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
equity: For discussion, I convert the
preamble’s predicate phrases to nouns and paraphrase it for my interpretation
of its proposal as follows: “We the People of the United States consider,
communicate, collaborate, and connect to practice 5 public disciplines:
integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity so as to encourage both
living fellow citizens and future citizens to take advantage of responsible
human independence.” I want to improve my interpretation by listening to other
citizens and their interpretations yet would preserve the original, 1787, text,
unless it is amended by the people.
It seems the
Supreme Court occasionally refers to it, and 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.
DUE TO UPTICK IN VIRUS REPORTS, THIS MEETING IS POSTPONED BY EBRP LIBRARIES
Selected theme from this week
Announcing Responsible Human
Independence Day 2020
Soon, we’ll host our 7th
annual commemoration of 1788 when 9 of 12 represented states ratified the draft
U.S. Constitution and its U.S. Preamble. Recent discoveries position us to
promote the U.S. Preamble’s proposition for practice by government officials as
civic citizens. In other words, elected and appointed fellow citizens in local,
state, and federal offices either self-discipline to the U.S. Preamble rather
than to British-American precedent or other alien principle; or get fired by
The Civic Citizens of the United States.
The meeting on June 25, 2020, at
EBRP Main Library, 7711 Goodwood Blvd, Study Room 2D from 6:30 PM until 7:30 PM
is limited to 10 people including me. If more people want to participate, we
can mutually schedule another meeting. This year’s title is “Responsible Human
Independence Day,” and we’d like June 21 to be a national holiday of more
domestic interest than the 4th of July’s National Independence Day.
Key discoveries, controversial on
introduction yet well-grounded in historical events, include:
1. In
the preamble’s dependent-predicate object “to ourselves and our Posterity,” our
generation is the “ourselves” to coming generations. It’s in the citizen’s
self-interest and descendant-responsibility to discover and practice his or her
civic, civil, and legal preamble-interpretation. The preamble leaves religious/spiritual
pursuits to privacy.
2. The
word “blessings” expresses advantages, responsibilities, acceptance, and affirmation
of being a human citizen. Arbitrarily rejecting the rule of law denies human-citizenship.
3. The
word “independence” offers civic clarity whereas “liberty” is often
misappropriated as “license.” The phrase “responsible human independence”
seems more coherent than “responsible human liberty.” Among a
crowd that is harming property or people for egocentric liberty/rights, the
civic citizen has the psychological independence to leave. “License to leave” implies
permission from the harmful group.
4. None
of the phrases in the U.S. Preamble specify standards, implying that
posterity’s posterity discovers ultimate reforms so that We the People of the
United States, led by Civic Citizens of the United States, continually
approaches statutory justice. Civic Citizens of the United States does not know
how well its society can serve citizens under posterity’s future excellence.
5. The
U.S. Preamble proposes discipline-and-purpose of by and for living citizens ending
unjust colonial British-American traditions. It accepts the global independence
won in 1781 and ratified in 1784 to 13 free and independent states. Furthermore,
it offers U.S. citizens opportunity to develop equity under statutory justice
rather than preserve English-traditional power over U.S. citizens.
6. “The
people,” “self-rule” and other “Western” fallacies preserve a 17th-18th
century European “us versus them” attitude; or “the people versus government.” Reform
to Civic Citizens of the United States can come from fellow citizens who accept
being human with intent to develop integrity rather than to tolerate injustice.
7. The
55 framers of the 1787 U.S. Constitution were not “founding fathers” or in any
way an extension of the bloody revolutions for liberty of the period 1688 in
England to 1774 in colonial British-America to 1789 in France. Instead, the
framers designed and specified a system of domestic government under discipline
by current families so as to secure independence in perpetuity. Some representatives
were dissidents to the Constitution: only 39 framers were signers, leaving 16
dissidents. So far, Congress has held U.S.-potential hostage to
British-American tradition.
8. Revising
the subject to "Civic Citizens of the United States" clarifies that
the U.S. is not a utopia with no need to develop statutory justice. It seems there
will always be people who think infidelity is sufficiently rewarding to their
persons.
9. The
capitalization of “Posterity” instructs me that the Committee of Style accepted
that, in my interpretation, parents cannot imagine the actual-realities their children,
the next generation, will face and therefore parents and the Civic Citizens of
the United States are prudent to encourage and coach the children unto
self-discipline for integrity rather than instruct them in false human
constructs.
