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 interpretation of its proposal as follows: ”A civic citizen of the
United States practices 5 public disciplines (integrity, justice, peace,
strength, and prosperity) in order to enjoy
responsible human independence with
fellow citizens.” 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.
Selected theme from this week
Approaching serene confidence
On July 4, I shared online my view of the preamble,
developed slowly during 2 decades then rapidly on leading, now in the 7th
year, library meetings to promote its proposition. I appreciate input from over
70 fellow citizens. I recently revised to “Civic citizens of the United States maintain
5 public disciplines to encourage responsible human independence.”
A British person, I think a woman, disparaged my statement
as a fantasy, because the U.S. doesn’t practice my interpretation let alone
care. Thinking that a Brit cannot possibly comprehend the preamble’s offer, I
responded that an achievable better future is no fantasy.
But thinking overnight, I realized that the plural made my
statement false: I do not know that one other person would agree with my
interpretation. It was a milestone experience for me: I stopped preaching to
simply accept my interpretation for me: A civic citizen of the United States
practices 5 public disciplines (integrity, justice, peace, strength, and
prosperity) in order to enjoy responsible human independence with fellow
citizens.
The Brit still holds my statement to be a fantasy but did
not reject my appreciation for the dialogue. I no longer feel compelled to
preach the proffered U.S. preamble and still hope U.S. inhabitants take
interest.
Columns
Overlooking the
dignity and equity due the ovum and the spermatozoon (David Mushatt) (https://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/letters/article_585f3208-bd5f-11ea-b6f9-0be64c8da331.html)
David Mushatt’s letter to fellow citizens is great. After a
friend called to check on us, we added removing shoes at the entrance to our
home. Also, we disinfect upright appliances as well as counter tops. We don’t
want anyone to suffer the horrors we have read about.
On the other hand, my opinion is that Kennedy’s famous
statement is un-American and extends political regimes’ intentional distraction
from the preamble to the U.S. Constitution. Whatever your interpretation of the
preamble may be, I’d like to consider it so as to improve mine: A civic citizen practices 5 public
disciplines (integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity) “in order to”
encourage responsible human independence to living U.S. inhabitants.
The discipline for responsible independence is in each
person’s self-interest. If 2/3 of citizens practice the U.S. Preamble’s
proposition for “ourselves and our Posterity” as each perceives the
proposition, they will be holding governments---local, state, and
national---accountable to the U.S. Preamble.
We the People of the United States is a worthy goal that can
be approached if 2/3 of citizens behave in self-interest according to
the-literal-truth. For example, carelessness with coronavirus can kill, and the
victim will be near you at some moment.
Integrity was as obviously a self-interest in 1960 as it is
in 2020. The U.S. citizen who does not develop his or her interpretation of the
U.S. Preamble begs the woe political regimes have maintained since March 4,
1789, when the First Congress, with 11 member-states, began to establish
Anglo-American tradition (Canterbury-Parliament common good) to repress the
U.S. Preamble’s Americanism: individual discipline for independence.
I encourage fellow citizens to practice their interpretation
of the preamble and to hold government accountable for ending Anglo-American
tradition in order to establish mutual, comprehensive safety and security in
the USA.
Overlooking the
dignity and equity due the ovum and the spermatozoon (Angie Thomas) (https://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/article_351ee54e-c125-11ea-8c1c-8f52bd1a6f1e.html)
“Common ground: a thing that seems rarer and rarer these
days.” The question is, do most woman include their viable ova in the “common
ground?”
The origin of a human is the viable ovum that is fertilized
by a viable spermatozoon. Each cell is unique, and their combination into a
single-cell is a unique embryo. The subsequent events that lead to a person do
not reduce his or her uniqueness. However, the starting conditions and every
subsequent event is critical to his or her potential for a successful human
lifetime. No one wants another human to live a lifetime without appreciation.
The conception’s potential for success is unique. However,
events can ruin his or her pursuit of his or her complete human life. No
institution guarantees life, liberty, property, or opportunity for happiness.
Both the church and the Court have erred in the exclusion of
the ovum and the spermatozoon from “common ground.” The question is, what is
the meaning of common ground? John Locke (d. 1704) thought he knew, and Thomas
Jefferson (d. 1826) thought he knew better. People mistakenly discount Albert
Einstein (d. 1955), who claimed that physics and psychology conform to the same
laws.
Einstein’s words did not aid comprehension. He spoke to
scholars who were debating “science” and “ethics.” See
https://samharris.org/my-friend-einstein/. Science is research to discover
ineluctable evidence, and ethics journals the discovery of integrity. Physics
and its progeny---mathematics, chemistry, and imagination---conform to the same
laws.
The 5 members of the Committee of Style and the 39 of 55
delegates who signed the draft U.S. Constitution in 1787 comprehended what
Einstein tacitly articulated in 1941 when they wrote that the civic, civil, and
legal system being created was for “ourselves and our Posterity.” In 2020,
that’s living families, their direct descendants, and future legal-immigrants.
