The Advocate’s abuse of the race card

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

The Advocate, Louisiana’s dominant press, adolescently abuses the race issue, harming the people of Louisiana. For example, this week Governor John Bel Edwards’ supporters raked candidate Eddie Rispone, and The Advocate sided with the Edwards’ camp when Rispone responded.

Moreover, The Advocate is proud of its aid to unconstitutionally ending Louisiana’s provision of Amendment VI impartiality through 10:2 criminal-jury verdicts.

News

Rispone’s wry sarcasm (Sam Karlin) (https://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/news/politics/elections/article_6970e034-ff30-11e9-9e9c-53c105316e12.html)

“Asked whether he stood by his comments about Edwards’ military background, Rispone said “I guess being politically correct I should not have brought it up.”

There's Rispone-serene, wry sarcasm in that response. He could have been trapped into Edwards-frustration.

With its expressed political identity, it is doubtful The Advocate accepts dry humor.

Columns

The Advocate’s abuse of the race card (The Advocate) (https://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/our_views/article_86f40d32-fff5-11e9-b54f-efb0118fcae3.html)

No one should yield to the press’s demands, for example, to apologize for holding an opposing opinion. I do not yield to The Advocate’s neglect of my assessment that their support of unanimous jury verdicts is tyranny against We the People of the United States, especially citizens who live in Louisiana. I encourage fellow citizens to vote for Rispone more than against Edwards.

The Advocate demanded Rispone apologize for his response to the John Bel Edwards’ camp’s abusive rhetoric. The Advocate, too adolescent to accept that The Advocate does not always get what it wants, herein whines against Rispone’s serene confidence in the face of Edwards’ temper tantrums.

More importantly, The Advocate is silent about its use of the race card in the campaign to defeat a Louisiana treasure: Louisiana’s 1780 provision of criminal-jury impartiality through 9:3 verdicts. Statistics informs that majority jury verdicts is the only way a state may offer the possibility of impartial verdicts. It matters not if 49 other states want to cling to colonial-English tradition that the U.S. Preamble proposes to overcome.

It is well known that England used its jury rules---unanimity among 12 Englishmen in England, selected for “justice” against colonial-English Americans. The Advocate does not share the fact that England, in 1967, adopted 10:2 jury verdicts in order to lessen organized crime’s influence on jury trials. Nor does The Advocate accept that U.S. Amendment VI, 1791, requires states to provide impartial verdicts rather than unanimous jury opinion. Can you imagine obtaining an impartial jury dominated by Sister Prejean’s influence?

It is well known that American statistics is close to the following: racial demographic is 12% black or about 7 non-blacks/black; 85% of black victims were offended by a black person; 50% of murder victims are black; many anecdotal cases demonstrate criminal bias in black-on-black crime. The black community is about 900% disproportionally victimized by the unanimous jury constraint. Reversing that claim using incomplete data is The Advocate’s primary offense.

Both John Bel Edwards and The Advocate supported unanimous-jury abuse of We the People of the United States who live in Louisiana. U.S. Amendment XIV.1, offers Louisiana citizens relief:  “No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States.” Our immediate relief might address enforcement.

In 1880, Louisiana provided Amendment VI criminal jury impartiality by legalizing 9:3 verdicts. In 2018, the Louisiana State Bar Association (LSBA) petitioned the Louisiana Legislature to undo 10:2 verdicts that were affirmed by both the Louisiana Supreme Court and the U.S. Supreme court. The Advocate pushed the race card to the hilt in its tyranny against Louisiana citizens.

I commend the Louisiana Legislature to undo the Amendment XIV.1 tyranny created by the LSBA, the John Bel Edwards administration, and The Advocate.

Meanwhile, The Advocate might cut back on its habitual use of the race card. I like to consider wiki on such matters: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mote_and_the_Beam.



Mayor Broome misrepresents We the People of Baton Rouge (The Advocate) ( https://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/our_views/article_cf1e6c0e-0024-11ea-a6e7-7fbbf97da520.html)


I agree with The Advocate.

Second post: Further, Mayor-President Broome's gestapo does not represent We the People of Baton Rouge, those of us who practice and encourage responsible human liberty.

Beware the “original sin” fallacy: slavery is as old as civilization (The Advocate) (https://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/our_views/article_522c4f68-fa7a-11e9-ac9a-37b7c1245364.html)

“Landrieu’s ambitious foundation seems to be largely funded by Laurene Powell Jobs, a philanthropist who leads the Emerson Collective, an advocacy group she co-founded with deceased husband Steve Jobs of Apple Computer fame.”

