. . . ecclesiastical principalities . . . are sustained by the
ordinances of religion, which are so all-powerful . . that the principalities
may be held no matter how their princes behave and live. These princes alone
have states and do not defend them, they have subjects and do not rule them;
and the states, although unguarded, are not taken from them, and the subjects,
although not ruled, do not care, and they have neither the desire nor the
ability to [emigrate]. Such principalities only are secure and happy. But being
upheld by powers, to which the human mind cannot reach, I shall speak no more
of them, because, being exalted and maintained by [what-ever-God-is-in-the-principality],
it would be the act of a presumptuous and rash man to discuss them.”
I
seems evident that whatever-God-is does not respond to each nation’s God,
because throughout history military power has settled foreign violence and
police power settles domestic uprisings. I speculate that James Madison
understood Nicolo Machiavelli’s sarcasm but feared expressing political
integrity on par with Thomas Paine; too many of the free citizens of the 1780s
were factional American Protestants being solicited by a few Deists. I also
speculate that Madison did not like the preamble to the U.S. constitution and
schemed to falsely label it “secular”.
Here’s
how the procrastination works among factional believers. Each believer reads
his or her scripture and develops an opinion about his or her God. The scripture
is canonized to appeal to a broad spectrum of humankind. Also, it contains
passages that imply that government is an arm of the God. A government chooses
a scripture or its interpretation that accommodates the government’s plan for
controlling the people. Government enlists the church that claims that
scripture or its nearest kin. Together, church and state pick the people’s
pocket with immunity. Because believing is a commitment to eternal hope, the
people allow the church-state abuse indefinitely. Only a dreamer would imagine
solving alone the problem of Chapter XI Machiavellianism.
However,
reform is offered in the preamble to the U.S. Constitution. It is a citizen’s
proposition which, appreciating the power of the human being is offered for the
choosing. It states: We the People of the United States aid five public
institutions so as to secure responsible human liberty; or We the People of the
United States aid freedom-from oppression so that fellow citizens may accept
responsible human liberty; or We the People of the United States communicate,
collaborate, and connect so as to aid individual happiness with civic
integrity; or We the People of the United States work for equity under
statutory justice.
My present
interpretation of the U.S. preamble’s proposition is: We the People of
the United States communicate, collaborate, and connect to provide 5 public
institutions---integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity---in order
to encourage responsible human liberty to the continuum of living people.
Under the U.S. preamble’s proposition, religion or none is a private matter.
The purposes actually stated in the U.S. preamble are Union, Justice,
Tranquility, defense, Welfare, and Liberty to us and our Posterity. The first
five nouns are public goals, and Liberty is an inalienable human condition.
That is, nothing can change a human’s choices to develop either integrity or
infidelity, and habitual infidelity leads to ruin. The question is can the individual
rely on either government or whatever-God-is as the standard for fidelity?
It seems evident that government is unreliable and whatever-God-is leaves
fidelity to the individual. For this reason, I trust-in and rely-on
the-objective-truth
as the standard for discovering justice. By this I mean I rely on the
ineluctable evidence to aid the development of civic integrity or statutory
justice. I also have my hopes for my afterdeath, but they are important to me
and to no one else. My afterdeath is typically not a civic matter.
The U.S. preamble’s proposition offers relief from the church-state
partnership. The-objective-truth may be used to develop civic integrity.
Citizens may privately develop religion if they want it. Machiavelli may opine
that I am “
a presumptuous
and rash man,” but I think I suggest an achievable better future under civic
agreements like the U.S. preamble with the-objective-truth as standard for
developing statutory justice.
I think we are
experiencing the end of procrastination on ending the church-state partnerships
and appreciating the-objective-truth will accelerate the journey to a better
future.
https://www.quora.com/unanswered/What-do-you-think-of-the-initiative-to-teach-civics-in-our-schools-that-is-championed-by-Richard-Dreyfus?
Thank you for asking my opinion. I considered Dreyfus’s work in about 2015
when my sister Dona Bean (d. 2017) alerted me. I like restoring civic
education. However, I oppose some of Dreyfus’s principles.
For example, see at
The Need for Civic
Education “What makes America unique?”
“The United States of America was one of the first political bodies that
gave its subjects distinct individual freedoms, which are outlined in the Bill
of Rights. Built from the ideas of the Enlightenment, America was constructed
as a nation dependent on the sovereignty of the people, a breakthrough in a
world full of monarchies and tyrannies. Our political system emphasizes the power
of the individual by granting citizens the distinctive ability to be part of a
sovereign body that elects representatives and impacts policies.”