These and prior discoveries from our six years are the basis of my June 2020 interpretation of the U.S. Preamble’s proposition: Civic Citizens of the United States continually develop and practice 5 domestic disciplines---integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity---in order to encourage to living citizens responsible human independence. [On 6/6/2020, thinking there would be no future discoveries, I perceived the clarity of “Civic Citizens” instead of “We the People.” Yet, as always, I preserve the original words so as to accept each citizen’s personal interpretation by which to order civic, civil, and legal living while preserving individual religious/spiritual fidelity. The U.S. Preamble’s proposition offers voluntary self-interest as each citizen views it or not.]
We look forward to discussing
your interpretations of the U.S. Preamble so I may improve my civic, civil, and
legal way of living. We want to accelerate aid to an achievable better future
in the USA.
We hope you attend the world’s
first Responsible Human Independence Day and that as a consequence of your aid
the 2021 event will be celebrated by EBR Parish and beyond. We hope the
intentions and practice the U.S. Preamble’s proposition accelerates in a matter
of months to at least 2/3 of members of every responsible association in the
U.S., including the Supreme Courts, state and federal.
Copyright©2020 by Phillip R. Beaver. All rights
reserved. Permission is hereby granted for the publication of all or portions
of this paper as long as this complete copyright notice is included.
Quora
I think so.
The person who realizes that he or she must earn the living
he or she wants and does so with civic integrity sets an example of the
self-interest in rejecting infidelity.
The person who observes that Maslow’s hierarchy of needs can be used as a hierarchy of self-discipline and lives accordingly may be un-heralded, but will have influenced many fellow citizens to develop integrity.
The person who observes that Maslow’s hierarchy of needs can be used as a hierarchy of self-discipline and lives accordingly may be un-heralded, but will have influenced many fellow citizens to develop integrity.
Nelson presents weak arguments from the first paragraph to
the last.
Quoting the article, “We abhor the reality that some would
deny others respect and the most basic of freedoms because of the color of his
or her skin.”
Nelson expressed blatant assumption. Police actions have
many motivations. Fellow citizens must accept that they are human beings and
therefore are expected to behave for equity under statutory justice. Criminals
create the need for justice and first response to crime.
The human acceptance includes Mormon saints. In other words,
Mormons are in no position to “deny others respect . . . because” the others
are non-Christians or non-theists.
Again, quoting, “I plead with us to work together for peace,
for mutual respect, and for an outpouring of love for all of God’s children.”
Humankind must include the fellow citizens who were chosen
by whatever-God-is to not believe Jesus is God. See John 15:18-23 to understand
my statement. Mormon saints can exclude themselves from humankind but nevertheless
must observe the rule of law.
First, “the people” is a distraction from “fellow citizens”
and fosters “the people versus government” attitude. Even more importantly,
civic citizens develop equity under statutory justice. It seems there will
always be dissidents to justice.
Nicolo Machiavelli wrote, I think in irony about the ways
government can pick its citizens’ pockets in “The Prince,” 1513. See https://www.gutenberg.org/files/1232/1232-h/1232-h.htm.
In Chapter XI, he explains the church-state-partnership,
saying that the clergy and politicians can live high on the hog and the
citizens will neither rebel nor leave, each believing that his personal God
will eventually relieve the tyranny. Through hiring congressional chaplains,
“freedom of religion” as specified in the First Amendment, the religious oath
“so help me [whatever-God-is to me],” and other religious expenditures, the
U.S. operates Chapter XI Machiavellianism while claiming separation of church
and state.
The U.S. Preamble offers a civic, civil, and legal
proposition for fellow citizens to hold local, state, and federal government
officials accountable to the 5 disciplines and 1 purpose stated therein.
However, the entity We the People of the United States ignore the Chapter XI
Machiavellianism.
I think we are at the abyss and have the opportunity to
ascend to American discipline under the U.S. Preamble rather than continue
under British-American psychology. Fellow citizens can accelerate the reform by
revising the First Amendment so as to encourage integrity leaving spirituality
as a private interest if any.
I agree with you. The human condition requires acceptance of
human responsibility. Civic humans behave for equity under statutory justice.
There will always be humans who develop the belief that infidelity pays, and
civic humans have the responsibility and self-interest to constrain the
dissidents to justice and encourage them to reform.
After my dad, Ralph Waldo Emerson inspired “Self Reliance.”
See https://archive.vcu.edu/english/engweb/transcendentalism/authors/emerson/essays/selfreliance.html.