Beware foundation in falsehood. Readers can count on The Advocate to sponsor social fallacies.

Self-made fellow citizen Frederick Douglass in 1852 asserted that the U.S. Preamble and the articles of the U.S. Constitution do not advocate slavery. They specify ending slave-trade in 20 years from 1788 and lay the groundwork for emancipation. Slavery was instituted in America by the tribes who enslaved individuals in Africa, the Arab traders who sold persons, and the Europeans, dominantly the English, who incorporated African slaves into the doctrine of discovery.

Behind The Advocate’s silence, there has developed in EBRP public library meetings, entering their seventh year, an interpretation of the U.S. Preamble’s proposition for establishing the USA as a global nation.

On June 21, 1788, 9 of 13 former British colonies legally established the USA, leaving 4 globally free and independent states. The U.S. Preamble proposes civic citizenship: collective individual discipline rather than the corruptible scholarly tradition self-governance.

My interpretation of the U.S. Preamble’s proposition today, 11/5/19, is: We the People of the United States communicate, collaborate, and connect to aid 5 public institutions---integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity (original nouns “Union . . . Justice . . . Tranquility . . . defence . . . Welfare,” respectively)---in order to accept the benefits of responsible human liberty by living people. I speak, write, and meet for the opportunity to learn, from fellow citizens, improvements on this interpretation.

Every association in America should strive for 2/3 participation in We the People of the United States. I constantly appeal to many of The Advocate’s employees to join We the People of the United States according to The Advocate's published interpretation of the U.S. Preamble. I doubt The Advocate interpretation would speak of original sin. But nothing surprises me when it comes from The Advocate: disappoint? yes.

Sadly abstract writing (George Will) (https://www2.ljworld.com/opinion/2019/oct/31/opinion-in-baseball-most-valuable-rules-are-unwritten/)

In “The Laws of Science and The Laws of Ethics” Albert Einstein unfortunately wrote for the audience, thereby, unintentionally hiding forever his message. I boldly think Einstein expressed that 1) physics (the objective of evidentiary research to discover rather than construct doctrine) and 2) integrity have one source: physics. “Science” and “ethics” were popular to the audience but disguise physics and integrity. Einstein’s only clue is his singular example:  People with integrity do not lie so as to lessen human misery and loss. In other words, infidelity to physics begs woe.

In the same way, Will uses proprietary, perhaps erroneous, words and phrases to illustrate the lessons in civic integrity played out in baseball and to end with perhaps Will-Bennett nonsense: “standards are always out of date---that is why we call them standards.” Will writes about human equity in developing statutory justice.



The U.S. Preamble proposes 5 public institutions for responsible liberty to living citizens. The citizens 1) accept/reject the civic, civil, and legal proposition and with acceptance 2) responsibly choose STANDARDS for the 5 institutions: “Union, Justice, Tranquility, defence, Welfare.”

Perhaps George Will is among the millions of Americans who have no personal interpretation of the U.S. Preamble’s proposition. If so, it is not too late for him to create and publish it. I’d be disappointed if he did not teach me an improvement on mine.

Also, I so wish I could talk with Albert Einstein so as to understand his message about laws having one source.

Posted at the above URL and at https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/poor-bat-behavior-is-a-stain-on-baseballs-unwritten-standards/2019/10/30/8ff1d55c-fb42-11e9-8190-6be4deb56e01_story.html#comments-wrapper.

I hope the people of Louisiana elect Eddie Rispone (The Advocate) (https://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/our_views/article_e472fb60-fce1-11e9-b35a-4bc356e5fbb0.html)

Second post: The Advocate owes readers an apology for such emotional adolescence.

To John Sarradet:

In 1967, my employer, the Ethyl Corporation, appealed to the U.S. to lift my draft because I was working on a combustion improver that reduced the enemy's ability to use smoke trails to target U.S. aircraft.

I was testing 150 remedies that had been selected as possible clues, and narrowed the options to one for close study. When I calculated the cost of that additive a mixture of chemicals made acidic, the expense was prohibitive. I then tested the components in the mixture, with sufficient acidification, solving the problem. Ethyl Corporation continued to supply the combustion improver long after my work, which took 18 months following as many months of basic chemistry studies.

Do you think reliable relief from the draft so as to perform critical work is immoral? I don't. Do you think enlisting in the military is the only way to serve the USA? I don't.