At any moment in a family-unit’s life, the viable ova and
the viable spermatozoon are the family’s potential posterity, and the woman and
the man ought to be assuring personal and spousal well-being according to the
laws of physics---ought to fulfill their obligations to the dignity and equity
of their progeny. Government ought to encourage men and women, especially those
who deviate from physics, to take heed of the dignity and equity of gametes as
well as of conceptions.
When we observe lawyers, judges, legislators,
administrators, and citizens speaking of common grounds as physics and its
progeny rather than Anglo-American precedent we may perceive that We the People
of the United States may survive.
I hope this U.S. reform accelerates over the next few weeks;
if not, months; if not, years. If decades, it may be too late.
Same obsolete,
upside-down scholarly pursuits (The Advocate) (https://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/our_views/article_c97747a0-bfcb-11ea-8350-078bed808862.html)
It seems this program
unfortunately aims to push Alinsky-Marxist organization (AMO) to higher social
status and thus begs more woe rather than development of statutory justice (a
U.S. goal).
U.S. Education
Departments at all levels may reform by developing human acceptances plainly
grounded in discovered-literal-truth rather than human reason, construct, or
revelation.
The newborn baby
starts with the curiosity “what’s that?” or future equivalent “I don’t know.”
It takes at least 3 decades of open-minded learning for the baby to transition
to a young adult with comprehension and intention to develop a complete human
life---physically. It takes perhaps 8-9 decades and psychological adulthood,
yet, perhaps never approaching freedom from both internal and external
constraints. Some people never surpass psychological adolescence (Overstreet,
“The Mature Mind,” 1949).
The adolescent who
accepted that the world is in confused conflict perhaps takes charge of his or
her learning and accepts that the human being possesses the individual power,
the individual energy, and the individual authority (HIPEA) to behave so as to
develop integrity, both in self-interest and in encouraging fellow citizens to
avoid infidelity.
The adult who develops
integrity neither initiates nor tolerates harm to or from any person or their
responsible institutions. She or he is aware of her or his culture’s acceptance
of integrity and behaves so as to encourage reform where infidelity prevails.
According to these
principles, culture/civilization owes fellow citizens the opportunity to aid
the development of mutual, comprehensive safety and security (hereafter SECURITY)
with integrity. Beyond the opportunity to develop integrity, there’s little
fellow citizens can do for the individual citizen: neither persuasion nor
coercion dictates to a person who, knowingly or not, practices HIPEA. For
example, too often liberty is taken to be license to destroy a fellow citizen’s
property or peace. And institutions try to impose the happiness they perceive
for individuals rather than provide the SECURITY the individual needs to
responsibly pursue the happiness he or she perceives. Fellow citizens cannot
guarantee life. The mature adult, like the baby, says, "I don't
know," when that is so.
The official who wants
credentials for these principles might examine individual self-reliance's value
to integrity. Proprietary approval rarely comes without coercion. Integrity is
a self-interest route to responsible human independence.
Quora
I am a unique human being: you are a unique human being.
Neither of us can be persuaded to think something or someone can make us equal.
We each have the individual power, the individual energy,
and the individual authority (HIPEA) to aid equity under statutory justice.
A civic citizen practices these principles even though she
or he may not articulate them. The motivation is mutual, comprehensive safety
and security. Thereby, the individual may responsibly pursue the happiness she
or he perceives rather than submit to the happiness someone else might impose.
This is the culture of responsible human independence with
civic integrity that is proffered in the preamble to the U.S. Constitution.
Without comprehending the phrases “for the truth” and “to
the truth” I can’t get a sound start. I’d like to answer in my language and
hope you will comment wherein I write confusion.
The-literal-truth exits, and humankind works to discover and
take advantage of what is extant. There are five major divisions of understanding:
discernment, discovery, comprehension, and practice. Discernment is objective
to ineluctable evidence, and is often improved by the latter three activities.
At any moment, the product of this process is the-objective-truth, which is
destined to change on invention of new perception and may ultimately approach
the-literal-truth.
With this introduction, let me restate and see if I
understood your question: Does
continually improved perception of the ineluctable evidence
(the-objective-truth) inevitably approach the-literal-truth?
I appreciate your concern and think we can understand
statutory justice, in other words, civic integrity, better than our ancestors
could, because we benefit from exponentially more discovery. However, we have
not yet accepted the standard to which we must conform: physics and its progeny
rather than reason or revelation.
John Locke (d. 1704) thought life, liberty and property were
human rights, and Thomas Jefferson (d. 1826) thought pursuit of happiness
included property. They each supported the license (liberty) to take fellow
citizens lives, property, and happiness. Franklin Roosevelt (d. 1945) proposed
freedom-of speech and worship and freedom–from want and fear (preposterous
ideas). People mistakenly discount Albert Einstein (d. 1955), who suggested
that physics and psychology conform to the same laws. In other words, by
discovering the laws of physics (physics the object rather than the research)
and applying discovery-comprehension for transparent human benefit, we may
establish and maintain mutual, comprehensive safety and security.