I did not discover “Divinity School Address” (American
underground literature) before I was so indoctrinated I could not accept for 2
decades of occasional re-reading that RWE was saying that Jesus is a man, and
the Church obfuscated Jesus’ message by making him a God. See https://archive.vcu.edu/english/engweb/transcendentalism/authors/emerson/essays/dsa.html.
Which
philosopher first challenged you?
There is so much to know! My view is that it’s the
consequence of some 8 trillion person-years of experiences and observations now
expanding exponentially.
It takes at least 3 decades from infancy to acquire the
comprehension and intent to live a complete human life in service to family,
civic fellow citizens, and self, preferably in a profession of individual
interest and aptitude.
Once gamely employed, the individual may pursue expansion of
general knowledge as an avocation, perhaps changing jobs occasionally to
broaden experiences and observations. Family and personal welfare come first.
A first task is to narrow the field of personal interest.
Find a list of 100 greatest books you prefer and read them as fast as possible.
Take notes in an organized way, using Word or other software that can be
searched on key words. Take some courses online and at university, both free
and at full cost. I participated in the Great Books Reading and Discussion
Program for 5 years.
After about 15 years, I felt my interest was in two major
areas: 1) what does it mean to be a human being and 2) what does it mean to be
a U.S. citizen? Once I knew that was my interest, I read randomly, selecting
authors learned from current reading. Eventually, I chose historical documents
as better sources than books or articles about those documents.
For example, by reading the South Carolina Declaration of
Secession you gain the suggestion that the U.S. Civil War was motivated by an
erroneous religious belief; see Declaration of
the Immediate Causes Which Induce and Justify the Secession of South Carolina
from the Federal Union. R.E. Lee’s letter to his wife, suggest that
it’s a Christian error; see Letter
from Robert E. Lee to Mary Randolph Custis Lee (December 27, 1856).
Christians who believed in slavery considered Christian abolitionists evil and
wanted to kill them.
Most of all, to explore the-literal-truth requires an open
mind, which is difficult to obtain and maintain. For example, it took me two
decades of occasional re-reading to accept that Ralph Waldo Emerson asserted
that Jesus was a man and that the Church destroyed Jesus’s message by making
him a God; see EMERSON
- ESSAYS - DIVINITY SCHOOL ADDRESS.
Each time you are curious, research your topic until you can
explain it. For example, the sun will not come up tomorrow; rather, the earth’s
rotation will un-hide the sun.
While most people accuse President Donald Trump of lying, I
marvel at his humility in protecting the entity We the People of the United
States from internal and external---domestic and foreign---aliens. I read
Matthew 7:6 CJB often and still do not comprehend Trump’s brilliance in
protecting me and you.
The advice to never talk politics or religion is grounded in
indoctrination. I see it as dissidence toward the U.S. Preamble’s proposition:
domestic discipline of by and for living citizens so as to develop individual,
responsible human-independence.
I prefer self-reliance rather than conformity to assure my
opportunity to develop integrity rather than tolerate infidelity toward
the-literal-truth.
For example, if someone tells me my soul will burn in hell
because I obviously do not agree with their religious doctrine, I ask, “Are you
certain?”
Usually, the other party does not take the question, but if
they do, I am prepared to witness to personal humility toward whatever-God-is
rather than tolerate my hubris/folly to turn my back again. I don’t know
the-literal-truth.
The person who is psychologically mature should prevail.
By psychologically mature I mean open minded to both
external and internal constraints and able to choose and act on integrity
rather than infidelity to the-literal-truth.
For example, even though most citizens pray to God, the
mature person seeks hope and comfort with sufficient appreciation for
whatever-God-is. With this perspective, the mature person does not fault a
fellow citizen who has not yet recognized that whatever-God-is may not
appreciate his or her personal God.
By integrity, I mean preserving the infantile “What’s that?”
unto maturity as “I don’t know.” In other words, the person is comfortable with
publically stating “I don’t know,” when that is so. If the person has exhausted
personal studies to learn and earned an opinion, it is good to share the
opinion then clarify with “But I don’t know.”
For example, to the question, “Can a human being change his
or her gender? I respond, “Given a wonderful life to live, it is not prudent to
embark against the laws of physics and its progeny---such as mathematics,
chemistry, biology, and psychology. I would not encourage anyone to do so.” On
the other hand, I don’t know enough to try to constrain someone who intends to
responsibly try to change gender.
I encourage responsible-human-independence. The hyphens are
intended to express a singularity.
H.S. Overstreet’s book, The Mature Mind, 1949, is on my list
of best books for good living.
As absolute, I don’t know how to argue no.
