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: "The good People of these" united
states facilitate and encourage five civic disciplines---integrity, justice,
peace, strength, and prosperity, "in order to” develop responsible
human-independence “to ourselves and our Posterity.”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
Necessity&justice appreciate life more than afterdeath
Traditionally, scholarship, at least in the west, grounded political philosophy on the mystery of human afterdeath, that vast time after mind, body,
and person stop functioning.
As cultures evolved, some political philosophers focused on
life more than death. A Sumerian, 4,500 years ago, suggest that humankind must
independently constrain chaos on earth. A Greek, 2,400 years ago, suggested
that the-good need not be labeled “God”. A Jew, 2,000 years ago, suggested that
the human-being can perfect their person during life. A mathematician, 80 years
ago suggested that civic-citizens don’t lie so as to avoid inevitable
disclosure by physics and its progeny.
Essay this week expand on these issues.
Quora
https://www.quora.com/Does-it-seem-more-logical-to-have-faith-in-a-creator-as-opposed-to-faith-that-nothing-created-everything-Why-or-why-not?
By Bryan Whitson, comment by
Barry
Goldberg
The human being is born ignorant. It seems rational to
encourage and facilitate acceptance of ignorance until the-ineluctable-truth is
known by female&male-human-being.
It’s alright to form opinion. For example, my opinion is
that necessity&justice is the-good sometimes referred to as the-God. The
laws of physics and its progeny control the-good. Thus, civic citizens don’t
lie, expecting physics will eventually deliver the human loss and misery that
lies invite.
Human conformity requires discovery of the-ineluctable-truth,
how to responsibly apply it, and perfect integrity to the two discoveries.
Necessity&justice are so demanding I see no rationality
to take the leap of faith to advocate either atheism or theism.
https://www.quora.com/Should-we-accept-the-way-all-humans-exercise-their-individual-free-will?
by Rodney Vessels
Absolutely.
Every
human being experiences and observes necessity&justice and has the
opportunity to use their individual power, individual energy, and individual
authority (HIPEA) to develop humble-integrity in self-interest rather than tolerate
dependency on fellow-citizens. Thus, humankind divides itself: civic-citizens
vs dependents, where “civic” refers to necessary&just human connections
more than municipal compliance.
Dependency
can be gaming the welfare system, crime, tyranny, evil, vigilantism, terrorism,
and worse. To maintain the opportunity for dependents to reform to
responsible-human-independence, the civic-citizens provide a system of
written-law enforcement. They continually discover injustices and eliminate
them so as to approach statutory justice. This burden is necessary so as to
proffer to dependents the self-interest to reform.
Even
subjected to law-enforcement, the fellow-citizen is free to resume or replace
the dependence once the constraint has expired, if it does.
What
do you think?
FB
add on: Subjugation to law-enforcement proffers opportunity
to reform to responsible-human-independence.
https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-difference-between-integrity-and-consistency/answer?
by Malak Ali
Integrity
maintains “I don’t know” as long as the-ineluctable-truth is unknown.
Consistency
maintains belief without regard to the-ineluctable-truth—hit or miss.
https://www.quora.com/How-can-life-satisfaction-among-young-people-be-linked-to-collectivism?
by Semra Oz
Young people can accept the necessity&justice demand:
constrain chaos in personal way of living rather than tolerate infidelity to self.
The first requirement is to develop humble-integrity so that your impact may be
appreciated rather than resented.
In practice, neither initiate nor tolerate injury to or from
any person. If an associate proposes that your group inflict injury, object. Depart
if the objection is not heeded. If you are convinced injury will happen, report
the intentions and proponents to first-responders.
To elders who propose injury, youth can object without
imposing personal-opinion.
With most youth behaving this way, dissidents would observe
the self-interest that responsible-human-independence serves. The majority
would enjoy an achievable better future satisfaction with the humble-integrity way
of living.
FB add on: Collective youth can proffer an achievable better
future.
https://www.quora.com/How-would-you-define-good-in-this-statement-It-is-much-better-to-do-good-in-a-way-that-no-one-knows-anything-about-it?
by Debra Williams
I would define the-good in that statement as
necessity&justice.