Some of the problems in that paragraph include: neither “political bodies”
nor “its subjects” but victors in a war of independence; the Bill of Rights is
an unfortunate colonial-British imposition resulting from 1789-1791 identity
politics; not “sovereignty of the people” but civic discipline under
the-objective-truth; not “a breakthrough” because the preamble to the U.S.
Constitution proposes voluntary civic discipline for a specified purpose; “the
power of the individual” is a consequence of evolution and can only be accepted
by the individual.
Quoting Dreyfus from
Richard
Dreyfuss Fights For Civics In American Education,
“We’ve gifted the world with two things that are recognized as interesting
but should be recognized as totally unique. One was a written, signed
constitution whose preamble is all verbs so that when Justice Scalia says that
it’s a dead document and anyone who thinks it’s a living document is an idiot,
I just say, read the preamble, you putz. The other gift is the Bill of Rights.
People think of the Bill of Rights as a series of laws. Well, the Bill of
Rights is actually a written picture of the goal of our moral character. “
Dreyfus, honestly or not is wrong on both points.
A citizen (or other person) can’t just read the preamble and accomplish
anything. The preamble must be paraphrased so as to either accommodate the
citizen’s lifestyle or instruct him or her to reform to the people’s
proposition. The citizen most resistant to this thought is the devout Christian
who thinks he or she would deny Jesus by being a civic citizen.
To join We the People of the United States, a person must comprehend the
civic, civil, and legal power citizens who adopt the U.S. preamble, civic
citizens, claim. The U.S. Supreme Court does not admit to the U.S. preamble’s
legal power, but without the 1787 U.S. preamble, the 1774 Confederation of
States would operate rather than the 1788 republic the USA guarantees. And once
the citizen joins We the People of the United States, he or she may want to
amend the Bill of Rights, especially the First Amendment’s immoralities.
(Specifically the religion clauses must be deleted and replaced with
encouragement to develop integrity. And freedom of speech and of the press must
be constrained on bad behavior according to the-objective-truth.)
My current interpretation of the U.S. preamble’s proposition is:
We the People of the United State communicate, collaborate, and connect to
provide 5 public institutions---integrity, justice, peace, strength, and
prosperity---in order to encourage responsible human liberty to the continuum
of living people.
In a civic culture and under the U.S. preamble’s proposition, religion or
none is a private matter. (The purposes actually stated in the U.S. preamble
are Union, Justice, Tranquility, defense, Welfare, and Liberty to us and our
Posterity.)
We---A Civic People of the United States---work freely and do not plan to be
a revenue-generating organization. We work to convince fellow citizens that
adopting the U.S. preamble under the-objective-truth offers individual
happiness with civic integrity. We would not dilute our work by supporting an
effort we consider un-responsive to responsible human liberty.
https://www.quora.com/Do-people-honestly-want-equality-or-privilege-Why?
Cultures so far have not taught their youth that honesty is
insufficient for successful living: People must develop integrity.
Cultures so far have not taught their youth that emotion is
insufficient for successful living: People must comprehend and utilize the-objective-truth.
Cultures so far have not taught their youth that evolution has
evolved a species with potential awareness for successful living: The human
being has the individual power, energy, and authority (HIPEA) to develop integrity to the-objective-truth rather than
wander into infidelity.
Cultures so far have not taught their youth that acquiring the
comprehension and discipline to develop human integrity takes the first quarter
century of life: People must discover and accept personal HIPEA to avoid infidelity.
The consequence is that most adults live adolescent lives,
never even discovering HIPEA much less choosing to develop integrity. The
adults who realize this perceive it is too late for them, because during their
entire lives they never thought they were developing discipline for self, to
children, and to grandchildren and beyond. By the time they realize their drift
into infidelity to the-objective-truth, they’ve had enough of whatever
privilege they had and all they want is mercy.
I write to encourage people it is never too late to adopt
action for equity under the rule of statutory law and aid the establishment of
civic integrity.
These ideas come from our work to understand the people’s
proposition that is offered in the preamble to the U.S. Constitution using
the-objective-truth as standard for responsible human liberty. We invite every
person to write a paraphrase of the U.S.
preamble they’d like to use to communicate, collaborate, and connect with
fellow citizens for an achievable better future.
https://www.quora.com/unanswered/What-is-the-importance-of-civic-education-in-enhancing-good-governance?