However, the miniscule of good in some humans is expendable.
That is, it’s OK to execute the worst and imprison-for-life the un-worst.
The questions of more urgent concern are: Has anyone developed sufficient integrity?
And is anyone developing integrity?
I think the preamble to the U.S. Constitution abstractly
proposes development of integrity. In my view, it proposes 5 domestic
disciplines in order to encourage responsible human independence to living and
future citizens---“ourselves and our Posterity.” It specifies no standards for
the disciplines or for human independence, implying that posterity’s posterity
may approach statutory justice in the rule of law. Excluding
spirituality/religion from the domestic disciplines assigns any interest to
privacy.
The First Congress repressed the U.S. Preamble by hiring Congressional
chaplains and ratifying the First Amendment’s “freedom of religion” rather than
opportunity for integrity.
After 233 years of neglect, We the People of the United
States may embrace the U.S. Preamble’s disciplines of by and for fellow
citizens’ self-interest. This can only be accomplished by fellow citizens who
want individual happiness with civic integrity rather than infidelity.
So the question is: Are there enough individual citizens who
want responsible human independence; enough to develop the entity We the People
of the United States as a national supermajority?
Albert
Einstein expressed, in my view, that integrity and physics with its
progeny---such as mathematics, chemistry, biology, psychology, and
imagination---come from the same source and conform to the same laws. As
humankind discovers integrity, the-literal-truth, may be journaled as ethics.
So
far, western thought is self-constrained to justifying Lockean theism and such thought,
repressing acceptance of Einstein’s political philosophy. Einstein helped
obfuscate his thoughts by writing about science and religion instead of physics
and integrity, perhaps to “write for the audience.”
I focus on my family including myself, our friends, and our
city and state. I occasionally write an email to the president on https://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/.
Otherwise, I read, write, and communicate to promote
widespread use of the preamble to the U.S. Constitution in order to encourage
civic, civil, and legal public living (privately, with the individual
opportunity to develop interest in whatever-God-is according to personal
preference).
My wife’s Louisiana French-Catholic faith is essential to me for her, and my children’s faiths are essential to me for them. Through them I learned that my trust-in and commitment-to the-literal-truth is important to me. Approaching my ninth decade---that is, in my late seventies---I readily say “I don’t know,” when that is so.
My wife’s Louisiana French-Catholic faith is essential to me for her, and my children’s faiths are essential to me for them. Through them I learned that my trust-in and commitment-to the-literal-truth is important to me. Approaching my ninth decade---that is, in my late seventies---I readily say “I don’t know,” when that is so.
When a fellow citizen tells me my soul is doomed because I
do not think as they do, I ask, “Are you certain?”
Fortunately, you are not alone and may accept
the-actual-reality, which I do not know. That is, I think it is prudent to
declare that I do not know what I do not know, yet I need to earn opinion.
It’s important to accept personal presence among humankind.
If so, there are some additional acceptances that are in the individual’s
self-interest. Most of them were recognized by a Greek or other thinkers before
Christ and some before Abraham.
For example, from 2400 years ago, my views of some Greek opinions
about perhaps older concepts follow. First, a civic citizen behaves to develop
equity under statutory justice. Second, a civic citizen neither initiates nor
tolerates harm to or from a person or association. Third, a civic citizen
encourages fellow citizens to discipline for human justice. Fourth,
whatever-God-is assigned responsible human independence to the person.
In America, a proposition that seems consistent with the
above principles is offered in the preamble to the U.S. Constitution (the U.S.
Preamble). Citizens who do not consider the preamble and personally interpret
it in order to understand civic citizenship may consider themselves aliens to
We the People of the United States as defined therein. Passivity leaves
development of statutory justice to others and therefore is not in the
individual’s self-interest.
The first abstract phrase to consider may be “ourselves and
our Posterity.” Living families of 2020 are perhaps the 12 generation of 1787’s
posterity and “ourselves” to the coming generations including the families’ descendants.
Because so many U.S. citizens do not want to consider the
U.S. Preamble’s proposition, we are developing 30 trillion dollars for our
posterity to pay. I read and write to promote use of the U.S. Preamble.
Mostly no to homelessness and yes to unable. Practice the
U.S. Preamble’s proposition to reform.
Humans begin as a unique ovum that is fertilized by a unique
spermatozoon. Neither conception of the single-cell embryo nor subsequent
developments lessen the person’s uniqueness.
Most young adults accept being human and recognize that
their first obligation to their person is to earn the lifestyle he or she
wants. Some people are incapable and others are so averse to discipline that
they don’t own a home or rent.
