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 develops 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
Citizens need encouragement and opportunity to develop
integrity during their unique human lifetimes.
This principle was the tacit consequence of the U.S.
Constitutional convention in Philadelphia in the summer of 1787. Before that
convention, non-loyal “good People of these . . . States” (1776) declared
independence from England, extolling liberty. In 2020 America, we experience
license to burn buildings, loot stores, ruin property, hurt citizens, and
murder protesters for egocentric liberty. When the mob licenses their liberty,
we want the independence to leave the scene.
The draft preamble claimed action by the 13 free and independent
states, one of whom had not sent delegates to the convention. Beginning
September 8, 1787, the Committee of Style added a people’s proposition for 5
public disciplines “in order to” encourage responsible human independence.
Sixteen of the 55 delegates opposed the disciplines, which excluded religion
and states control. Thus, only 2/3 of states’ representation signed the 1787
U.S. Constitution. Dissidents resumed the political fight during ratification and actions of the First Congress.
The political consequence is the imposition of freedom of
religion, a business enterprise, instead of protection of the opportunity to
develop integrity, a self-interest and duty. Several of this week’s essays
emphasize these ideas.
Columns
Editors with no
hope for civic reliability (The Advocate) (https://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/our_views/article_d006e7c2-cc39-11ea-b927-e3358109d405.html)
The Advocate seems
mired in the swamp so deeply they’ve lost or never had appreciation for press
reliability. A reliable press uses the opinion page to develop their civic
integrity rather than to attempt to divide the nation and its states and
cities.
Mayors have the
responsibility to protect public protesters from internal violence and
anarchists. When Mayors don’t function their governors have the
responsibility---can even take over management of the city. When governors
fail, the responsibility to protect U.S. citizens falls on the President.
Consider, for instance U.S. Amendment XIV.1: “No State shall make or enforce
any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or
property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its
jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
The Advocate attempts
to hide their apparent support for the far left by attacking President Trump.
Why not tell us what they like about the Democrat platforms? For example,
compare https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Donald_Trump,
https://www.ocasiocortez.com/issues, and
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Joe_Biden for “the good
People of these . . . States” borrowing words from the Declaration of
Independence (1776) and “We the People of the United States in order to . . .
“, borrowing words from the U.S. Constitution.
The U.S. (proffered on
June 21, 1788) is the first nation on earth to propose public discipline as the
self-interested means to responsible human independence among fellow
inhabitants. Some citizens want to be dependent. The Advocate editors have
joined the chorus “license for violence to claim the liberty to be dependent”
preferred to statutory constraint of injury, property-damage, and murder.
Dependence is a pursuit of “happiness” that is alien to civic integrity.
Apparently, The Advocate sincerely thinks integrity is wrong. Persons are
liable for sincere harm and beg woe, knowingly or not.
One other point: The Advocate could have juxtaposed Saturday’s competing political marches in Baton Rouge: Support for the police versus Mayor-President Broome’s dependency on church and racialism.
Why not encourage
black people to also develop civic integrity while practicing spirituality in
African-American Christianity or other choices? I think all races want mutual,
comprehensive safety and security so that each may pursue the happiness they want.
Why does Broome feel compelled to encourage fellow citizens to consign to her
God responsibility that whatever-God-is evidently assigned to humankind:
statutory justice to constrain violence within the family, the community, the
municipality, the state, and the nation, leaving to foreigners their means of
living---whether civic or violent.
Quora
https://www.quora.com/Why-are-limitations-important-for-human-beings?
Humankind is constrained by physics and its progeny, the
objects of research. Unknowns are discovered at an exponential rate.
Researchers in a given field are at the leading edge of discovery, and
suspicion increases with ignorance of recent results.
With increasing ignorance, people tend to arm others inviting
constraint. When harm is imposed on fellow citizens, justice is required.
https://www.quora.com/How-is-morality-determined?
By the culture that maintains its rules.
More important is human integrity, which is discovered by
researching the ineluctable evidence.
https://www.quora.com/What-does-human-dignity-human-obligations-and-human-rights-mean?
Every human ovum deserves dignity and receives appreciation
if the woman whose body ovulates attends to her physical and psychological wellbeing
and chooses a mate who similarly appreciates his spermatozoon.
Human beings are obligated to accept being human seriously
enough to accept his or her individual power, energy, and authority (HIPEA) and
choose to develop integrity.
I promote only one human freedom: the opportunity to develop
integrity. All else may be left to the self-discipline needed for
responsible human independence.
https://www.quora.com/Do-most-liberals-feel-morally-superior-than-everyone-else?
I think so, and they are very competitive, overlooking
shared desire for mutual, comprehensive safety and security among fellow
citizens.
Judging from recent presidential elections in the U.S., it
seems classical liberals and social liberals are split near
51:49, in election cycles. The definitions are given in Wikipedia articles.
Classical
liberalism is a political
ideology and a branch of liberalism which
advocates civil liberties under the rule of law with an emphasis on economic
freedom.
In the United States, social liberalism describes progressive moral and social values
or stances on socio-cultural issues such as abortion and same-sex marriage as
opposed to social conservatism.
https://www.quora.com/Do-you-think-we-know-more-about-sinning-than-being-virtuous?
I don’t think so, and we need to drop those diversions so as
to focus on physics and its progeny.
Sin and virtue are competitive concepts based on human
constructs. Whereas “sin” derives from a religious doctrine and may apply to
secular usage, “virtue” derives from diverse civil conventions that may apply
to religious doctrine. See Merriam-Webster online to read the mix.
Rather than constructing integrity, humankind works to
discover and enjoy the benefits of the-literal-truth. Humankind discovers
the-objective-truth using continually improved instruments of perception “in
order to” approach the-literal-truth. In other words, psychological integrity
and physical reality conform to the same laws. This suggestion was offered by
Albert Einstein in 1941 in a speech titled “The Laws of Science and The Laws of Ethics.” See https://samharris.org/my-friend-einstein/
or the book cited there.
I think “science” is research and the object is physics and
its progeny. I think “ethics” is the journal of humankind’s heartfelt concerns
and discoveries and the comprehension of integrity according to the ineluctable
evidence.