We may begin with
establishing the meaning of “civic” respecting “good governance.” Civic citizens aid freedom-from oppression in order to
secure mutual liberty-to develop integrity in human connections.
We think “civic” means humanly communicating, collaborating,
and connecting to aid individual happiness with public integrity under a
reliable standard. Civic differs from civil, social, and legal, which each
addresses a level of civilization: conformity to the human standards that
evolved in a locale.
Actual reality or discovered ineluctable evidence is the
reliable standard, and we call it the-objective-truth. The-objective-truth
exists and is the evidence by which objective truth, truth, Truth, absolute
truth, ultimate truth, and other expressions of human constructs are measured.
Justice is determined by the-objective-truth, most of which has not yet been
discovered. The-objective-truth does not respond to reason.
A fellow citizen who is aware of these issues accepts the
civic contract to aid equity under the justice of statutory law. When he or she
encounters in justice, he or she reports it and speaks for reform toward
statutory justice. It is an impossibility but the worthy goal that can order an
individual’s opportunity to develop integrity during his or her unique
lifetime. Progressing on different paths and times with distinct personal
constraints, no two mature adults achieve the same integrity nor would the
extensions of their lifetimes reach ultimate integrity.
A fellow citizen who is aware of these issues, a civic
citizen, tarries not with errant thought in order to develop the
self-discipline to usually if not always maintain fidelity to the-objective-truth.
A civic citizen is not likely to behave with infidelity to anyone or anything
and is prepared to resist if not prevent harm to him or her or anyone else.
Turning now to “good governance,” the civic citizen wants
representative rather than direct political power. The civic citizen commits to
aid institutional freedom-from oppression so as to secure responsible human
liberty to the continuum of living people. The civic citizen publicly aids
government while privately living a life of responsible human liberty.
The revolutionary civic education we support aids and
encourages youth and adults to accept human individual power, energy, and
authority (HIPEA) to develop integrity during their personal opportunity in
life. We write daily to excite education-reform so as to encourage these
principles for living. Because of HIPEA, no human will accept the “happiness”
someone else would impose on them.
When most citizens are developing responsible human liberty,
civic education will be empowering an achievable better future.
https://www.quora.com/unanswered/What-is-civic-education-in-good-governance-in-Sierra-Leone?
We think our public meetings at local libraries (with
appreciation to about 70 people) have worked out the (improvable) essentials of
an achievable better future no matter where the proposed culture is tried. The
elements include:
1. Commitment to state a
civic concern and well-grounded solution, dialogue to clarify, then listen to
the audience for improvements in the concern and/or solution. Develop a
glossary of words and phrases that reflect the civic improvements.
2. Acceptance that the human individual has the power, the
energy, and the authority (HIPEA) to develop integrity and that some people
will choose infidelity.
3. An education system that encourages HIPEA for integrity and
supports the individual’s lifetime pursuit of statutory justice or perfect law.
4. Adoption of the preamble to the U.S. Constitution (or better
statement of essential civic goals) as the proposition each citizen considers
and interprets so as to order his or her path to civic integrity. My current
interpretation of the U.S. preamble’s proposition is:
We the People of the United State communicate, collaborate,
and connect to provide 5 public institutions---integrity, justice, peace,
strength, and prosperity---in order to encourage responsible human liberty to
the continuum of living people. In a civic culture, religion or none is a
private matter. (The purposes actually stated in the U.S. preamble are Union,
Justice, Tranquility, defense, Welfare, and Liberty to us and our Posterity.) I
hope people in Sierra-Leone or other non-U.S. citizens will read this and
comment as to whether or not it seems useful to them. I think they have better
chance to make it happen than I do.
5. Acceptance of the-objective-truth, which is the ineluctable
evidence on which discovery evolves, as the standard for civic integrity,
justice, and truth.
6. Acceptance that spirituality, religion, and philosophy are
personal pursuits for hope respecting private concerns regardless of what has
not been discovered and that is why they are not incorporated in the U.S.
preamble’s proposition.
7. A constitutional amendment that requires elected officials to
begin each official meeting with the unison reading of the U.S. preamble in
order to remind the officials that they are first fellow citizens.
8. Acceptance
that physics, the object of study rather than the study called “physics,” is
the source of evolution of everything including human integrity. Imagination,
such as fiction and religion, derives from “un-discovered” physics that may not
exist. For example, no one solved the mystery whatever-God-is.