This is 2021, and we have the benefit of humankind’s the-ineluctable-truth-discoveries
since political-philosophers of the past had their suggestions reported (with then-woke
corrections or not).
Appreciating a creative thinker as political-philosopher
(PP) is a personal preference by a human reader who accepts their individual
power, individual energy, and individual authority (HIPEA) to form personal-opinion
and gauge it by humble-integrity. Here are three suggestions about the-good in
personal development:
First, a Sumerian PP 4.5 thousand years-ago (tya) suggested
that the-God assigned to female&male-human-being the temporal
responsibility to constrain chaos on earth; Genesis 1:27-28. The PP implies
that the task is attainable since the-living humankind is in the-God’s image.
Second, a Greek PP 2.4 tya reportedly asked “Is the-good
God, or is the-God good?”; “Euthyphro”.
Third, a Jewish PP 2 tya reportedly suggested the
human-being can perfect their unique person; Matthew 5:48 and Matthew 6:1
(addressing your statement).
Connecting these three suggestions, the human-being in
the-God’s image is intentionally developing the humble-integrity to perfect
their unique person---privately practicing necessity&justice.
What do you think?
FB add on: The-good:
necessity&justice?
https://www.quora.com/What-are-universal-rules-and-guidelines-for-everyone?
by Herman Hermans
I’d appreciate getting one rule on your list.
The individual who accepts being a human-being neither initiates
nor tolerates injury to-or-from any person. Others
tolerate infidelity to themselves.
Thank you for the opportunity.
FB add on: Avoiding
infidelity to self.
https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-source-of-morality-among-humans-does-it-come-from-the-innate-survival-instinct-of-the-human-as-a-social-animal-or-from-an-external-something-someone-requiring-humans-to-behave-morally?
by Samuel Yap
I think necessity&justice drive human integrity.
Interestingly, the newborn human-being cries when hungry and
does not have enough innate survival instinct to independently find mom’s tit. It
takes about a year for the child to walk. In contrast, a foal stands and walks
in 1 hour and finds their mare’s tit in 3 hours. A thoroughbred horse peaks in
3 years, whereas a human-being requires a complete lifetime to perfect their
unique person.
With encouragement&facilitation, the human-being can, in
their first quarter century, acquire the comprehension&intention to live a
chronologically&psychologically complete life. If so, the person accepts
the individual power, individual energy, and individual authority (HIPEA) to
develop humble-integrity rather than tolerate infidelity to self.
In a culture the follows the above principles, fellow
citizens know they are working to discover&benefit from physics&its-progeny
rather than suffer in mystery. They accept that female&male-human-being is
the only living species with the awareness and grammar by which to research
the-ineluctable-evidence and learn to responsibly survive. For example,
detection of an earthquake in the ocean is followed by tsunami warnings. People
subject to the expected waves escape to higher ground. Less accepted is that
civic-citizens never lie, expecting physics to eventually deliver the loss and
misery that lies invite; herein “civic” refers to human-connection more than municipal-obedience.
However, much of the-ineluctable-truth is unknown. Some
people construct theories to explain an unknown and, conducting failed
research, develop mysteries to support the theory. Mysteries are harmless, as
long as the mysteries are not believed as the-ineluctable-truth. It is alright
to take comfort in salvation by a personal-God, as long as the believer retains
sufficient humility toward the-God, whatever the-God may be.
Necessity&justice demand that each human being develop
the personal integrity to neither initiate nor tolerate injury to or from any
person or association. Vigilantism too often fails necessity, so civic-citizens
provide a written law-enforcement system to constrain injustice. And they continually
improve the system so as to approach statutory justice.
I think the civic-citizen behaves to aid the development of
statutory justice in the human-being’s quest to benefit from
physics&its-progeny.
What do you think?
FB add on: Necessity&justice
drive the human quest for humble-integrity.
https://www.quora.com/Do-you-worry-about-being-negatively-judged-when-you-speak-up-or-stand-for-what-you-believe-is-right?
by Peter Coultas
No. But I developed self-appreciation only in my latest quarter-century.