In research, there is no influence of emotions---happiness,
passion, hopes, dreams---there’s only actual-reality as witnessed by
the-literal-truth from ineluctable evidence.
Einstein’s only example of these principles is that appreciative
human beings don’t lie so as to lessen human misery and loss rather than to be
virtuous or avoid sin.
https://www.quora.com/Is-it-strange-to-care-about-other-people-more-than-you-care-about-yourself?
I think so. In responsible independence’s simplest
application consider the airline industry’s advice to don an oxygen mask before
fitting your own child with one.
Consider for example the past couple decades’ focus on
“diversity,” an invasion of integrity. About 3 million years evolution of
(MYEo) humanoids, maybe 0.2 MYEo humankind, maybe 0.08 MYEo of cultures, maybe
0.01 MYEo theism, and 0.004 MYEo monotheism led to a Google Ngram with
“morality” declining to 0.00056% in 1945 and “diversity” peaking at 0.00337% in
2004 when “morality” was at 0.00121%, representing 2/3 lessened interest in
morality, itself a lame coercion against “integrity,” which was unfortunately
at 0.002% in 2004. “Honesty” is the least published of the 4 at 0.0005% in
2004.
Human living is a dynamic undertaking wherein humankind is
confused and conflicted, cultures are competitive, and most Education
Departments hope for “. . . schools and colleges to train our workers” quoting
Barack Obama’s second inauguration. What citizens need is encouragement and opportunity
to develop integrity during their unique human lifetime.
Most human beings want mutual, comprehensive safety and
security so each one may pursue the happiness she or he perceives rather than
submit to the happiness an official thinks they ought to accept.
There’s no integrity in assuming responsibility for another
person’s “soul” when the very concept of soul is metaphysical: so far, some
metaphysical ideas have not been disproven. To approach another human
being with the proposition that his or her personal motivation and inspiration
are wrong seems the utmost psychological violence. The person who so accosts an
appreciative fellow citizen under the egocentricity of the “Golden rule” in any
of its perhaps 7 forms may disturb whatever-God-is.
Lastly, let me tell my story concisely. By age 10, threats I
read in the Bible gave precious doubt in all its Gods. At
24 years old, I was attracted to a Louisiana French-Catholic woman. After 53
years with her I know her serene confidence attracted me.
I was still self-indoctrinating in what wonderful providers Mom and Dad each
wanted for me: faith in Southern Baptism. At age 52, I discovered that I
preferred my wife’s faith for her and dropped out of my church with
commitment-to and trust-in the-literal-truth, most of which I do not know. In
other words, it took me a quarter century to climb out of my Plato’s cave of
indoctrination. Without open mindedness to the woman I adore and her
metaphysics for her, I would never have discovered my person.
However, I do not have enough quarter centuries to learn enough about the
diverse faiths to opine on them, so I consider it prudent to accept integrity,
justice, peace, strength, and human independence wherever its proffered.
I think diversity dishonestly obstructs and bemuses integrity.
I think only one republic is proposed that would bless self-discipline and responsible human independence to the continuum of living citizens: the United States, which was proposed on September 17, 1787 with the disciplines and purpose proffered in the U.S. Preamble.
So far, U.S. generations have neglected “We the People of the United States in order to” hold local, state, and national officials accountable to the U.S. Preamble. While 9 states, globally free and independent, ratified the U.S. Constitution (they agreed the First Congress to amend) on June 21, 1788, and Congress began operations with an 11-state Union on March 4, 1789, the intentions of the U.S. Preamble have yet to be addressed by 2/3 of a U.S. generation.
The U.S. Preamble, by default, implies that “our Posterity” will set standards, and we hope that the 2020 “ourselves” (that’s our generation) will establish the preamble’s U.S. at last.
The U.S. Preamble and its supporting articles, the draft U.S. Constitution, was signed by only 2/3 of the representatives of the then free and independent states, formerly 13 of the 14 eastern seaboard British colonies. Nova Scotia, with much Catholic influence never joined the factional-Protestant confederation. Rhode Island sent no delegates to the Philadelphia convention, I speculate, out of suspicion that the 12 states would negotiate a union of people in their states instead of strengthening the confederacy of states.
Sixteen of 55 delegates did not sign the draft for reasons they may have understood. Some insisted on the usual allegiance to whatever-God-is, preferably the Protestant Trinity, but arguably “Nature’s God,” or other theism. The draft preamble claimed the states as actors rather than the people in their states “in order to.”
As states’ representatives ratified the 1787 draft, at least 2 did so only on the condition that some English-colonial traditions be re-established. Concerned about the competitive Church of England and the Vatican, a political faction wanted a Bill of Rights patterned after the English Bill of Rights but under factional-American Protestantism rather than the Church of England, a reformed-catholic church. Instead of supporting the U.S. Preamble’s tacit provision (the individual human opportunity to develop integrity to actual-reality rather than submit to a civil, metaphysical institution), the First Congress established Chapter XI Machiavellianism and Congress and the U.S. Supreme Court have kept the U.S. under that tyranny ever since. (See Greece v. Galloway, 2014.)
By default, the privilege of establishing civic integrity in the U.S. rests now with our generation---the citizens of 2020. We may also default. I propose that we each interpret the U.S. Preamble for consideration in managing each of our civic, civil, legal, and spiritual lives, as expressed by the original 52 abstract words personally interpreted for practicing integrity rather than the insufficient honesty. The difference is that honesty yields to ignorance whereas integrity admits to not knowing when the ineluctable evidence is not comprehended.
Each human being has the individual power, the individual energy, and the individual authority (HIPEA) to establish integrity rather than tolerate infidelity to the ineluctable evidence. HIPEA cannot be consigned, because neither whatever-God-is nor government will usurp the individual human’s opportunity to develop his or her unique lifetime. Even under the U.S. Preamble’s proposition and the ineluctable evidence for developing justice, it would take perhaps 3 quarter-centuries for a human to develop his or her mature person---free of external and internal constraints due to self-discipline under the-literal-truth.
In this pursuit, neither liberty, which is too often taken as license to hurt fellow citizens, nor religion, a business enterprise, can substitute for HIPEA to choose integrity.