However, in 2020 too many inhabitants don’t have a clue as
to observable past mistakes let alone 2020 errors. For example, it is easily discernable,
from Frederick Douglass’s 1852 July 5 speech, Bleeding Kansas in 1856, R. E.
Lee’s letter to his wife in December, 1856, the CSA’s declaration of secession,
and President Lincoln’s inaugural speeches, that the civic war came about from
enmity between white-Christians whose ministers preached slavery as God’s plan
to redeem blacks and white-Christian abolitionists.
Political regimes bemuse inhabitants with Anglo-American
politics in order to hide the lessen to be learned: the purpose of Christianity
is encouraging the spiritual discipline so as to guarantee that Jesus will not
lose one soul God has given Jesus. When a Christian uses Christianity for
political power, he or she begs woe, and woe comes in its own time and
severity.
I think “moral” is an erroneous, misleading idea. What
inhabitants need is integrity to an independent standard. The standard the
church-state-partnership cannot tolerate is physics and its progeny. Once 2/3
of inhabitants accept that standard under the-literal-truth, there’ll be a
culture based on the acceptance “We don’t’ know” when in actual reality we do
not know.
No (my opinion). What are you thinking?
People tend to read the Holy Bible as the word of
whatever-God-is rather than as practical observations kindly shared by ancient coercive
persons. For example, Mark 5:1-20 illustrates the folly of crowd action as
2,000 pigs rush in to a lake and drown. Sheep are known to jump off a cliff in
mass; https://www.thetimesnews.com/article/20140801/Business/308019819#:~:text=%E2%80%9CFirst%20one%20sheep%20jumped%20to%20its%20death.&text=In%20the%20end%2C%20450%20dead,rest%20of%20the%20flock%20followed.%E2%80%9D,
but for reasons I do not know, no Bible-writer I can cite related a destructive
sheep story. If they had, the story of the lost sheep might be viewed as the
shepherd’s work to prevent the 99 from following the one. In fact,
A person can help verify self-interest by discussing plans
with other people and listening-to and considering their ideas. For example, I
cured myself of wondering if religion would always be with us when one of my
favorite conversationalists said, “Why, the very idea! I want religion even if you
think it’s divisive.” Or, more recently, an English citizen called my view of
“Civic citizens of the United States” a fantasy. I reacted by changing a
decades-old practice to expressing for “A civic citizen of the United States.”
The last development I want is for people to agree with me.
If that happened, I could not learn from fellow citizens. I’d be like being
stonewalled by everyone.
https://www.quora.com/Which-civil-rights-activist-s-philosophy-do-you-agree-with-the-most-and-why?
I view civil rights as we know them as political fodder to
keep the masses bemused while the government regimes operate the Anglo-American
Chapter XI Machiavellianism. Thus, John Locke’s life, liberty, and property and
Thomas Jefferson’s revision of “property” to pursuit-of-happiness hold the
people hostage for generations. Families hope their personal God will relieve
the misery and loss dealt by church-state-partners who live high on the hog.
Nothing and no one can guarantee life. Liberty is too often
taken as license, for example to destroy property, psychological confidence,
even life. The only human “right” that seems meaningful is the opportunity to
develop individual and collective integrity. Only civic citizens can hold
governments accountable for the opportunity to develop integrity.
https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-most-ethical-trends-of-2020?
President Donald Trump followed best advice and stopped
travel from China to the U.S. then stopped travel from Europe to the U.S. in
the face of unknown power of the coronavirus. With death rates steadily falling
despite the viral power, the administration is now accelerating the economic
wellness of the nation’s people and sharing new wellness products with the
world.
The worthy members of the Trump/Pence administration (TPA)
and the worthy Republicans stuck to the U.S. Constitution as Democrats and the
liberal media pulled unconstitutional stunts and infidelity to the U.S.
electorate in impeaching Donald Trump. The TPA attorneys upheld the U.S.
Constitution in the Senate trial. Republicans excluding one Morman “saint”
upheld their oaths to defend the U.S. Constitution, and most Democrats
demonstrated that they are not members of We the People of the United States as
specified by the preamble.
The TPA and the Republicans continue to invite Democrats to
reform despite their shameless treatment of Justice Brett Kavanaugh.
The TPA continues to uphold the reform that the U.S. is not
and will not be the first responder in foreign disputes. If local government
are not strong, they beg subjugation by aggressors. The TPA remains ready to
help allies but not to assume their responsibilities.
Underwriting the TPA success are the civic people of the
Unite States---those who, whether they articulate it or not behave as though
the U.S. Preamble proposes 5 public disciplines to encourage responsible human
independence to living citizens.
If I think of another evidence of the integrity that
determines ethics, I will add it.
https://www.quora.com/What-makes-coercion-immoral?
Human-integrity opposes coercion. Some religions thrive on
it, and within such groups coercion is not immoral. However, the group is
unfaithful to human integrity.
Merriam-Webster (MW) online informs us “coercion” means “to
achieve by force or threat.” MW’s information on “moral” expresses conformance
to standards.