First, I learned an aversion to “believing” anything. I
wonder, research, experience, observe, think, and earn opinion but
retain humility to the possibility I am wrong. I think many human-beings behave
similarly, according to their unique past, methods, and preferences. Of course,
not every person accepts that they are a human-being. Some
think crime pays so chose to be a criminal.
Second, I have learned to clarify that I do not know much of
the-ineluctable-truth. My purpose therein is to caution the other party that I
am only expressing personal-opinion; I do not bore them with my work to gauge
personal-integrity by humble-integrity, unless asked.
Third, I deny that people are naturally bad and initially
consider (not assume) a stranger to be a human-being who also perceives self-interest-in
mutual, comprehensive safety&security. I do not question their
motive&inspiration to behave civically, where “civic” relates to human-connection
more than to community compliance. If they are bad, they express it soon enough
for me to withdraw.
Fourth, I read, write, speak, and LISTEN, in-order-to
improve my responsible-human-independence rather than to impose on
fellow-citizens who are not interested. In my dialogue, my opinion is my choice
for me, even if the other party expresses an improvement I appreciate. With
appreciation, I consider and may adopt their opinion---may change my opinion.
For example, I encouraged adherence to the-ethics-of physics
until long-after the late Doug Johnson convinced me I had the cart before the
horse: In my words, the discovery of
the-ineluctable-laws of physics&progeny plus adopting
responsible-human-application creates the journal of human ethics. Thank you,
Doug.
If it were not biased to the left (that’s my opinion rather
than “my truth”), Wikipedia might be creating such a journal. With the help of
search engines, quora.com, may be creating a good resource with biases plainly
expressed. (Readers, please inform me of better resources.)
In another example, a Monsignor stonewalled me with “I love
the Church too much to offer you The Host in remembrance rather than in
transubstantiation. If you won’t join, we no longer have reason to meet and
talk.” I responded, thank you very much. The next time we met, I talked
baseball and the weather, and he was cordial.
Finally, a dear friend whose opinions I valued, said, “If
you are to remain my friend, you will not approach me again to consider the
preamble to the U.S. Constitution.” With acceptance, I told my dear wife that a
former friend had announced acquaintance only. (She doesn’t stonewall my work,
because she relies on me to plant and maintain the shrubs and flowers she
buys.)
After 3 quarter-centuries taking my equal-opportunity to
develop the unique-person my single-celled ovum&spermatozoon made possible,
I urge fellow-citizens to study 3 global documents until they have an opinion
about how they connect to proffer an achievable better future: the 4500 year
old Sumerian political philosophy in Genesis 1:27-28, the founders’ 1776
declaration of military-war against England plus their 1778 appeal for French
providence, and the framers’ 1787 constitution to order civic-discipline in the
U.S. Only 39 of 55 framers became signers. Some of the 16 dissenters went on to
aid re-establishing Anglo-American tyranny with the 1791 Bill of Rights to
mimic the 1689 English imposition of Protestant Christianity.
Most fellow-citizens perceive they are too busy living their-way
to take the time to discover the opportunity to develop
responsible-human-independence the U.S. proffered in 1787. It’s their life, and
I can only express my opinion, since I don’t know the-ineluctable-truth.
I write to learn and appreciate opportunity to respond to
comments.
FB add on: It
seems in a person’s self-interest to treasure hard-earned personal-opinion in
civic-debate, unless another fellow-citizen attempts to either 1) impose their
opinion on others or 2) consign their opinion to arbitrary authority. For
example, some fellow-citizens erroneously agree that crime, racism,
vigilantism, tyranny, and otherwise injuring human-beings rewards the
individual.
https://www.quora.com/Do-you-think-society-is-currently-degrading-otherwise-possibly-on-the-downfall-to-something-worse-then-it-was?
by Tyler Ainsworth
I think we are approaching the
abyss and hope the long-needed assent will follow.
Bipeds-evolution began perhaps 7 million years ago,
awareness to construct tools perhaps 3 million years ago, spiritualism perhaps
0.080 million years ago (80 thousand years ago), monotheism perhaps 4.5
thousand years ago, and competitive, Western-Christianity about 514 years ago.
A Sumerian political philosopher suggested that the-God he
followed had assigned to female&male-human-being the independent
responsibility flourish and order events on earth.