The above principles emerged from my intent to understand what it means to be of the 1776 U.S. Declaration of Independence’s non-royal faction “the good People of these . . . States . . .” as tentatives to the 1787 distinction “We the People of the United States in order to . . .”, leaving the opportunity to accept the intentions, perhaps taking individual risk if not. Over 70 fellow citizens have helped me develop my interpretation, which I share hoping to consider suggested improvement. It is this: This appreciative individual practices and promotes 5 public disciplines---integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity, "in order to” enjoy responsible human independence among “ourselves’’ and encourage “our Posterity.”
Exercising self-discipline in integrity more than honesty is in the individual’s self-interest and empowers him or her to hold elected and appointed government officials accountable to responsible human independence. Due to HIPEA, the individual may pursue hope and comfort from his or her personal God with sufficient humility toward whatever-God-is. It seems obvious that humankind is accountable to constrain chaos.
https://www.quora.com/Is-it-true-that-Justice-delayed-is-justice-denied/answer/Phil-Beaver-1
(last week)
To Ralph Holder:
The U.S. belongs to the people who appreciate its preferred
proposition enough to hold local, state, and national elected officials
responsible to the preamble to the U.S. Constitution. Thus, my view is that you
are waiting for you and me to consider, communicate, collaborate, connect in
order to vote out of political office every fellow citizen who does not own and
practice his or her personal interpretation of the U.S. Preamble’s
individual-citizen’s proposition.
I share the interpretation I live by hoping readers will
comment and give me the opportunity to improve it. Over 70 people have helped
so far. My interpretation today is this: This appreciative citizen practices
and promotes 5 public disciplines---integrity, justice, peace, strength, and
prosperity, “in order to” enjoy and encourage responsible human liberty to
“ourselves and our Posterity.”
https://www.quora.com/Should-I-make-my-own-set-of-principles-to-live-by?
I
think so, and as you develop self-reliance, take advantage of experiences and
observations humans share in the tragic waste of their opportunities to develop
integrity.
The
question is, how to start. I don’t know what your mature human person will
consider to be individual happiness with civic integrity. I speculate that
is the human goal.
What I think is, you could list heartfelt concerns you have,
prioritize them, then do the work to establish integrity in your assessment of
each of them. For example, which is more important: love or appreciation?
Liberty or self-reliance?
As you go, your list will increase and priorities change, so
maintain it. By all means, keep a journal. When you read something, record the
most important ideas and where you read them. Your views will change, and you
will need to consult them again, and re-read the author’s original words.
For example, over 2 decades re-reading and writing,
Agathon’s speech from Plato’s “Symposium” became this: an appreciative citizen
neither initiates nor tolerates harm to or from any person. My interpretation,
written just now using “appreciative” instead of “civic,” for the first time,
does not come easy. “Not tolerate” usually involves your objection to harm (but
can be self-defense under actual attack).
For example, when a stranger learns of my trust-in and
commitment-to the-liberal-truth, interprets it as non-Christian, and says
“Phil, I’ll pray for you, because you are headed to Hell,” I respond: “Are you
certain? I think it is critical to reserve sufficient humility toward
whatever-God-may be.” Usually, that stops the conversation but not the
considerations; I study anything I learned.
I’m not recommending that you read “Symposium” or any other
Greek literature, because a human lifetime is short, and each person ought to
pursue his or her unique interests in a somewhat random search. My practice has
led to over-reading because one book’s references motivated me to read another
book. I don’t know what personal pursuits I missed by reading that second book,
influenced by the first. One thing I have learned, though, is that I have no
interest at all in what a modern scholar has to say about, for example, John
Locke’s thinking. Locke died 316 years ago, and his original writing has enough
errors for me to recognize without a professor’s sophistry to misuse the
errors; in other words, quite often the professor is trying to use Lockean,
misplaced-authority to support the professor’s erroneous line of thought.
People waste their entire family and fortune trying to justify erroneous
correction of error.
Consider, for example, sophistry to justify slavery. See,
for example, http://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/slavery/ethics/philosophers_1.shtml.
It seems BBC writers regard philosophy as non-secular, in other words, religious;
http://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/slavery/ethics/justifications.shtml.
But many English writers do not practice integrity so as to overcome honesty. And
they don’t understand slavery in America.
Benjamin Franklin (read his autobiography as he developed
his own religion) and Thomas Paine were American abolitionists in 1775.
Franklin signed the 1776 Declaration of Independence representing the
entity “the good People of these . . . States” as well as the 1787 U.S.
Constitution representing the entity “We the People of the
United States in order to . . .”
With that intention and the beneficiary “ourselves and our
Posterity,” every U.S. citizen ought to own a personal interpretation of the proffered and repressed U.S. Preamble’s
proposition. I share mine hoping another criticism will motivate me to improve
it, and today it is: This appreciative human being practices and
promotes 5 public disciplines---integrity, justice, peace, strength, and
prosperity, “in order to” enjoy and encourage responsible human independence
among “ourselves and our Posterity.”
Unfortunately, Robert E. Lee listened to erroneous Christian
ministers and wrote to his wife in December, 1856, “I fear [the abolitionist]
will persevere in his evil Course”; https://www.encyclopediavirginia.org/Letter_from_Robert_E_Lee_to_Mary_Randolph_Custis_Lee_December_27_1856.
I doubt Lee was unware of Frederick Douglass’s indictment of domestic slave
trade in 1852; https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/frederick-douglass/#USCons.
Lee could have thought in self-interested integrity instead of religious
coercion, sold all his property, and moved to a non-slave state. Further, he
could have owned a personal commitment to his interpretation of the U.S.
Preamble. Instead, he forfeited everything for someone else’s cause. [Much as
people are being arrested daily for volunteering to soldier for AMO
(Alinsky-Marxist organized) groups like “BLM” and many others.] Maybe Lee
thought he acted for his soul, but I doubt it and admit I could be wrong.
Now, to the point: I doubt there’s another person in the
world who either 1) owns an interpretation of the U.S. Preamble remotely
similar to mine or 2) interprets the U.S. Civil War as attack an erroneous
European-Christianity on defensible European-Christianity,
perhaps to be resolved by African-American Christianity, but I doubt it.