I appreciate my opportunity to serve and do not regret the sacrifices I made to unlock the production of that particular combustion improver.

One of the nicest couples I ever met was Jack and Iris Sarradet, now deceased. I appreciated their serene confidence, responsibility, and open-minded good will. Many of their ancestors remind me of Jack and Iris.

I think Jack and Iris might vote for Rispone if they were living today.

Quora

https://www.quora.com/How-do-you-change-the-law-society-and-the-entire-social-system-and-the-way-it-works?

The key seems nested acceptances as follows, improved for the collective civic citizens by individual pursuit of happiness as the individual perceives it:

1)    Each person may develop human, individual power, energy, and authority (HIPEA).

2)    Each person may choose to use his or her HIPEA to develop either integrity or infidelity to the-literal-truth.

3)    While the-literal-truth is often unknown, its discovery is available through the-objective-truth, the ineluctable evidence.

4)    Each person may aid the development of human equity under statutory law.

In the U.S., fellow citizens are offered the U.S. Preamble’s proposition, as I interpret it for my civic guidance:  We the People of the United States communicate, collaborate, and connect to aid 5 public disciplines---integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity---in order to encourage living people to practice responsible human liberty.

I write this, a proposal for an achievable better future so as to learn improvements from the individuals who may practice the ultimate civic culture made possible because the U.S. Preamble did not specify the standards for achievement. Nor do I demand norms, beyond suggesting acceptance of the-literal-truth, unknown as it often is.  

https://www.quora.com/unanswered/How-can-sociology-benefit-democratic-societies?

MW online’s definition of sociology is “the science of society, social institutions, and social relationships specifically : the systematic study of the development, structure, interaction, and collective behavior of organized groups of human beings.”

So far, social science has taken the erroneous path of pretending that statistics is reliable rather than corruptible and designing subjective polls from selected groups of people to systemize studies. The consequence is chaos.

The remedy may be for sociology to change their intentions from 1) manipulating public opinion to 2) discovering the-literal-truth and encouraging most people to aid the pursuit of its ineluctable evidence. There are at least two fundamental principles to such a study.

First, each person may or may not develop his or her human, individual power, energy, and authority (HIPEA) to practice integrity to the-literal-truth rather than drift into infidelity. While the-literal-truth is often unknown, the individual may avoid mistakes by behaving according to the-objective-truth when it is necessary to act and otherwise rely on accepting “I do not know what I do not know.” The-objective-truth ultimately approaches the-literal-truth because humankind gradually discovers and eliminates erroneous comprehension and consequential practices. For example, it is well known that integrity involves not lying, so as to lessen human misery and loss.

Application of this principle is not obvious. For example, if a liar approaches the President with a lie designed to learn the President’s intentions, only an astute response will distract the professional liar so as to fix him or her on an alternate line of discussion.

At least 2/3 of practitioners in each human endeavor should pursue the-literal-truth. Presently, it seems sociology has a business plan directed toward advising the media business plans for maximum revenues in both camps. To reform, sociology could re-direct itself toward discovery-of and encouragement-to-pursue the-literal-truth in all human communication, collaboration, and connection.

The media may live and die on their business plans.

https://www.quora.com/Which-political-thinker-or-theory-provides-the-most-plausible-framework-for-reconciling-individual-liberty-with-social-justice?

The U.S. Preamble literally offers an achievable public discipline that encourages responsible human liberty to both individuals and the voluntary collective, We the People of the United States.

Each human has the opportunity to consider, comprehend, and practice his or her interpretation of the U.S. Preamble’s proposition to fellow citizens, even though the public discipline is for the nation of people. Uniquely, the U.S. Preamble leaves standards for performance to the individuals who practice responsible human liberty and dissident fellow citizens who reform.

Following the colonial-British norm, the First Congress ignored the U.S. Preamble (1787) to establish the British tradition of church-state partnership. Perhaps the 1789-1793 congressional majority was motivated to feel divine on par with Parliament, with its fixed number of Canterbury designees. Regardless of why, the 1791 First Amendment protects religion, an institutional business, instead of integrity, a responsible human acceptance. We the People of the United States must amend the first amendment so as to protect human integrity.

The U.S. Preamble interpretation that orders my civic life is: We the People of the United States communicate, collaborate, and connect to aid 5 civic disciplines---integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity (original nouns “Union, Justice, Tranquility, defence, and Welfare,” respectively)---in order to encourage responsible human liberty to living citizens. Because the standards for performance are not restricted, no one can imagine how and when We the People of the United States will begin to approach statutory justice; that is, justice according to the-literal-truth.