The person who accepts being human develops his or her
individual power, individual energy, and individual authority (HIPEA) and
chooses to develop integrity rather than infidelity to his or her self.
The civic citizen neither initiates nor tolerates harm to or
from any person or responsible institution.
There are societies who advocate violent speech and action.
For example, Saul Alinsky, the advocate for Alinsky-Marxist organization (AMO)
said that violence is justified if his rights are at stake. I understand Obama
and Clinton were students. Within any AMO-like culture, coercion would not be
immoral.
The implication is that persons who join an AMO-modeled
group, in self-interest, may consider if they literally stopped being
human—-reduced their acceptance to the instincts level. For example, thinking
that liberty means the license to shed a fellow citizen’s blood. A group member
who finds himself or herself in jail has the initial U.S. civil opinion and
awaits justice.
Discovering and mastering a personal interpretation of the
preamble to the U.S. Constitution can help every citizen, including U.S.
Senators, U.S. Representatives, and AMO soldiers, can keep persons out of jail
so that they may use HIPEA to develop integrity.
https://www.quora.com/What-rule-exists-because-of-your-actions?
I can’t tell that anything I advocate for has influenced new
legislation. For example, in my state, Louisiana, I advocated for medical
marijuana derivative CBD to epileptic children as an over-the counter food
supplement. My idea did not pass.
I advocate to amend the U.S. First Amendment’s religion
clauses (1791) so as to encourage integrity, a citizen’s self-interest rather
than religion, a business enterprise.
I advocate the transition from English-American
psychological dependence to the U.S. proposition for 5 public disciplines in
order to encourage responsible human independence that is offered to interested
citizens in the preamble to the U.S. Constitution.
I advocate for impartial criminal jury trials by allowing
majority-jury verdicts rather than jury unanimity. The U.S. Supreme Court in
Ramos v Louisiana (2020) ironically voted 6:3 to require Louisiana to retro to
12:0 juries. It’s a perfect example of the courts rules that allow jurors to
consider only what is presented to them rather than conform to the U.S.
Constitution. Under its preamble, the government is required to use integrity
to develop statutory justice. In other words, Anglo-American tradition holds
the U.S. hostage, and the court calls my concerns “niggling” (Greece v Galloway,
2014). Anglo-tradition changed to 10:2 criminal juries in 1967 to lessen
organized crime’s influence on jury trials after the Louisiana-French
brilliance of 9:3 juries in 1880. Against U.S. Amendment VI (impartiality) and
U.S. Amendment XIV.1 (states can’t impose injustice on U.S. citizens), the USA
unjustly preserved an obsolete Anglo-American tradition rather than uphold the
U.S. preamble’s proposition.
I think politicians purporting to speak-for or bargain-with
God is arrogant toward whatever-God-is. If whatever-God-is is chaos, chaos
assigned to humankind the responsibility to prevent chaos. A culture that takes
charge of mutual, comprehensive safety and security among fellow citizens may
survive. If an intelligent being did in fact cause the cause of the
unfolding of the universe or actual reality, it may not accept the term “God”
as an expression of humility. Again, it is prudent to accept humility in
appreciating whatever-God-is, and I only hope my statements are humble. I don’t
know.
It’s important for each person to accept that they are human
and therefore a member of the most powerful species on earth. Second, if a U.S.
citizen, to accept that the voluntary commitment to citizenship is offered in
the 5 disciplines to encourage responsible human independence to living
citizens.
If I think of another concern that gets no supporting
attention I discern, I’ll add it to this list.
I understand “public administration” to mean managing
government operations.
First, ethics journals the discovery and application of
the-literal-truth. In other words, ethics journals the discovery and acceptance
of human integrity. A society’s ethics may not enjoy integrity. Consider the
society that accepts the label Democrat.
The U.S. observed in the impeachment and trial of President
Donald J. Trump that a party that does not practice ethics begs infidelity’s
ruin. The Democratic Party exposed its corruption beyond tyranny. And career,
appointed officials, by defying civic citizens’ electoral choice for
commander-in-chief, lost their careers and reputations. “The swamp” spoke and
sacrificed their livelihoods to an unethical political party: the Democrats.
Civic citizens understand ethics’ depends on integrity, and
they express it in overall opinion if not by articulation. Consider, for
example, https://news.gallup.com/poll/1654/honesty-ethics-professions.aspx,
which shows car salespersons last in a field of 22 professions. Members of
Congress are at 21, and Senators at 20, and state governors at 16,
respectively. Medical professionals are ranked 1, 3, 4, and 5 with policemen at
6. Interestingly, some writers, for example, https://news.gallup.com/poll/245597/nurses-again-outpace-professions-honesty-ethics.aspx,
omit engineers, who rate second in some reports. Omitting a variable, either in
the polling or in the evaluation of results, is one of social science’s powers
of deceiving the public.
I doubt anyone claims it, but factually recording the errors
and discoveries in the journey toward the-literal-truth is journalism’s job.
Only on that ethic is U.S. Amendment I (1791) justified.