We do all we can to share
this message. It is supported by the essays on our website, A Civic People.
https://www.quora.com/Do-you-think-that-in-todays-world-in-some-cases-the-fight-for-freedom-of-speech-became-an-attack-on-forbidden-Will-they-only-stop-fighting-for-the-freedom-of-speech-if-there-s-nothing-forbidden-anymore?
The speech clause in the First Amendment is unjust can
therefore is a candidate for amendment. As an absolute, it never held, as in
the example falsely yelling “Fire!!!” in a public assembly. If the consequence
is harm, the speaker may be held responsible.
My state, Louisiana, has a slightly better expressions
clause respecting both the citizen and the press:
“No law shall curtail or restrain the freedom
of speech or of the press. Every person may speak, write, and publish his
sentiments on any subject, but is responsible for abuse of that freedom.”
I have suggested that my state put some enforcement behind
this provision, for example, making the press liable for loss due to any
erroneous publication.
The First Amendment exemplifies the failure of the First
Congress, 1789-1791, to implement the people’s proposition that is stated in
the preamble to the U.S. Constitution. Their failure had two drivers. First, American
Protestants opposed reformed Catholicism as in the Church of England. Among
free inhabitants, 99% were factional Protestants. Living free citizens took for
granted James Madison’s claim that citizens must first be considered citizens
of whatever-God-is and to him that was our precious Christian faith
whatever-that-meant. Therefore, they took for granted the false lessening of
the U.S. preamble as a “secular” sentence.
Second, 1/3 of delegates to the 1787 Constitutional
Convention did not sign the document. Some of them objected to the fact that
the 1787 Constitution, in human integrity, does not suggest knowledge of
whatever-God-is. Others objected to assigning the necessary discipline for
responsible human liberty to the people instead of the states. The convention
was the product of debate under minds that were open to a standard never before
employed. They had no confidence in theism as the standard and therefore did
not impose it. The delegates represented the-objective-truth more than a
dominant opinion. Fortunately for us, 2/3 of delegates expressed this reality
in the U.S. preamble by ratifying it and the amendable articles that follow.
When the First Congress was seated, power shifted from
independent constitution framers to elected representatives of
factional-Protestant people. With two months of March 4, 1789, Congress
established their divinity on par with Parliament’s lordship by hiring
Protestant chaplains at the people’s expense. The people procrastinated under
Chapter XI Machiavellianism:
Whatever-God-is will eventually reform an unjust Congress. Like
adolescent spouses who know no more about parenting that squabbling over what
four grandparents would do (that’s at least 6 opinions potentially imposed on
the child), the First Congress re-instated as much colonial-English tradition
as the could as factional Protestantism under Blackstone common law.
The U.S. upholds colonial-English traditions England no
longer abides. For example, “Under Article 10 of the Human Rights Act
1998, ‘everyone has the right to freedom of expression’ in the UK.
But the law states that this freedom ‘may be subject to formalities,
conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary
in a democratic society’.”
England is also more leftist about freedom of religion: “Everyone
has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this
right includes freedom to change
his religion or belief and freedom, either alone or in
community with others and in public or private, to manifest
his religion or belief, in worship, teaching, practice and
observance.” I think both the US and the UK should sacrifice religion to
integrity.
You may perceive that I deviated from your question, and
that’s OK. However, I think your question spoke to the-objective-truth in your
way:
Only ideas that oppose
the-objective-truth should be regarded as forbidden whether they are
constrained or not.
https://www.quora.com/Is-the-freedom-of-association-a-classic-or-social-right?
Human association is neither a freedom nor a right. It is a
consequence of the evolution of physics; that is the “physics” that is the
objective of study rather than the study called physics. I think everything
derives from physics the object of study.
It seems everything that exists evolved from physics:
E=mC-squared or better expression of actual reality. After the big bang, there
was plasma chemistry then inorganic chemistry then biology then psychology, and
civilization. With psychology humans used imagination to explore
the-objective-truth that had not been discovered; hence, mirages, fiction,
metaphysics, and religion.
The time sequence for earth is 13.7 billion years ago, 4.6
billion years ago, 4 billion years ago, and perhaps human psychology 300,000
years ago. Language might be 150,000 years old and civilization emerged unto journaling
perhaps 12,000 years ago.