Homelessness in each case should be treated according to the
cause. The incapable should be supported until they accept capability or not.
The averse should be rehabilitated until they accept being human or not. In
neither case should society sacrifice its own viability.
So far, the U.S. has not created an education system that
steadily reduces the portions of the population that is either incapable-of or
averse-to discipline. The preamble to the U.S. Constitution offers a suitable
proposition, but so far, it has been sacrificed to the church-state partnership
the First Congress unconstitutionally initiated. The preamble proposes 5 public
disciplines that consign religion/spirituality to privacy rather than civic,
civil, and legal purposes.
Each citizen may either consider the abstract preamble and
interpret or dismiss it. My view of the preamble’s proposition is: We the People of the United States practice 5
public disciplines---integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity---in
order to encourage responsible human independence.
Some capable people like dependence and some dependent
people want independence. With a supermajority of citizens who attend to the
preamble’s proposition instead of the church-state partnership, in an
achievable better future is available. Under public discipline for responsible
human independence, the proportions of both capable and incapable dependence
would lessen.
I think so maybe one at a time or together.
And it’s important to consider competing opinion with
appreciation for the-literal-truth, TLT; in other words, actual-reality: discovered,
ineluctable evidence or the-objective-truth, ToT. With best instruments of
perception, ToT may approach TLT.
Perhaps take the view “I don’t know, but here’s what I
recall,” emphasizing what happened-to you more than what others did-to you. When
someone feels you are indicting them, it is difficult to learn their opinion.
Some suggestions by the Greeks over 2,400 years ago are
worth interpreting.
First, civic citizens aid equity under statutory justice,
SJ. SJ is the perfection of written law, which may be developed by correcting
injustice when it is discovered. Since every human is unique and develops either
integrity or infidelity on personal decisions, statutory justice can only serve
equity.
Second, the civic citizen neither initiates nor tolerates
harm to or from fellow citizens or their responsible societies. The victim of
real harm is obligated to carefully consider the incident and accurately
describe it so as to inform the offender that harm was done. To avoid
initiating harm, perhaps describe the offense and allow the other party to
evaluate the harm under your benefit of doubt as to who caused it.
Letting the pain fester for 2 years is an unintentional
harm. An incident so long ago with no impact on the offender may not even be
recallable. However, continuing to harbor the offense only adds to the harm, so
address it softly. The other party may recall the situation and offer
information that helps you understand the real cause of pain. If you kindly share
your feelings with the actual offender trusting them to resolve the offense,
you will have done your best to aid development of his or her integrity.
In other words, let the sharing of your reaction to the
incident be both sharing and forgiveness. Let the offending party accept the
forgiveness if or when they admit to guilt.
Law professors
“Antifa embodies the revolutionary outlook” reminds me of
two histories. First, the period 1688, to 1774, through 1789 promoted liberty
as license to let blood flow. A more civic idea is responsible human independence.
Second, anarchism reminds me of Alinsky-Marxist organizations, AMO, who
tolerate violence when their rights are threatened according to their
democracy.
Borrowing Smith’s words, “The philosophical [consequence] of
the Framers’ constitutionalism is that . . . the larger society . . . as each individual[,]
must struggle to impose discipline . . .” The framers’ Committee of Style abstractly
captured this profound recognition in the preamble. In my view: We the People of the United States practice 5
self-disciplines---integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity---in
order to promote responsible human independence to living citizens.
Additionally, the Committee of Style realized that posterity
could accomplish what their generation could not, so the object of the
dependent predicates is “ourselves and our Posterity.” Further, they did not
suggest standards for the 5 public disciplines or the purpose, implying that
posterity’s posterity might approach statutory justice or perfectly written
law-enforcement. Our generation is “ourselves” to the coming generation, and we
have the privilege of establishing the American pursuit of justice instead of
British-American tradition.
Let’s get started. A good first step is to amend the First
Amendment so as to protect integrity (based on ineluctable evidence) rather
than religion (based on mystery). There is no justice in government turning its
back on whatever-God-is in order to impose a doctrinal God on fellow citizens.
Phil
Beaver does not “know.” He trusts in and is committed to the-objective-truth which
can only be discovered. Conventional wisdom has truth founded on reason, but it
obviously does not work.
Phil is agent
for A Civic People of the United States, a Louisiana, education non-profit
corporation. See online at promotethepreamble.blogspot.com, and consider essays
from the latest and going back as far as you like.
No comments:
Post a Comment