Thus, the citizens who trust-in and commit-to their personal interpretations of the U.S. Preamble’s proposition make plausible “individual liberty with social justice.” Dissident fellow citizens are encouraged to reform by example more than by exhortation or law enforcement.

The world’s first majority citizenship that establishes the proposition may not be We the People of the United States, but I think the USA has the leading opportunity. For example, I do not think England could imagine public acceptance of the-literal-truth and faith in responsible human liberty.

https://www.quora.com/How-are-social-moral-standards-set-in-a-given-society?

Of course, I do not know. However, I think it is a matter of appreciation and acceptance by most, at least 2/3, of the members of the society.

The foremost society is the humans who accept responsible liberty. A couple Greek thinkers suggested 1) humans may pursue equity as statutory justice and 2) the civic citizen neither initiates nor tolerates harm to or from anyone. These two principles are implied in the U.S. Preamble.

It proposes that civic citizens aid 5 public provisions (Union, Justice, Tranquility, defence, and Welfare) in order to accept responsible human liberty. In other words, 5 collective disciplines empower individuals to responsibly pursue personal happiness.

Adding the U.S. Preamble’s proposition better than my interpretation to the two Greek suggestions, we have standards on which statutory justice may be pursued by most citizens. There is historical evidence that 2/3 of citizens are candidates for appreciation and acceptance of these principles.

Civic integrity can be established only by the people. In the civic culture, 2/3 of members of chosen societies must aid the public disciplines that encourage responsible human liberty. Each individual develops his or her standards for the disciplines for responsible human liberty, so the ultimate good of the U.S. Preamble is unforeseeable.

Merely by spreading this message, the USA, through the U.S. Preamble’s proposition is a candidate for establishing an achievable better future.

https://www.quora.com/What-is-equality-in-society?

I do not understand “society” so will answer respecting humankind, an evolutionary species with its leading psychologically-capable branch: the human being.

Each human person may accept the individual power, the individual energy, and the individual authority (HIPEA) to develop integrity to the-literal-truth, much of which is unknown. Thus, while we know that the earth is like a globe rather than a plane, we know not what it will be like tomorrow.

At any moment, we may consider the-literal-truth by accepting the-objective-truth; the ineluctable evidence we are able to perceive with the latest instruments. For example, while microscopes empower “seeing” atoms, radiation enables observing subatomic-particle traces.

Each human has the choice to pursue and benefit from the-objective-truth as the path to the-literal-truth or not. In other words, he or she may accept HIPEA and either pursue integrity to the-literal-truth or rely on individual reason to decide his or her behavior.

Human equality seems the opportunity to choose two acceptances: HIPEA (human individual power, energy, and authority), equitable as it may be, and the-literal-truth, unknown as it may be.

On the combined choice, humans diversify. Civic humans do not lie so as to lessen both individual and collective loss and misery. Equitable societies and associations encourage members to practice civic humanity.

https://www.quora.com/Should-aliens-or-even-illegal-aliens-be-allowed-to-vote-in-any-elections?

Fellow citizens who neither trust-in nor commit-to the U.S. Preamble’s proposition should be allowed to vote.

About 2400 years ago, Greek thinkers suggested, in my interpretation, 1) someone who wants human equity aids statutory justice and 2) the appreciative human neither initiates nor tolerates harm to or from any person.

The person who does not accept and practice these two principles may anticipate neither equity nor security.

The U.S. Preamble offers fellow citizens a civic, civil, and legal agreement they may consider or not, trust-in and commit-to for civic order or not, interpret to order their individual civic life or not. Whether by neglect or by intention, the fellow citizen who ignores the U.S. preamble’s proposition risks lawful constraint if harm he or she caused is discovered.

My interpretation of the U.S. Preamble is critical to my way of living and no other:  We the People of the United States communicate, collaborate, and connect to aid 5 public disciplines---integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity (original nouns “Union . . . Justice . . . Tranquility . . . defence . . . Welfare,” in order to accept the benefits of responsible human liberty to living citizens.

Aliens to responsible human liberty ought not be allowed to vote.



https://www.quora.com/Is-it-really-that-bad-if-you-do-not-want-to-contribute-to-society-in-any-way?

About 2400 years ago, Greek thinkers suggested, in my opinion, 1) someone who wants human equity aids statutory justice and 2) the appreciative human neither initiates nor tolerates harm to or from any person.