Also, I doubt many white Americans care about Ethiopian
Christianity with bible canon dating from 360 AD. I do not care to study it and
doubt appreciative human beings respond to skin color. Moreover, I will not
disparage Ethiopian Christianity, because I prefer to practice humility toward
whatever-God-is.
Back to your question, I hope you will consider a few of my
acceptances late in my 70s:
1. A
unique human life begins when the spermatozoon activates the ovum that contains
the organelles to develop a zygote and the nutrients it needs until
implantation. Appreciative spouses long-since accepted their responsibilities
to maintain physical and psychological well-being. The ovum is due the dignity
and equity of a person in order to compliment a well-being spermatozoon from
the man with whom the mom is bonded in monogamy for life.
2. Parents
may encourage and coach their children to accept being human; to accept
responsibility for 3 decades’ accumulation of comprehension and intention to live
their complete, unique human lifetime; to accept that each human has the
individual power, the individual energy, and the individual authority (HIPEA)
to develop integrity rather than nurture infidelity and to choose integrity.
3. Not
every individual who accepts HIPEA develops integrity, so those who do must be
engaged to constrain the chaos that comes from democracy rather than the rule
of written law with development of statutory justice under the ineluctable
evidence.
4. Accept
that ineluctable evidence is based on physics and its progeny, which do not
yield to reason, revelation, coercion, force, fear, happiness or any other
human construct; there are no emotions---only actual reality.
5. While
it seems that institutional religion is a business based on constructed fear
and speculative relief, there remains human prudence to retain sufficient
humility to whatever-God-may be, without compromising the personal
responsibility to constrain chaos.
6. Accept
that fellow citizens are on their paths to developing their unique lives no
matter how un-faithful their present status may be; to appreciate whatever
goodwill they offer and return more; to encourage fellow citizens to accept
being human and to self-develop as described above. Self-interest begins the
moment a person accepts integrity and decides to develop it.
I hope my ideas help you develop
your ideas. Only death will terminate my quest to comprehend and behave.
https://www.quora.com/How-much-do-you-agree-with-Maslow-s-characterization-of-self-actualizers?
I have never studied Maslow, but found a good reference by
which to consider your question; https://www.simplypsychology.org/maslow.html#self.
First, let me tell you, Scvenska Galla, how much I
appreciate your motivation to look it up: it will improve my future posts, and if
you do not object I will record my appreciation on my page for that with the
entry “Scvenska Galla,7/30/30”.
Now, to my comments from the above cited text by Saul
McLeod, March 20, 2020, “Self-Actualization.”
Referring to “. . . human behavior which . . . goes right,” I propose
re-titling the pyramid “hierarchy of self-interest” rather than “needs” so as
to emphasize self-actualization rather than social dependency.
“Growth”
implies a physical process, such as chronologically maturing. I prefer
“development” so as to indicate self-engagement---focusing your body and mind
on your unique person’s integrity. With encouragement and coaching, this
process can begin by age 2 or earlier. I prefer “personal discovery and
development” to “personal growth and discovery.” With encouragement and
coaching, the adolescent may understand that he or she may use integrity to
make self-interested choices and avoid nurturing human error---so as to perfect
his or her person until the moment body and mind stop functioning rather than
perhaps “find a meaning to life.”
These
principles may be focused on a single culture rather than particulars such as
art, science, or public service by accepting that humankind is a factional
society defined by the will or none to aid mutual, comprehensive safety and
security on earth (hereafter, SECURITY). Imagine a bell curve with self-actualizers
at Maslow’s 2 percent and increasing percentage as integrity to self-interest
declines, peaking at the change to dissidence to SECURITY in its transition to
crime, tyranny, and other bad behaviors.
Moving
now to the characteristics and behaviors, I will comment only to recommend
change.
At
Item 14, democracy is chaos, and humankind’s self-evident contribution to life
on earth is to constrain chaos. Therefore, the will to aid SECURITY is the
divider between civic citizens and fellow citizens who risk subjugation to
justice. For SECURITY, justice is measured by conformance to physics and its
progeny---chemistry, biology, psychology, and imagination. Humankind researches
the-ineluctable-evidence to discover the-objective-truth and determine how to
take human advantage of the initial comprehension; publically share the
understanding; invent new instruments to improve perception; and continue until
the-literal-truth is approached if not established. For example, I doubt
humankind will discover that the earth is not like a globe. BTW; the process I
just described is the process of integrity: honesty is insufficient for
self-actualization or any other human function.
At
Item 15, morality and ethics are a society’s records of developing reliability
of performance according to the society’s objectives. For example, the clergy
cannot allow integrity to lessen their commitment to the doctrine. For
SECURITY, ethics is determined by the process for integrity, described above.
In a culture with “freedom of the press,” only those writers who record the
path to integrity may consider themselves journalists. Since living people
cannot know how far integrity will empower humankind’s self-actualization,
cannot cannot impose on youth today’s standards for human equity under
statutory justice.
(a)
Experiencing life with an open mind
(b) Try new things in the
SECURITY of physics and its progeny.
(c)
There is no place for “feelings” in practicing integrity. Also,
self-actualization requires awareness of “tradition, authority or the
majority.” For this item I prefer: Accept that you are a human being. Human
individuals have the power, the energy, and the authority (HIPEA) to develop
integrity rather than tolerate infidelity.
(d) As mentioned before,
“honesty” is insufficient to integrity.
(e) Always practice sufficient
humility among fellow citizens. More and more, we hope most will be
self-actualizers.
(f)
Taking responsibility and working hard/smart
(g) Accept conviction that you
erred and avoid repetition or habit forming.
I think the summation “There are no perfect human beings” does
not reflect sufficient humility toward whatever-God-is, or what controls human
development, even if it is humankind’s developed constraints on chaos. Among
Maslow’s 2% there may be many human beings who perfect their unique persons.
It has been a pleasure to express my opinions on McCleod’s insights, and I hope
some readers will criticize so that I can learn. I apologize for any typos and
will correct them upon discovery.
https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-benefits-of-feeling-and-expressing-gratitude?
Gratitude expresses thankfulness, and that’s good.