Civilization is a consequence of the power of the human
species. The human has individual power, energy, and authority (HIPEA) to
develop integrity to the-objective-truth; in other words fidelity to the
evolving actual reality. It is impossible for the individual to know
everything, but he or she may make decisions based on the-objective-truth or
the discovered ineluctable evidence. When someone does not know the-objective-truth
and does not have to make a decision, they may admit, “I do not know enough to
decide.” Otherwise, he or she may responsibly act on best advice from their
HIPEA. Irresponsible action begs woe, and woe due usually shows up.
There is one human association that stands the test of
evidence:
communication, collaboration,
and connection for mutual, comprehensive safety and security (Safety).
Provision of mutual security requires conformance to the-objective-truth.
The human must aid Safety in freedom-from oppression so as
to secure the liberty-to develop integrity-to the-objective-truth. Demanding
the right to contrary association begs woe to the individual as well as the
errant society.
https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-examples-of-freedom-of-choice?
A person may choose to communicate, collaborate, and connect
for human equity under statutory justice.
Recognizing that statutory justice is impossible perfection,
the U.S. Constitution is amendable so that when statutory law is found wanting
it can be amended toward statutory justice.
Further, the U.S. Constitution does not specify the standard
for statutory justice. Citizens are free to choose to base justice on
the-objective-truth rather than accept a dominant opinion such as
Judeo-Christianity.
The U.S. preamble’s proposition supports my choice. The
public goals are Unity, Justice, Tranquility, defense, and Welfare in order to
encourage Liberty to living citizens.
Citizens may wait for the First Amendment’s amendment from
religion clauses to an integrity clause. Maybe “Congress shall make no law
limiting development of integrity” or demand reform now.
Both elected and appointed government officials may choose
to behave as fellow citizens.
A woman may prevent neglecting or abusing of her viable ova.
A man may protect a woman and her viable ova.
https://www.quora.com/If-everyone-is-supposed-to-be-equal-why-is-there-so-much-about-privilege-that-tries-to-make-everyone-unequal?
“Everybody knows” every human being is unique. Therefore,
the people who claim everyone is supposed to be equal are denying what
everybody knows.
Each human infant is equally uninformed and dependent on
care-takers, usually the man and woman who conceived the infant. Rare is the
adolescent who discovers that he or she has human, individual power, energy,
and authority (HIPEA) to develop integrity rather than wander into infidelity.
The man and woman did not yield their inequality as unique
human beings when they conceived a person from the woman’s unique ovum. If
either of them accepted HIPEA to develop integrity, their children are
fortunate and may be encouraged by their parents to also develop integrity.
Some men and women who conceive a child are monogamously,
for life, in-love and are committed to whatever family they develop. Their
commitment is not only to their children, but to their children’s children and
beyond. Thus their family---the spouses and their children---know they aid
public security in order to encourage responsible human liberty to the
continuum of living people.
The families who live by these principles are privileged to
develop integrity yet each remains a unique human being.
These ideas are strengthened by our recent interpretation of
the preamble to the U.S. Constitution:
We the People of the United States communicate, collaborate, and connect
to provide 5 public institutions---Union, Justice, Tranquility, defense, and
Welfare---in order to encourage responsible human liberty to living citizens
using the-objective-truth as standard for justice rather than competing for
dominant political opinion.
Law professors
https://www.lawliberty.org/liberty-forum/self-rule-is-the-basis-of-american-nationalism-not-natural-rights
We appreciate Professor McAllister’s views and think they invite a
proposal for an available better future using the U.S. preamble under
the-objective-truth.
Let me first collapse the arguments against Hayward’s view:
“Hayward is wrong, however, about the nature of American nationalism.
We are left wondering about . . . the nationalism of a self-governing people.
Hayward connects . . . with the Declaration of Independence generally and with
natural rights particularly. America is the exception to the rule, the rule
being that nations are built on power, on tribal associations that are
connected to soil and that come with old grievances and irrational attachments
that supply the cultural glue. Hayward uses the term “exceptional” to assert
that America is an “idea” or a creed, and that what we mean by America and by
the emotional attachment to it is fidelity to the true moral principles on
which the nation was founded.”
McAllister segues to “experiences, attachments and affections” but
dismisses them as “well beyond the scope of the essay.” I don’t think so.
Neither Hayward nor McAllister has discovered the people’s proposition
that is suggested in the preamble to the U.S. Constitution (the U.S. preamble).
Each citizens may interpret the 52 word sentence and either manage civic
connections and transactions or be arbitrary. It proposes equity in developing
statutory justice, which is perfect statutory law, a worthy goal. Many citizens
could not care less, but I think everyone should have his or her interpretation
of the U.S. preamble’s proposition and a basis for justice.