In 2021, the suggestion seems like necessity&justice
appealing to the individual human-being to constrain chaos in their way of
living.
I work daily to convince people to consider the suggestion
and further to consider my assertion that the reference, Genesis 1:27-28
effectively separates church from state, church being the-God’s realm and
safety&security female&male-human-being’s independent responsibility.
Further, the combination of the 1776 Declaration and the
1787 U.S. Constitution comport to public discipline in order to encourage and
facilitate responsible-human-independence “to ourselves and our Posterity”.
I think U.S. citizens should be required to 1) write what
the preamble to the U.S. Constitution means to them to obtain a license-to-vote
and to 2) update their statement every 10 years to renew their license.
The opportunity to develop responsible-human-independence is
a self-interest to the human-being, and the right to vote hinges on accepting
the human-being’s individual power, individual energy, and individual authority
(HIPEA) to develop humble-integrity by which to gauge personal-integrity.
If developments like license-to-vote come from the current
diverging chaos, the entity We the People of the United States face an
achievable better future, and the world will be glad.
Now, let me find what you wrote.
https://www.quora.com/When-a-law-is-unjust-is-it-the-right-thing-to-disobey?
by Jose Felipe Gil
Absolutely not, even for Supreme Court justices.
I think of the individual who personally interprets the law
as a vigilante.
Necessity&justice requires every human-being to
constrain chaos in their way of living. Persons who accept this
responsible-human-independence (RHI) behave to develop statutory justice, by
influencing amendment of written-law-enforcement that is found to be unjust.
Vigilantes are found in all walks of life: the public, the Congress, the Court,
and the Administration.
Every human being has the potential to develop their individual
power, individual energy, and individual authority (HIPEA) in-order-to behave
with RHI. But not every person accepts being a responsible human-being. Some
develop a dependent way of living: gaming welfare, crime, tyranny, terrorism,
evil, and worse. Therefore, citizens who behave for RHI, civic-citizens, must
constrain dependent fellow-citizens, in-order-to encourage and facilitate their
reform and thus corporate reform.
HIPEA is so powerful that fellow-citizens who prefer
dependency constantly invent new practices. Therefore, legal systems inevitably
lag statutory justice. Unfortunately, some of the fellow-citizens who most
egregiously act as vigilantes are Supreme Court Justices. I doubt many of them
possess a personal interpretation of the people’s proposition in the preamble
to the U.S. Constitution. I consider the preamble proffered public discipline,
proposed to encourage and facilitate responsible-human-independence “to
ourselves and our Posterity”.
Take for example the Court’s recent, egregious 6:3 opinion
that individual-states must provide 12:0 criminal-jury verdicts (Ramos v
Louisiana, 2020). The U.S. quest for justice based on the-ineluctable-evidence is
competitively argued by the prosecution versus the defense and renders the unanimous-jury-verdict
unjust. Only if a civic-people was willing to pay exorbitant cost could the
court stall procedural injustice until statutory justice is rendered.
A civic people continuously research in-order-to improve
law-enforcement methods. About 40 years ago, the use of DNA in matching crime
perpetrators with their victims was introduced, and today it is well
established.
There are fellow-citizens who game the legal system by
“believing” DNA-evidence to exonerate accused associates and “misbelieving” DNA-evidence
for conviction. The consequential injustice is guaranteed with unanimous jury-verdicts
and lessened with majority verdicts, such as 7:5, closer to Supreme Court 5:4
opinions.
Louisiana established 9:3 verdicts in 1880 to improve
statistical impartiality when a jury is biased 50%;50%. England adopted a 10:2
majority verdict in 1967, reforming their centuries-old unanimous requirement.
With majority verdicts, a jury of 11 DNA-evidence observers with 1 DNA-gamer
can render a just verdict. With 9:3 verdicts, there can be 3 DNA-gamers.
Likewise, a jury comprised of 6 criminals and 6
civic-citizens may render 7:5 justice rather than hung-jury or other injustice to civic-citizens.