I think appreciation as “sensitive awareness” is more
rewarding. In my eighth decade (late seventies) I am so wounded yet so rewarded
that I appreciate every connection or rejection. In other words, if someone
will spend time pondering a concern and share their ideas for solution, I feel
connection and appreciation without knowing the person’s name. I may adopt the
idea I learn. If they have not the time or inclination, I appreciate their
polite refusal.
What’s rewarding is that I never encounter anger. Humans are
just too good to behave unseemly. Of course, there is the rare exception, but
it does not take long to become silent.
I have yet to meet a human individual about whom I could say
“He or she has not the individual power, the individual energy, and the
individual authority to develop integrity rather than brook infidelity.” I have met some who I thought were in a difficult
point on their path to their unique goodness.
I could be wrong.
https://www.quora.com/How-do-laws-increase-individual-freedom-in-society?
About 2,400 years
ago, the Greeks, commenting on political philosophy suggested that citizens can
develop human equity under statutory justice. Inhabitants who take advantage of
civic citizens add to the chaos of natural disasters. Written laws encourage
dissidents to reform to aid justice. Natural disasters calls for most
inhabitants to connect with fellow citizens to constrain chaos.
With public
discipline, each individual aids his or her opportunity to develop personal
happiness rather than submit to political and natural chaos.
My interpretation of the U.S. Preamble’s people’s
proposition is: I practice and promote 5
public disciplines---integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity “in
order to” enjoy and encourage responsible human independence “to ourselves and
our Posterity.”
The actors in the sentence proffer each termination of colonial-British
influence in America, termination of the confederation of free and independent
states, agreement to not follow the wishes of the 16 framers who did not sign
the 1787 Constitution, and agreement to civic discipline for individual
independence can be accepted. The Declaration of Independence called them “the
good People of these . . . states,” and the U.S. Preamble proposes “We the
People of the United States in order to . . .”
I bought a book on atheism and thought it was very good. I
offered it to my good neighbor, an avowed atheist. I was surprised by a blunt
response: “I’ve been an atheist for over 50 years and don’t care to read
another book.”
He had turned and taken a step away when I said, “That’s a
leap of faith I cannot take.”
He stopped, turned, and said, “That’s interesting. I’ll
think about atheism. I still do not need the book.”
It seemed a tacit agreement, “We don’t know what we don’t
know.”
Now, I write that it seems prudent for each human to retain
sufficient humility toward whatever-God-is. And if it is chaos, it seems clear
humankind must constrain God.
Four examples are in my limited experience.
Matthew, in 5:48 reported that Jesus said, “Therefore, be perfect, just
as your Father in heaven is perfect.” It seems irrational to claim that the
listeners can overcome death or otherwise have “your Father” omniscience and
omnipotence. This seems a mystery for which Ralph Waldo Emerson offered
explanation in “Divinity School Address.” My interpretation of Emerson’s
message is that Jesus urged each listener to develop their unique person unto
his or her perfection, and that the church forever buried this message by
making Jesus, a man, a “divinity.” As a person who trusts-in and commits-to
physics and its progeny, the objects of discovery, Emerson’s essay assured me I
am not alone.
Flannery
O’Connor, in her posthumously published non-fiction, “Mystery and Manners”
wrote:
“I write for the sake of the art. The artist
uses his reason to discover an answering reason in everything he sees. For him,
to be reasonable is to find [in something] the spirit which makes it itself. It
is to intrude upon the timeless, and that is only done by the violence of a
single minded respect for the truth.”
John Harbo reasoned that O’Connor used “violence” to go
beyond “passion.” I am never satisfied with a writer’s “the truth” because it
seems doubt laden to some readers. I think O’Connor expressed
“the-objective-truth,” which remains mysterious until humankind has invented
the necessary instruments of perception so as to discover the-literal-truth.
For example, no one has disproven the existence of an entity that controls the
unfolding of events. Therefore, it seems prudent to retain sufficient humility
toward whatever-God-is. If God is chaos, humankind must constrain God.
Socrates, like Jesus, did not write. Plato tells us Socrates
suggested that “good” is sufficient without attributing it to “God.” Also,
Socrates died to defend the law, even though he was accused and convicted
unjustly. Finally, his claim to wisdom was that he does not know what he does
not know. Moreover, Plato claims that Agathon suggested that the good citizen
neither initiates nor tolerates harm to or from any person.
Albert Einstein suggested, at least to me, that physics and
its progeny (the objects of study, including psychology) are controlled by the
same laws. Humankind’s self-interest is discover and take advantage of the
laws. A couple example may suffice. First, humans can’t fly like a bird but can
take advantage of aerodynamics. Second, families develop integrity and encourage
their descendants to avoid infidelity when spouses share monogamy for life with
their progeny.
https://www.quora.com/What-widely-accepted-idea-do-you-reject?
The pledge of allegiance to the flag of the U.S.: I prefer
the preamble.
It is a coercive act which neither the 1787 U.S.
Constitution nor the Declaration of Independence’s “the good People of these .
. . States” condone. The preamble to the U.S. Constitution leaves it to
posterity’s posterity to approach the standard of good citizenship, and that is
all I will agree to, unknown as that better future may be.
Second, the Knights of Columbus, a Catholic layman’s club
imposed the prayer “under God” in the pledge in 1954. I was eleven years old
and in a Southern Baptist community, so I thought it was OK. However, I refuse
to say such a presumptive prayer, because I have learned to be humble toward
whatever-God-is. I think it is prudent to retain sufficient humility about what
you perceive you don’t know, without preventing neighbors from privately
expressing their hopes and comforts.
I would like to witness the retirement of the pledge in my
lifetime, and would like instead for the people to read the 52-word U.S. Preamble
in unison at public events. The preamble is abstract so as to allow each
citizen to say its words with their appreciative, personal intentions.
Human individuals have the power, the energy, and the
authority (HIPEA) to develop integrity.
It has not been proven that whatever controls the unfolding
of actual-reality is not God. It seems logical for each human to reserve
sufficient humility toward whatever-God-is rather than claim to know God or
that God does not exist.
It seems prudent accept being human and therefore
unqualified to specify God or none.
I hope you will
indulge a story I could not have told while it was happening.
At perhaps age 12,
I discovered the joy of reading a sky-blue backed biography series at Staub
School. Soon, I realized not all the lives were instructive to me at the time,
so I read the first and last page of the next selection, and if not interested,
I moved on.