Here’s mine today: We the People
of the United States communicate, collaborate, and connect to aid five public
institutions---unity, justice, tranquility, defense, and welfare---in order to
encourage responsible human liberty to living people now and in the future. I
highlighted the six words used in the original U.S. preamble to note that it
says nothing about standards, such as religion or not.
Some of the implications in this interpretation include: civic people
should encourage each other to develop integrity as a necessity for liberty;
the people can aid freedom-from five tyrannies but cannot force the human
liberty-to choose responsibility more-than or rather-than infidelity;
responsibility applies not only to the person but to his or her progeny and
beyond; consequences affirm the standard of justice; and interest in mysteries
about whatever-God-may-be is a private rather than civic matter. An overall
human implication is that each person has the right to develop integrity and
the consequence of his or her lifetime is up to him or her.
Each human is unique with the individual power, the individual energy,
and the individual authority (HIPEA) to develop integrity. However, the person
must discover HIPEA or be encouraged to recognize it. The cultures that have
evolved do not coach their youth to accept HIPEA and choose fidelity. Many
cultures suggest consigning HIPEA to whatever-God-may-be or government.
Moreover, the emerged cultures do all they can to obfuscate the
standard for integrity. The standard is the ineluctable evidence, which we call
"the-objective-truth". The hyphens invite readers to keep
“the-objective-truth” intact as more precise than any of ineluctable evidence,
indisputable facts, actual reality, ultimate truth, truth, Truth, and other
phrases that may lessen open-mindedness.
We think the reason we encounter resistance to the U.S. preamble’s
proposition with the-objective-truth is not mere preservation of ever-failing
tradition. We think that without encouragement and coaching it is nearly
impossible for the human being, psychologically powerful as he or she is, to
discover HIPEA and choose integrity for life. It takes a couple decades to
acquire basic comprehension and intent to live a full life, but integrity is
not encouraged by the conflicted societies and civilizations. And self-rule is
corrupt from the start, as we may observe in the U.S. attempt.
Discovering HIPEA is especially unlikely in a nation that has the
church-state partnership, which is the tradition from colonial-British days on
this country’s Atlantic seaboard. A civic people may reform the First Amendment
so as to protect individual and collective development of integrity, a human
right for living, rather than religion, the institution of mystery.
America has an exceptional opportunity that a civic people may accept
any day now. Americans may adopt the U.S. preamble’s proposition to develop
civic, civil, and legal integrity with the-objective-truth as the standard for
justice. These are principles of discipline for life rather than
procrastination for afterdeath.
To Karen Renfro:
About 2500 years ago humankind received the thought, in my
paraphrase, humans may develop equity under statutory justice. The entity
whatever-God-is has not been disproved, so it seems un-civic, within statutory
justice, to claim to know God. Looking beyond humankind, it seems obvious that
whatever-God-is may not approve a human misrepresenting God.
It seems to me this is the reason the U.S. people’s
proposition, the preamble to the U.S. Constitution, does not invoke divinity. I
hold the U.S. preamble’s proposition as the equivalent of the Supreme Court
building’s claim to “Equal Justice Under Law” or of Pericles’ idea his way, or
of my equity under statutory law.
It seems to me that people who seek to overlay the U.S.
preamble, the people’s proposition, with their particular scripture are not of
We the People of the United States and are fully aware that that is their
position: dissident to the American civic-civil-legal citizen’s agreement. They
are still fellow citizens but need to reform. It reminds me of the
fundamentalist who never considered the preamble’s proposition but kept saying
to me, “I am enjoying this conversation with a lost soul.” I guess he is hung
up on Caesar’s coins.
Maybe U.S. dissidence applies to you; maybe not. I have my
doubts.
To
https://www.independent.org/aboutus/person_detail.asp?id=652
Max Hocutt
Thank you.
To Standing Fast
Thank you.
It seems to me that, as of January 14, 1784 and ratification
of the 1783 Treaty of Paris, the 13 eastern seaboard former colonies were
nation states. Would you agree?
The 13, named, nation states remained free and independent,
as stated in the treaty, until June 21, 1788. Then, the 9th required state had
ratified the 1787 U.S. preamble with its attached, amendable articles,
establishing the USA as a global nation. That left 4 nation states dissident to
the USA—Virginia, New York, North Carolina, and Rhode Island.
The USA is 231 years old rather than 243 years old.
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.