In a culture with the intentions for the continuum
“ourselves and our Posterity” to constitutionally pursue statutory justice, the
opinion “Such nonunanimous procedural rules are unconstitutional . . . because
the prevailing public meaning in 1791 of “trial by jury” always and everywhere
meant only a unanimous jury verdict, based on “400 years” of English common-law
practice, colonial agreement at ratification, some Founding-era state
constitutions, and court practices at the time” is tyranny. DNA-evidence was
not available in 1791, and Louisiana’s French influence was not possible until
their statehood in 1812. Louisiana brilliance regarding Amendment VI
impartiality with 9:3 verdicts came in 1880 rather than in the Court-alleged
1898 “white supremacy” convention. The Court selects both cases to consider and
facts to deliberate. Ramos vs Louisiana is 700% more unjust to black-skinned
fellow-citizens, who suffer disproportionate crime rates.
Many people are too busy living to think through issues like
the Court’s tyranny in applying fourteenth century English common law to bully
twenty-second century states. It’s this easy: English-law precedents are voided
by the 1787 U.S. Constitution and its preamble. Unfortunately, we are all
subject to the injustice of unanimous jury-verdicts imposed by the Court’s 6:3
tyranny.
Thank goodness, the 3 dissenters give hop of Court reform in
the future. Meanwhile, dissenters like me will observe the law while we urge
reform.
FB add on: It
is important for fellow-citizens to oppose vigilantes, including some Supreme
Court justices.
https://www.quora.com/Is-it-selfish-not-to-fight-for-your-rights?
by Blake Bollinger
I don’t think so.
But there is only one right for which I fight: the right to pursue
humble-integrity, in-order-to gauge my personal-integrity. Otherwise, I express
my opinion. For example, FDR’s four freedoms intend to gull the human being.
That does not mean I don’t express opposition to injury by
any person to another person or self. Nor does it mean I would not use one of
my guns or other strength to defend my home and family. It means no one can
persuade me to believe or join their association intended to arbitrarily
constrain the individual human-being. I work daily to persuade fellow-citizens
to amend, before 2022, the U.S. First Amendment from promoting
religious-opinion to encouraging and facilitating civic-integrity.
My method of pursuit is to experience&observe, read,
write, speak, and LISTEN in-order-to either discover&responsibly-use
the-ineluctable-truth or maintain my newborn status from three
quarter-centuries ago: “I don’t know” (what I don’t know).
After 3 quarter-centuries, no person or association can
persuade me to profess what I don’t know. I think the political philosophy of
humble-integrity can be inculcated in youth and beyond so as to create the
possible politics rather than a “next best”. In such a culture, most citizens
would understand why human-beings who reject humble-integrity suffer constraint
to maintain necessity&justice.
If someone asked me if they have the right to life, liberty,
and the pursuit of happiness (1776 declaration of war against England), I’d
respond, life and happiness cannot be offered by either the-God of
necessity&justice nor government nor “the good People” of this land.
Further, liberty is license bestowed by the victor in war and can be easily
revoked. Therefore, it is better to accept responsible-human-independence
(RHI). If they asked how to acquire RHI, I’d answer: experience&observe,
read, write, speak, and LISTEN in-order-to either discover&responsibly-use
the-ineluctable-truth or maintain newborn status: What’s that?
If someone asked me if a culture using the above principles
has been proposed on earth, I’d answer: yes. Amending “Blessings of Liberty”,
which is too often taken as license to injure fellow-citizens, to “opportunity
to develop RHI”, the amendable 1787 U.S. Constitution proffers a culture of
humble-integrity. Its purpose is 5 public disciplines---integrity, justice,
peace, strength, and prosperity, “in order to” encourage and facilitate
responsible-human-independence “to ourselves and our Posterity”. The preamble
offers no standards for the disciplines, leaving it to the continuum “oursevels
and our Posterity” to approach if not attain statutory justice. Since religion
is excluded from the public disciplines, it is left to the
individual-human-being to choose their motivation&inspiration.
If someone asked me if the 1776 Declaration and 1787
Constitution reflect an ancient thought, I’d answer that a Sumerian political
philosopher perhaps 4,500 years ago suggested, as recorded in Genesis 1:27-28
and in 2021 interpretation, that of necessity&justice,
female&male-human-being must constrain chaos on earth.