As a Southern
Baptist Royal Ambassador, I received strict Bible instruction and decided to
apply my practice. The first Bible-page was more than I could assess, but the
last page contained threats. I thought: whatever-God-is, the weakness to
threaten me is not something I am willing to tolerate. I did not ponder my
doubt, but kept it.
I now regard that
as the precious doubt that sustained me through 4 decades attempting to
indoctrinate myself to please Mom in her way and Dad in his (it seems every
Christian has a personal view of being Christian). My serenely-confident
Louisiana-French Catholic wife complimented my doubt and helped me discover
that Phil Beaver always tended to trust-in and commit-to the-objective-truth.
She tells me she is glad for that change in self-understanding.
Unlike the Bible’s
metaphysics, the-objective-truth is often doubtable, because humankind is
constantly inventing new instruments of perception and thereby improving
comprehension of the ineluctable evidence. For example, seafarers knew from the
curved horizon and from sailing into the horizon without falling into the sky,
that the earth was probably a globe held together by gravity. They had the
perception without the articulation. Some landlubbers doubted seafarers until
pictures from orbit confirmed that the earth is like a globe.
With continual
improvement in perception, the-objective-truth ultimately approaches
the-literal-truth. I am reluctant to claim certainty that the earth is like a
globe, because I cannot imagine the tools of perception that might prove
otherwise. However, based on the ineluctable evidence we possess, I think the
earth is like a globe.
I am humble toward
whatever-God-is, and it seems self-evident that responsibility for peace on
earth is assigned to humankind. In other words, humankind must constrain chaos
on earth. If chaos is God, then humankind must constrain God. Doubt allows me
to imagine that this could be so, at least in metaphor.
Humankind is deliberately improving its integrity, sometimes
regressing and overall advancing. This is noticeable by a reduction in war and
public approval of war.
Your question itself is motived by your human individual
power, individual energy, and individual authority (HIPEA) to develop integrity
rather than tolerate infidelity. So far, most cultures on earth have inculcated
in their young dependency on a higher authority---a God, a philosophy, an
institutional religion, a government, or a partnership of church-government
tyranny.
As a consequence, most people don’t spend much time
discovering actual-reality, comprehending how to take advantage of the
discovery, and connecting with fellow humans so as to gain new perspectives on
optimal benefits. In this latter duty, fellow citizens are to hold elected and
appointed political officials to accountability for constraining chaos, which
lessens fellow citizens’ opportunities to develop integrity.
It takes about 3 decades for a human infant to transition
from feral infant to young adult with intent and comprehension to accept HIPEA
and to choose to develop integrity. Without parental coaching and encouragement,
the adolescent may never accept being human, much less responsible human
independence.
Many boys (and girls) grow up dependent on the chemistry of
human reproduction, never considering the self-interest of monogamy for life so
as to share an established mutual appreciation with progeny and grandchildren
and beyond. The metaphysics of religion fails the human individual in this
regard. Engaging physics and its progeny (the objects of research) in civic
integrity promises an achievable better future.
The leading edge of humankind accepts better ideas within their lifetimes and
therefore benefits. Unfortunately, too many humans are constrained by tradition
and do not employ HIPEA to develop integrity. Every education department ought
to reform so as to share these principles or better.
https://www.quora.com/Is-raising-a-child-moral?
Yes, if and only if 1) the parents are in monogamy for life
and want to share their bond with family and 2) each parent is aware that it
takes about 3 decades for a feral human-infant to discover the power of a human
being and develop it so as to enter young adulthood with the comprehension and
intention to live a complete human life with integrity as a self-interest.
Is it reasonable to expect anything else when most
U.S. citizens act on perceived-egocentric opinion rather than with civic
integrity---a higher self-interest? Aren’t appointed and elected officials
first citizens? If citizens are not engaged to practice and encourage civic
behavior (according to civic, civil, legal, and spiritual disciplines and
purposes specified in the 1787 U.S. Constitution) why should they expect local,
state, and national officials to be members of “We the People of the United
States in order to . . . “ (quoting the 1787 proffered and extant U.S.
Preamble, to be accepted or rejected by citizens) or “the good People of these
. . . States” (quoting the 1776 Declaration of Independence from England).
The 1787 intention of the signers of the U.S. Constitution
is (still is), in your interpretation for your civic living, what? My
interpretation today is this: This civic
citizen practices and encourages 5 public disciplines---integrity, justice,
peace, strength, and prosperity, “in order to” enjoy and encourage
fellow-citizens’ constraints on chaos/violence that could limit my opportunity
for responsible human independence.
I work hard to advocate holding government officials
accountable for being civic citizens as defined in the U.S. Preamble and 1787
Articles (the 1791 Bill of Rights is substantially opposed to the U.S.
Preamble’s intentions). Especially egregious is the First Amendment with its
failure to limit the press on par with limiting Congress, the Court, and the
Administration. Even more egregious is the First Amendment clauses that promote
religion, a metaphysical business enterprise, rather than integrity, each
citizen’s self-interest.
I am impressed that the U.S. is suffering chaos from
citizens who take the license to perpetrate violence for their egocentric
liberty and that the Democrat Party seems to promote as a civic solution to
favor those citizens who prefer dependence on elected officials rather than
responsible human independence. I much prefer the food I earn to the quality a
bureaucrat chooses for me and will always vote for human equity under statutory
justice, which the Democrats never seem to propose.
https://www.quora.com/When-is-a-persons-nature-deemed-unnatural?
You have an interesting juxtaposition of Lockean (17th
century British) political philosophy: for your context as I perceive, “nature”
refers to human will/intentions and unnatural, intentionally or not, refers to
“metaphysical.”
The political philosopher Albert Einstein suggested in 1941,
in my view with “science” meaning research and “ethics” meaning integrity, that
physics (the object rather than the research) and psychology (a progeny of
physics) adhere to the same laws. See the essay in https://samharris.org/my-friend-einstein/.
In Einstein’s only example, the liar accepts aiding human
misery and loss. The ineluctable physical evidence not to lie does not overcome
his or her metaphysical hope for egocentric benefits. But the Greeks suggested
over 2,400 years ago that a sincere/reliable/civic citizen neither initiates
nor tolerates harm to or from any person or institution (my interpretation).