The person who does not accept and practice these two principles may anticipate neither equity nor security.

There is more, but that is a start.

Law professors

https://www.lawliberty.org/2018/11/16/aristotle-and-the-seriousness-of-politics from January 2019

To Maximus:

Taking the hubris to think “this man” is me, I reject symbols of force.

The U.S. Preamble offers fellow citizens a civic, civil, and legal agreement they may consider or not, trust-in and commit-to for civic order or not, interpret to order their individual civic life or not. Whether by neglect or by intention, the fellow citizen who ignores the U.S. preamble’s proposition risks lawful constraint if harm he or she caused is discovered.

My interpretation of the U.S. Preamble is critical to my way of living and no other:  We the People of the United States communicate, collaborate, and connect to aid 5 public disciplines---integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity (original nouns “Union . . . Justice . . . Tranquility . . . defence . . . Welfare,” in order to accept the benefits of responsible human liberty to living citizens.

I speak, write, and meet to present my interpretation of the U.S. Preamble so as to learn from fellow citizens how to improve the interpretation and my civic behavior.

Fellow citizen

https://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/letters/article_dede8994-ef8a-11e9-bd67-e3f6530f32bd.html

“. . . when she asked an elder in that church why they felt such hatred, she was told that they were expressing love.”

Michael Jinkins may have never encountered John 15:18-23, especially V. 23. It’s the Apostle’s John’s hate message to “God’s people” who are not elected by whatever-God-is. That is, all but the ones who believe the Jesus that the Catholic Church canonized in 405 AD to express their particular mystery of whatever-God-is.

I’d be interested in Jinkins’ and other fellow citizens’ opinions about that passage.

To JT McQuitty:

It’s a matter of personal awareness. In about my 13th year of weekly worship in both my Baptist Church and my family's Catholic Church and supporting our three children's catechism, I recognized that the parishioners’ words in the liturgy of the mass may inculcate, especially with transubstantiation, that only Catholics benefit from the mystery of whatever-God-is. The Baptist distinction seems to be choosing baptism by emersion.

I was concerned about “God’s people” (http://www.usccb.org/prayer-and-worship/the-mass/order-of-mass/liturgy-of-the-eucharist/) and asked the children to attend Baptist Sunday School and Church with me until they felt they understood the two practices and wanted to choose for themselves.

There were a few observations. Some of the Baptists were public-school classmates, but could not get over the belief that my children were Catholics. When the Lord’s Supper was served in Remembrance, my children asked if they should participate, and I erroneously said yes, “If you feel you should, as usual.” I had to take that back when I read that some Baptist opinion would hold me in contempt. The experience increased my commitment to not go to communion with my family. The last straw came when a Baptist erroneously claimed that Confirmation is not a sacrament, meaning my children would burn in hell because they had not been baptized by adolescent/adult emersion instead of sprinkling in infancy followed by adolescent affirmation.

One Sunday, my children asked for a family meeting at the kitchen table. Stephen was the spokesperson, and he said, “Dad, we have decided not to attend Sunday school. We are Catholics.”

They were surprised when I said, “OK. Thank you for your time and consideration.” Not long after that, I accepted my trust-in and commitment-to the-literal-truth, which humankind may approach by accepting the-objective-truth---the ineluctable evidence by which truth may be measured.



I am eternally grateful for my Louisiana-French-Catholic wife’s confident-serenity and our children’s confidence and for helping me discover my person. I am also grateful to my Baptist mom and dad, who somehow encouraged my sincerity toward the-literal-truth, often unknown yet discoverable as it may be.

To Citizens United For Good Morals Commands and love [John 15:10] are not that difficult for me. But hate, as in John 12:25, is what turns me against the thinkers who canonized the NT in 405 AD. I don't trust their work.

And John is not alone in alienating me. I cannot brook Luke 14:26, whether from an ancient medicine man or from interpretation as "desperate love" by a modern apologist.

To Citizens United For Good Morals, again. I disagree. Only Jesus can define a Christian, and no two Christians have the same explanation for the mystery of whatever-God-is.

My children did not agree with my Baptist peers that my children are going to burn in hell because they never did submit to baptism by emersion.

I agree with my children and accept that Jesus agrees with our family and not the Baptists who think as they do. My Louisiana-French-Catholic wife, in her faith, taught me to accept serene confidence in the-literal-truth, whatever it is.

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.