I’d be grateful to learn your opinions about my views and
the three historical-documents I cite.
FB add on: Fight
the right to pursue humble-integrity.
https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-chronological-order-of-Socrates-Plato-and-Aristotle-What-were-their-major-contributions/answer/Phil-Beaver-1
Comment by Mark Chandos
Mr. Chandos, I added my appreciations to you today on the
post at promotethepreamble.blogspot.com. Your comments are provocative and you
motivated me to discover the rest of an Otto von
Bismarck (d. 1898) quote: “. . . the art of the next best” regarding
politics as the possible.
Judges and lawyers praise Western law as a consequence of
the Magna Carta, 1215. However, they practice the Machiavellianism(s) expressed
in “The Prince” (written 1513, published 1532). They use England’s Glorious
Revolution and its 1689 Bill of Rights (stipulating a Protestant monarchy) to
justify Machiavelli’s Chapter XI irony:
In a church-state-partnership, the clergy and politicians live high on
the hog and the citizens neither rebel nor expatriate, inculcating in their
young their hope that their-God will eventually save them from the misery and
loss. Machiavelli presented an example in which the Church eventually reigns.
Interestingly, judges, lawyers, clergy, and legal-scholars never mention
Chapter XI Machiavellianism. They persuade citizens to ignore
responsible-human-independence (RHI) and await a personal-God to relieve the misery
and loss.
The 1787 U.S. Constitution assigs to privacy the individual
citizen’s motivational beliefs. Some citizens do not perceive the
humble-integrity required for RHI. However, a few citizens accept the
human-being’s individual power, individual energy, and individual authority
(HIPEA) to develop humble-integrity rather than tolerate infidelity to self.
I think I know some people who practice civic-integrity,
hope their-God fulfills their hopes against the unknown, and sincerely have no
objections to fellow-civic-citizens’ differing personal-Gods. I would not
interview them about their private inspirations. But I appreciate their
civic-integrity.
The First Congress, in 1789, should have comprehended,
assimilated, encouraged, and facilitated the humble-integrity the combination
of the 1776 declaration of war for independence from England and the 1787 U.S.
laws for public discipline of, by, and for the continuum “ourselves and our
Posterity”. Instead, they re-instated Anglo-American, Chapter XI
Machiavellianism, codifying it with the 1791 First Amendment’s religion
clauses. Since then, the U.S. Supreme Court has exacerbated the tyranny with
opinions like Greece v Galloway (2014); my concerns are niggling to them.
China is not going to shoot the horse that’s feeding them
and would not prevail if they did. However, U.S. chaos is now divergent, so we
need our own reform. The 2021 “oursevels and our Posterity” could . . . should
amend the First Amendment to encourage and facilitate civic-integrity instead
of civil-religious-opinion, before 2022 ushers in.
Religious opinion is not “next best” to civic integrity.
Dependency on personal-God or government is not “next best” to
responsible-human-independence.
Mr. Chandos, thank you again for your comment, and what do
you think about these additional considerations?
Updates for December 7, 2016 post
I
read my December 7, 2016 post on April 20, 2021 to consider response to Mark
Chandros’s welcome expression of concern. Since 12/7/16 a few of my ideas have
changed, thanks to growing reader-idea-contributions, and I did not want to
update the original post. I write about 4 new views:
First,
civil “liberty” seems practiced as license that is arbitrarily bestowed (blessed)
by the victor in war and willfully demanded by destruction, injury, and murder.
Also, its “solidarity” enslaves gullible “brothers”, who risk constraint,
imprisonment, perhaps execution. Recall the bloody revolution’s motto: liberty,
equality, brotherhood. Therefore, I advocate “responsible-human-independence”
rather than either liberty or freedom. I suggest the “ourselves and our
Posterity” retitle the French gift in New York Harbor “The Statue of
Independence”, consistent with 1787 U.S. civic-intentions affirming 1776
war-intentions.
Second,
“the rule of law” is praised as a historical consequence of England’s “Glorious
Revolution” of 1688. The U.S. suffers the tyranny of some Supreme Court
justices preserving British precedent at the expense of U.S. intentions to
develop statutory justice rather than arbitrary-law enforcement. The 1787 U.S.