In another application, it seems self-evident that something
controls humankind’s cyclical progress and regress, perhaps with a steady increase
in collective goodness. Long since, humankind discovered that the sun is a
natural nuclear reactor rather than humankind’s controller by whatever name a
culture used, controversially, God.
It also seems self-evident that whatever-God-is assigns
to humankind the responsibility to constrain chaos. In other words, chaos is
inevitable due to the laws of physics, and humankind must learn the laws that
constrain physics and its progeny “in order to” thrive, even survive (quoting
the U.S. Preamble).
If so, citizens who volunteer humility-toward and work-civically-to
constrain chaos provide citizens who adhere to metaphysics a free-pass to as
much personal duration as possible. Meanwhile, civic citizens provide the evidence
that integrity to the laws of physics and its progeny is in the individual’s
best interest.
On a personal note, I suffered heterophobia (the fear of
monogamy for life with a woman, because of the manhood that requires) until I
met a woman who had the serene confidence to fall-in-live with me. Now into our
sixth decade of marriage with 3 children, 1 deceased, I am beginning to
discover myself, thanks to them. Occasionally, the heterophobia kicks in, and I
get counselling from a social worker. Their arsenal of actual-reality offers
suggestions I use. Not once have I received positive help from a metaphysist.
Physics and its progeny (mathematics, chemistry, biology,
and psychology, for examples) drive change, and humankind works to conform to
ineluctable evidence for advantageous reaction; in other words, to make
self-interested choices. For example, the person who prefers a way of living
must earn (not take) the money to fund it. Otherwise, he or she must accept
what a bureaucrat offers.
Fortunately or not, from about 3 million years of evolution
emerged the species we know as humankind. Posterity will see how humankind
turns out. Over the last couple hundred thousand years, human groups used
superior awareness to develop languages, then grammars and cultures. Some
cultures survived only by reacting to novel insights, yet the doomed cultures
influenced their descendants in the reformed culture.
It became evident to some humans that discipline is in their
self-interest and responsible human independence (RHI) requires civic, civil, and
legal constraints on violence. While most people want mutual, comprehensive
safety and security so that they can pursue the happiness they perceive rather
than the happiness another citizen or institution would impose on them, some
want to game the system.
In the known history of mankind, I am aware of only one
proffered proposal for a civic culture, and it has, so far, been repressed by
most citizens’ beliefs in religion; especially theism, especially
Judeo-Christianity, especially the Roman Catholic Church. (Do I write about
England?) Only by being engaged in civic living can adult spouses and their
children expect equal of better living for the grandchildren and beyond.
Neither whatever-God-is nor government will usurp spousal RHI. Adults who propagate
are obligated to their descendants and to fellow citizens according to
posterity’s standards.
Churches collect money by encouraging adults to try to
consign responsibility to a higher power. However, it seems self-evident that
whatever-God-is assigned to humankind the responsibility for civic connection.
Every human being has the individual power, the individual energy, and the
individual authority (HIPEA) to develop integrity to self-interest rather than
tolerate infidelity.
How the U.S. Constitution emerged and is repressed is the
topic of my blog, promotethepreamble.blogspot.com. Briefly, over 70 fellow
citizens helped me develop my insights about the 52-word, abstract preamble to
the Constitution. I constantly share it hoping to consider suggestions for
change, the most recent coming on July 24, 2020. My interpretation today
is: This civic citizen of the U.S. practices and
promotes 5 disciplines---integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity,
“in order to” enjoy and encourage responsible human independence among fellow
inhabitants.
I may be the only U.S. citizen who nurtures an independent
interpretation of the U.S. Preamble “in order to” manage my person’s civic,
civil, legal, and (private) spiritual conduct. However, I think the preamble’s
principles live in the genes and memes of most U.S. citizens. By developing a
personal interpretation of the preamble, the majority can develop an achievable
better future---constraining violence, and it can happen very fast. “Liberty,”
too often taken as license to harm fellow citizens and property must be
replaced with RHI or better.
Perhaps the first reckoning must be Congress held
accountable to revise the First Amendment so as to encourage each citizen to
develop integrity, a human self-interest, rather than religion, a business
enterprise selling metaphysical human hope and comfort. Second, qualification
to apply for elected or appointed political office requires verifiable evidence
of aiding development of the U.S. Preamble’s public discipline and RHI or
better purpose according to the candidate’s insights and expectations.
Law professors
https://lawliberty.org/forgiveness-as-a-political-necessity
By leaping to forgiveness Mr.
Ballor and Professor Hutchinson seem to skip a few steps. First, there’s
offense and guilt. Second is judgement. Third is acceptance of the judgement.
Fourth is resolution.
Whereas integrity is a human
necessity, in marriage a man and a woman first bonding then commit to monogamy
for life including any progeny. In other words, spousal bonding is a mutual
commitment by each person. The commitment is born of mutual appreciation. The
spouses encourage their children to extend civic integrity to the spouses’
grandchildren and beyond. Some children accept the family fidelity.
In contrast, involuntarily, each
human individual is responsible for life on earth, because they live. Neither
whatever-God-is nor government will usurp their opportunity to comprehend and
intend to live a complete human life, whether they marry or not.
Use of particular characteristics,
such as skin-color, to divide humankind is an erroneously evolved psychology.
The moment a living individual accepts that racism is a false attitude, she or
he can begin to develop civic integrity, provided she or he accepts a couple
other principles.
First she or he is a human being. They
have responsibility for life on earth. Second, she or he accepts the human
individual power, individual energy, and individual authority (HIPEA) to
develop integrity rather than tolerate infidelity. In most cultures, youths are
taught humility toward a higher power. Humility is essential. However, a
person’s HIPEA cannot be consigned, because neither whatever-God-is nor
government will usurp the individual’s opportunity to choose integrity rather
than infidelity.
Considering the forgiveness concept
from skin-color. Quoting Genesis 1:27, “So God created humankind
in his own image . . .” When European countries extended their competitive
doctrine of discovery (with African slave trade to North America), it is not
surprising that some Indigenous Americans (IA), on listening to the creation
story claimed God is red and shared “God is red” with their descendants.