Lastly, if we regard the President protecting the civic
citizens’ secrets, especially in light of the media and the Democrats’
opposition to the acceptance of election results, Donald Trump, Mike Pence, and
their ethical staff members set a remarkable consideration of Matthew 7:6 “Don't
give to dogs what is holy, and don't throw your pearls to the pigs. If you do,
they may trample them under their feet, then turn and attack you.” If I’m
listening to a reliable member of the administration when a Democrat or
media-writer is present, nothing I hear upsets me.
The integrity and infidelity that generates ethics is
critical to a better future. However, reliable journalism might record the
ineluctable evidence on which infidelity is measured in the discovery
of integrity, and let “ethics” fall in file-13 along with correctness, reason,
revelation, and lot’s of other scholarly distractions from integrity.
I appreciate your well-conceived attention to primary
concerns on July 7, 2020. I think government should encourage and effect
mutual, comprehensive safety and security.
First, I think inhabitants should conform to physics and its
progeny, from mathematics to imagination, including fiction. Since the
individual has perhaps the world’s most difficult task---transitioning from
feral infant to psychologically mature adult---only humankind can manage the
overall task of discovering and learning how to apply the-literal-truth in both
physical and judicial concerns.
Like individuals within a nation, humankind has evolved
along cultural lines. National cultures are at diverse stations in their paths
to psychological maturity. Citizens who want to benefit from discovery must fund
representatives who accept the responsibility to push the leading-edge
actual-reality conformance.
In this process, there are no emotions, no preferences, no
doctrine---only ineluctable evidence to the-literal-truth, whether physical or
psychological, and its application. When the representatives don’t know, they report
that they do not know yet disclose preparations for possible events.
Citizens who perceive an unlisted possible event share with the
representatives, so as to improve national strength. Writers for the media record
these events so as to journal the path to statutory justice---the approach to
the perfection of civic fellow citizens holding government accountable to
the-literal-truth. By reporting events without opinion, the media creates a
journal of errors not to be repeated rather than propaganda to preserve an
erroneous precedent. No civic citizen, who funds discovery, behaves to hide the
past.
Second, my opinion expresses no preference for a moral
compass beyond conforming to physics and its progeny. The motive is to enjoy
responsible human independence rather than promote good versus evil. In other
words, the civic purpose is individual happiness with civic integrity rather
than arbitrary dictates of a ruling body.
With voluntary, majority trust-in and commitment-to
conformity to physics and its progeny, an achievable better future is possible.
Then, every citizen, including elected and appointed government
officials, may develop mutual, comprehensive safety and security.
https://www.quora.com/unanswered/Is-it-possible-to-explain-acceptance-in-non-abstract-terms?
Merriam-Webster online has usage 2: “the act of accepting
something or someone.” Reviewing the verb “accept” at the five entries in
Usages 3 and 4 is instructive.
I think things would go better if every child was encouraged
to accept that he or she is a human being, and widespread acceptance of that
idea would create an achievable better future.
https://www.quora.com/unanswered/Does-Maslow-s-hierarchy-need-theory?
I think so, and I think it should be converted to a
hierarchy of responsible human independence.
A culture wherein self-discipline is encouraged as
self-interest for personal happiness with civic integrity promises an achievable
better future.
https://www.quora.com/Why-is-secularism-important?
According to MW, you assert the importance of “indifference
to or rejection or exclusion of religion and religious considerations.”
Secularism is important to a narrow human faction who for
reasons they may not understand wish to impose their will on other humans. I do
not understand how a person can focus on another person’s harmless pursuits and
thereby pass up their own opportunity to develop integrity---admit they don’t
know when they don’t know.
Humans have the un-consignable, individual power, energy,
and authority (HIPEA) to develop responsible human independence. It is plain to
most humans that they must conform to physics and its progeny, from mathematics
to imagination. For example, no human intends to control the Earth’s atmosphere.
The U.S. Preamble proposes, in my interpretation, 5 civic
disciplines---integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity---sufficient
to empower conformity to physics, excepting the unknowns. It says nothing about
constraints on motivation, inspiration, spirituality, or religion.
Individuals may freely ponder personal concerns. For
example, were intentions involved in the initiation of actual-reality? Further,
was the
cause of the Big Bang the consequence of intentions?
The research to answer such unknowns begins with
imagination: in this case, assuming an intention, proposing an actor,
developing a theoretical practice. Tests are designed to evaluate the theory,
and if the results are ineluctably negative, the theory is shelved until better,
pertinent instruments of perception are invented and new tests designed. While
the theory is on the shelf, no one faults the imaginative person who insists on
success as he or she imagines it. For example, in 240 years, humankind advanced
from balloon flying to concrete plans to rocket to Mars.
Early humankind imagined God started everything. Perhaps the
God’s intention was to create a species, individual members of which could
develop ultimate wisdom within about a hundred years, then die, leaving the next
generation to push the leading edge of wisdom. Perhaps discovery of new
dimensions will lead to the discovery of God.
In the meantime, civic humans whose personal God inspires
and comforts them ought to be appreciated by people who are civic without a personal
God.
Any intentions behind the causes of actual-reality have not
been discovered. Therefore, it seems prudent for every person to reserve
sufficient humility toward whatever caused the causes or whatever-God-is.
Hopefully, “whatever caused the causes” expresses personal humility toward God.
Hopefully, I will live to see humans on Mars. It would not
disturb me to also witness the discovery of God.
https://www.quora.com/What-values-are-the-most-important-to-you?
If I was English-Lockean, it might be life, liberty, and
property. If Anglo-American-Jeffersonian, it might be life, liberty, and
pursuit. If Thomas-Painian, it might be responsible human discipline.
My preferences are appreciation, acceptance, and
independence. Appreciation that I am another human being. Acceptance
that I have the human, individual power, energy, and authority (HIPEA) to
choose how to behave. Sufficient independence to choose to develop
integrity to the-literal-truth.
Neither society, civilization, written law, culture, reason,
revelation nor any other human construct competes with physics and its progeny,
from mathematics to imagination, for mankind’s attention.
A better future is attainable under the disciplines offered
in the preamble to the U.S. Constitution and conformity to physics and its
progeny---that is, by developing a personal interpretation of the U.S. Preamble’s
proposition and comprehension of the human pursuit of ideas about physics’
unknowns.
https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-root-causes-of-social-destruction-in-our-society?
Too many inhabitants don’t accept that they are human
beings.
Too many citizens who accept that they are human beings do
not accept the individual power, the individual energy, and the individual
authority (HIPEA) to develop integrity rather than tolerate infidelity.
At least 2/3 of citizens and 2/3 of the members of every
association practice the civic culture. The civic culture continually improves
5 public disciplines (integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity) in
order to encourage responsible human independence among fellow citizens.
https://www.quora.com/Why-does-the-rich-have-so-much-power-in-the-current-society?
For England constitutionally and for the USA by
Anglo-American tradition, I think the answer lies in Machiavelli’s “The
Prince”, 1513, Chapter XI; http://constitution.org/mac/prince11.htm.
Church and state partner to pick the people’s pockets and the people neither
rebel nor expatriate, believing their personal God will eventually relieve the
misery and loss.
The U.S. Preamble’s proposition offers relief from this
tyranny, but so far, the church-state-partnership has repressed the proposition
labeling it “secular,” which at best means areligious. However, the preamble
assigns religion to privacy rather than to a civil imposition.
Being kinder than Machiavelli, only a dreamer would imagine
reform. I promote reform by sharing my interpretation of the preamble’s
proposition: A civic citizen of the United
States practices 5 public disciplines (integrity, justice, peace, strength, and
prosperity) in order to enjoy responsible human independence with fellow
citizens. I share my opinion so that readers may comment and perhaps
improve it.
Mr. McAlpine, I appreciate reading your extensive
understanding and view that XI applies to theocracy only. For example, the
Vatican has one head for both spiritual and civic pursuits: the pope. There,
the pope is the prince.
There also, the doctrine of moderation seems to extend to
clergy-sexual-use of parishioners at least since Jesus lived and perhaps
beforehand. However, in the U.S., constitutional law poses development of
statutory justice: doctrinal justice eventually conforms to the law. Tradition
or not, in the U.S., state is constitutionally separate from church.
Perhaps on reading my post you discounted my qualified XI-application
to Canterbury’s constitutional dominance of Parliament in England and Congress’s
imposition of American theism by tradition.
Congressional imposition seemed necessary to 1789 political
correctness. Congress repressed the preamble to the U.S. Constitution, which
does not include religion in its list of public disciplines: Union, Justice,
Tranquility, defence, Welfare, and Benefits. The preamble implies that the
standards for these disciplines will be approached by posterity’s posterity; the
authors could not specify future standards. In 2020, the U.S. is reaping the
fruits of this tyranny as the chaos of democracy. The U.S. Supreme Court
codified the tyranny, in Greece v Galloway (2014), calling concerns like mine “niggling.”
U.S. citizens are better neighbors than Congress’s record
shows, and as soon as these principles are widely known, we may witness We the
People of the United States (as defined by the preamble) holding Congress accountable
to reform the First Amendment so as to encourage human integrity, each citizen’s
self-interest, rather than supporting civil religion, a business enterprise.
I am glad to read other opinions about Machiavelli’s
opinions. Thank you.
To Kiernan McAlpine again:
I think I comprehend the view you express and perceive we have differing perspectives.
I am informed by one XI sentence: “. . . the subjects, although not ruled, do not care, and they have neither the desire nor the ability to alienate themselves.”
When you apply XI to the Vatican, most “subjects” are devout Roman Catholics. For England, most subjects are either reformed Catholic under the Church of England or Protestant. For the U.S., most 2020 subjects of the Anglo-American tyranny are either diverse believers in whatever-God-is or the largest current faction, non-believers.
Congress, the Supreme Court, the administration, and all 50 state governments desperately impose freedom of religion in order to dominate the inhabitants. However, the preamble to the U.S. Constitution proposes 5 public disciplines in order to encourage responsible human independence.