People with non-red skin might argue that God has their skin color or none and
convict the IA of an offense. Should the IA accept guilt and request
forgiveness? No: it’s only their belief, and IA do not attempt to civilly or
legally impose God is red.
European entrepreneurs
proposed exploration of North America as a business enterprise and solicited
any inhabitants who were willing to risk the voyage serve for several years in
order to fund the trip. Meanwhile, the entrepreneurs bargained with African
kings for African slaves through Middle-Eastern slave brokers and bought slaves
to help with the labor to settle the wild country. After 144 years, loyal
British colonists realized they were being enslaved by Great Britain to manage
the African slaves and produce goods for fellow royal-subjects at home. In
1774, English colonists organized as a confederacy of states and prepared for
war for independence from England. France supplied the dominant military power
and strategy for the defeat of the English at Yorktown VA in 1781. The 13
states ratified that they were globally free and independent States in 1784.
By 1787, they realized
they could not survive as a weak confederacy and created a convention of 12 of
the states to strengthen the commitment. On reviewing humankind’s methods of
governance, they specified a political system of public discipline for
responsible human independence. Engaged citizens would hold local, state, and
national governments accountable.
I’d like to read each
Ballor’s and Huthinson’s interpretations of the proffered U.S. Preamble’s
people’s proposition. Mine, for comment, is this: This appreciative American practices and
promotes 5 public disciplines---integrity, justice, peace, strength, and
prosperity, “in order to” enjoy and encourage responsible human independence
“to ourselves and our Posterity.”
In my opinion, any
inhabitant who does not possess his or her interpretation of the U.S. Preamble
is a dependent in no position to accuse fellow citizens for her or his disengagement.
I would like to witness
the IA joining the Declaration of Independent’s “the good People of these . . .
States” and the U.S. Constitution’s “We the People of the United States in
order to . . . ourselves and our Posterity . . .”
https://lawliberty.org/lessons-for-america-from-europes-christian-democracy
Standards which many human beings might accept (and the U.S.
hopes “Posterity” will develop) elude Professor Rogers. With the 1787 proffered
U.S. promise at stake, humankind seems coming to grips with physics and its
progeny---chemistry, biology, psychology, and metaphysics in the challenge to
accept the responsibility to constrain chaos and violence.
Rogers cites the duplicity of the First Amendment’s religion
clauses: “While some forms of religious establishment [impose-on] religious free
exercise, some forms of religious establishment [provide] religious free
exercise.” My interpretation is: Religious establishment prevents free
exercise. Let me offer an example: European Judeo-Christianity imposes on
African-American Christianity by attempting to constrain Orthodox Tewahedo
biblical canon through stonewalling.
America may consider Ethiopian
Judeo-Christianity. Under Ezana (fl. 320–360)
Aksum adopted Christianity”; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Aksum. They used Tewhedo narrow canon: “The . . . the Oriental
Orthodox Churches currently
have the largest and most diverse biblical canon in traditional Christendom”; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orthodox_Tewahedo_biblical_canon.
Rogers narrows to the Protestant
squabble over infant baptism [with confirmation after education in the faith,
which makes good sense] versus baptism after the person is of an age to accept
the faith [whether by desire or by coercion]. Each of these Sacraments is a human
construct that may not be approved by whatever-God-is.
I met this human-babel in Baptist
Sunday school when my colleagues agreed that Catholic children were doomed to
Hell because they were infant-baptized. I argued that my 3 children had taken
instruction in the faith and only then took their First Communion. The teacher
ignorantly claimed that Confirmation is not a sacrament. I dropped out and
discovered my faith in the-literal-truth, most of which I do not know. My
Louisiana-French Catholic wife of over 50 years tells me she is glad I never
converted to Catholicism, even though her religious life might have been
easier.
Rogers seems to equivocate the
European Union to imply that each U.S. state may establish religion. However,
the U.S. proffered a proposal for individual discipline “in order to” enjoy
corporate human independence to the continuum of living citizens in their
states as well as in the nation. As a condition for statehood, Utah had to
agree not to establish Mormonism; https://ilovehistory.utah.gov/topics/statehood/index.html. (Poor Mitt Romney didn’t get the message, and as a consequence
there may never be another “saint” elected to the Senate.)
Rogers claims the standard is
managed by the Holy Spirit: “[L]iberal politie can flourish only in societies
that embrace Christian absolutes.” No one knows that a metaphysical entity ever
extended a life beyond the termination of body, mind, and person. But it seems
self-evident that civic integrity is for life-style and conforms to physics and
its progeny. For example, citizens may claim a “right” to protection from
crime. However, the death rate responds to individual behavior rather than to
metaphysics. The preamble looks to posterity’s posterity to discover statutory
justice---the standards for civic living.
A civic culture is possible only
if individual persons develop civic integrity so that most candidates for
election or appointment to office are reliable and held accountable by the
voters. Madison’s difficulty with this prospect stemmed from the Christian
belief that only authoritarian government could constrain chaos. In this
regard, Madison opposed the 5-member Committee of Style (including Madison),
which served from September 8 until September 12, 1787. They added to the draft
preamble a people’s proposition, terminating the states confederation.
Operations began on March 4, 1789, with only 11 states in the Union.
Each citizen may interpret the
52-word-abstract sentence so as to choose a way of living that is civic, civil,
and legal. I share my interpretation so that readers may criticize and perhaps
I improve my modus vivendi: This person practices and promotes 5 public
disciplines---integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity, “in order
to” enjoy and encourage responsible human independence among fellow citizens.
Neither my interpretation nor the
original U.S. Preamble specifies religious discipline. The original preamble
claims the purpose is “Blessings,” or advantages. Too often persons take the
license to injure people, murder people, and damage property for egocentric
liberty. Therefore, after a year, I abandoned “responsible human liberty” for
“responsible human independence.” When the mob takes license, I take a walk.
I’d be interested in Professor
Rogers’ and others’ interpretations of the preamble’s people’s proposition. I
think Americans who don’t own an interpretation ought not vote, let alone apply
for elected or appointed office. Also, the religion clauses should be replaced
with protection of the citizen’s opportunity to develop integrity.
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