Only a dreamer would imagine civic citizens reforming the U.S. First Amendment so as to encourage integrity, an individual self-interest, rather than religion, a woeful business institution. I am a dreamer and I appreciate Machiavelli.
To Kiernan McAlpine
again:
One
of the harms of scholarly scholarship is that scholars cannot escape their
tunnel. For example, citing Mansfield does not establish knowledge of
Machiavelli’s opinion.
But
you and I still have opposite viewpoints. You refer to “the piety
of the plebeians” while I am referring to their folly: the prince who
partners with the church enjoys the high life at the plebeians’ expense and the
plebeians pass on the loss and misery to their children’s children, indoctrinating
them in the faith the church teaches. Piety can be measured only by whatever-God-is.
Most churches have insufficient humility for acceptance.
In England, one church dominates the plebeian folly and in
America “freedom of religion” diversely represses encouragement to develop
integrity. In the U.S. especially, judges and lawyers exacerbate the plebeian
losses.
We the People of the United Sates can hold government accountable
by requiring Congress to reform the First Amendment so as to assure the citizen’s
opportunity to develop integrity, leaving religious pursuits a private choice
rather than civic, civil, and legal imposition.
To Kiernan McAlpine again:
I’d be surprised if you don’t understand that you wrote “the piety of the plebeians,” and I responded that I
am referring to their folly. It’s not surprising that you’d like to ignore that
dialogue. Perhaps you perceive the-objective-truth and don’t want to accept it.
You could directly oppose encouraging citizens to develop civic
integrity rather than civil religion. I’d like to understand your hypothetical,
“secular values such as “integrity” would be allowed to take
their proper place.”
I never imagined integrity to be areligious. After all,
mankind has proven neither that there is no intelligent design behind the world’s
chaos nor that there is no God. Atheism is a leap of faith the U.S. Preamble
does not take. Holding sufficient humility toward whatever-God-is seems
prudent.
To Kiernan McAlpine again:
That you wrote “That dialogue was unintelligible I must say”
and “I leave you” reflect frustrations I neither caused nor claim. Machiavelli
wrote for the reader, and I am one.
If at some point your arguments become intelligible to you,
I will welcome them, since I write to learn and have in this thread.
Your “fact” seems not born out by your question, which I
hardly call silence or even stonewalling: you have reached out for mutual
understanding.
My opinion is that dialogue is essential to my well-being. I
consider answering questions on this forum and others, because I learn from
considering the question and writing my answer. Answering creative questions is
richer than making a statement and hoping for a response.
Yesterday, someone referred to my interpretation of the
world’s most powerful, repressed, abstract, political proposal as a fantasy. I
first responded that it was not a fantasy, because I own it. Then, I thought about
my subject, “Civic citizens of the United States,” and realized for the first
time in 2 decades that I have always been promoting or urgently pleading
(preaching). I changed my subject to “A civic citizen of the United States” and
expressed only my opinion about the sentence. I am rewarded by a stranger’s
criticism and my open-mindedness.
Because I regard the other party as a fellow citizen in the
quest to discover integrity, I learn by expressing a concern, a well-grounded
solution, responding to a participant’s comments, and considering improvement
of my solution. There’s no place for silence in my quest for peace.
Law professors
https://lawliberty.org/religious-schools-and-the-freedom-of-the-church
I appreciate Professor Garnett’s acceptance: “Along with
other scholars, I have explored the . . . struggle for the ‘freedom of the
church.’” Fewer “the”s might expand his idea beyond the-church-freedom to
citizens and their struggle for integrity to the actual-reality for life rather
than death.
Churches (including the church) are constrained by physics
and its progeny. For example, no soul has ever reported the afterdeath. Also,
same-sex partners cannot practice monogamy for life AND share spousal
exclusive-appreciation with children; that is, they cannot conceive in
monogamy. Also, since not only conceptions but human ova and spermatozoon each
deserve their unique, human dignity and equity, churches have no grounds for
arrogance against physics, ova, and spermatozoon. Likewise, justices who
approve abuse of physics, ova, and spermatozoon are arrogant and additionally
deserve accountability to civic-citizens or to We the People of the United
States.
At question is their allegiance to U.S. commitment-to and
trust-in development of statutory justice. Only by their behaviors can we form
an opinion as to whether or not each of the nine justices possess a personal
interpretation of the preamble to the U.S. Constitution (the U.S. Preamble). I
guess not, due to their desires to preserve Anglo-American tradition,
Judeo-Catholic tradition, or other soul/none doctrine that the agreement to be
a U.S. citizen does not authorize. Many citizens are renters of the U.S.
proposition with allegiance elsewhere.
The Greeks, 2,400 years ago, suggested, in my view: Citizens may develop human equity under
statutory justice---a worthy goal. The US Supreme Court building is adorned
with “Equal Justice Under Law” which intentionally or not implies that unjust
law is alright if applied equally. “Equity Under Justice” would have helped the
architect accommodate perhaps better thought in the chosen space. There’s still
time for reform.
The Great Seal (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Seal_of_the_United_States),
dating from 1782, was authorized by the Confederacy of 13 states, who were
British colonies before 1774. It included the motto “E Pluribus Unum,” out of
many one, the Eye of Providence (symbolizing the Holy Trinity’s omniscience), Annuit cœptis---Providence’s
favor, and Novus ordo seclorum---new order of the ages. The new
order was proposed in 1787 and 9 states ratified in 1788. The 4 dissident states
had their reasons.
England agreed after negotiating with France that 13 named
states were free and independent. The 13 states ratified the 1783 Treaty of
Paris in 1784. However, after trying, some states opined they could not survive
as a confederation. Twelve states sent delegates to the 1787 Philadelphia
convention that concluded with the conversion to a Union of states under
public discipline of by and for citizens in their states and their nation. The
public discipline has not, heretofore, caught on.
The U.S. Preamble proposes for maintenance the articles of
law and of institutions that living citizens limit to civic, civil, and legal
powers. The proposition I perceive for personal development (as of July 10,
2020) is: A U. S. civic-citizen practices
and develops 5 public disciplines (integrity, justice, peace, strength, and
prosperity) “in order to” encourage responsible human independence to living
residents. Tacitly, the future integrity that posterity’s posterity
will achieve is the providential standard. Also, the U.S. Preamble tacitly
accepts spirituality as a private rather than civic trust and commitment. That
is, whatever-God-is assigned the 5 public disciplines and responsible
independence to the individual. I don’t know another citizen with these
opinions, and readers may notice that I no longer express my interpretation in
the plural. Too many people do not appreciate the preamble as the termination
of British psychological hostage-taking on U.S. persons.
The original, abstract preamble is proffered, and each
citizen may choose to consider it in order to comprehend civic, civil, and
legal citizenship or not. Citizens who choose not to accept it may live within
the 5 public disciplines and purpose (in their opinions or not) without constraint
as long as they neither initiate nor tolerate harm to or from any person or
their responsible institution.
Religions purport to save souls or equivalent. They have no
stake beyond safety and security in developing civic, civil, and legal justice
among living citizens.
As soon as 2/3 of living citizens value mutual, comprehensive safety and
security for living as prerequisite to pursuing a favorable afterdeath
or other doctrine, the motto E Pluribus Unum will apply to churches and their
God or philosophy. Then, providence may be viewed as the happiness posterity’s
posterity will achieve. For example, the living “ourselves” will not leave $26
trillion debt to posterity.
Then, love can be love, appreciation can be appreciation,
and civic citizens can be humble to whatever-God-is.
https://lawliberty.org/religious-liberty-without-constitution/?
Professor Arkes probably knows enough to
answer the dilemma: “The Court. . . has given us a wondrous construction
without quite explaining to us what it all rests upon.”
I think the U.S. is straining against
being held hostage to Anglo-American, Chapter XI Machivellianism; see http://constitution.org/mac/prince11.htm.
Canterbury partners with Parliament and pick the people’s pockets so as to live
high on the hog. Commoners neither rebel nor expatriate, their families hoping
their personal God will relieve the misery and loss.
Fortunately, the U.S. Preamble proposes
relief from the church-state-partnership by listing 5 public disciplines in
order to encourage responsible human independence. In my view for 2020
“ourselves and our Posterity” the disciplines are: integrity, justice, peace,
strength, and prosperity under the 1787 precious essences Union, Justice,
Tranquility, defence, and Welfare, respectively. Religion is not included in
the 5 disciplines.
I don’t think religion is omitted by
either neglect or opposition, but by the Committee of Style and the 55 signers’
acceptance of humility toward whatever-God-is. Further, the preamble’s
proposers tacitly accept: Whatever controls the unfolding of the universe
assigned to humankind the independence to provide the 5 disciplines. If whatever-God-is
is chaos, chaos assigned to persons the un-consignable accountability for
responsible human independence. The preamble’s standards of performance are the
6 excellences whatever posterity’s posterity achieves.
The First Congress, adolescent as
16-year old parents, restored Anglo-American precedent as much as they could,
and some judges and lawyers thrive on that error beyond today. The court finds
my concerns “niggling.” And the current panel voted 6:3 to impose 12:0 jury
verdicts, an obsolete Anglo-American error imposed on French-influenced
Louisiana. Interpreting “impartiality” in Amendment VI (1791) as requiring
unanimity is pure English precedent now overturning French-American, 1880
wisdom. The courts folly is that England adopted 10:2 jury verdicts in 1967 to
lessen organized crime’s influence in criminal trials.
We the People of the United States has
self-interest in holding Congress accountable and requiring amendment of
Amendment 1 so as to protect the development of integrity under the U.S.
Preamble rather than defend religion, which often defies whatever-God-is.
Choosing pride rather than humility begs woe.
YOUR
COMMENT HAVE BEEN AUTOMATICALLY APPROVED AND POSTED. It was, after
I posted it on facebook! I think nancy commented.
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