Constitution proposes five public disciplines with no standards to facilitate
the continuum “ourselves and our Posterity” to discover statutory justice. Of
course, that is my view, but anyone who studies the documents can reach their
conclusion, and it may be similar.
Humankind
works to discover and responsibly utilize the laws of physics&progeny,
including biology, psychology, and imagination that comports to physics rather
than metaphysics.
Third,
the 1787 U.S.-public-disciplines exclude religion, implying that the
individual-human-being is free to decide their choice of
motivation&inspiration and trust&commitment in the necessary&just
demand that they constrain chaos in their way of living and thereby aid
humankind’s responsibility to provide peace on earth. (This human-independence
was expressed by a Sumerian political philosopher and recorded in Genesis
1:27–28 and affirmed in the 1776 declaration of war for independence.)
Fourth,
while Agathon wrote about “force”, which I changed to “harm”, I now think
“injury” has more impact.
As
always, please comment.
https://www.quora.com/Is-it-okay-to-openly-criticize-woke-cancel-culture?
by Ricky Anarion
I think so.
It is especially important to neither initiate nor tolerate
injury to any person or their property.
It is also important to note that woke-cancel practices
begin with religion and cannot be disguised with civil “freedom of religion”
when what the human-individual needs, in self-interest, is
responsible-human-independence by which to develop humble-integrity so as to
gauge their personal-integrity.
The “ourselves and our Posterity” of 2021 need to oust from
elected and appointed office clergy&politicians who take both
sides---secular woke-cancel and religious woke-power.
The citizen who has not the integrity to vote in
self-interest ought to be presented the U.S. preamble and the opportunity to
interpret it according to the way of living they are developing. If they
decline or make no sense, they lose their license to vote and are on notice to
reform their regard for citizenship.
The necessity&justice of responsible-human-independence
seems self-evident in this U.S. age of divergent chaos.
https://www.quora.com/unanswered/How-can-we-make-sense-of-influential-movements-organizations-and-campaigns-without-an-equal-attention-to-those-that-lacked-influence?
by Lawson Shepherd
I appreciate your concern and offer my support to those who at
last lack impact: their opportunity to independently
establish civic integrity has passed. If they now accept
responsible-human-independence (RHI) as self-interest and “do the right thing”
it will be to assuage the coalition that previously lacked influence.
I encourage them to take this opportunity to establish RHI.
I absolutely oppose woke&stonewalling violence,
destruction, injury, and murder. We are fellow citizens, after all. However, I
also oppose the imposition of “freedom of religion”, Protestantism
Judeo-Christianity, a Catholic-dominated Court, English-law precedent, and the
1787 U.S. unconstitutionality of imposing civil-religion when citizens require
civic-integrity. U.S. psychological tyranny is shocking!
It’s another case of political ends don’t justify
legislative means. I refer here to the reinstatement of U.S. psychological
dependency on English, Chapter XI Machiavellianism, 7 years after French
military-providence helped the 13 British colonies win their war for the
people’s independence (not liberty bestowed by the victor in war). The 1787
U.S. Constitution proffers the civic-disciplines for RHI to the continuum
“ourselves and our Posterity”. The 1791 First Amendment bemuses
1787-public-discipline.
The 1789 Congress created a
factional-American-religion-Congress-partnership to compete with the
Canterbury-Parliament-English-“divinity”. Congress codified legislative tyranny
with the 1791 First Amendment, and the Court has increased the hubris against
necessity&justice ever since. The Court’s 2014 opinion in Greece v Galloway
holds my objections to be “niggling”. I assert that I am addressing the
obvious: neither the-God nor government will usurp the individual’s
self-interested duty to constrain chaos in their way of living nor their
opportunity to risk abdicating responsible-self-interest.
To originate reform so as to establish the 1787 U.S.
intentions, we, the 2021 “ourselves and our Posterity” must amend the First
Amendment so as to encourage&facilitate individual-humble-integrity rather
than impose civil-religious-opinion.
Mr. Shepherd, if any of this comports with your experiences
and observations, please think of how this U.S. opportunity can be made a
happening, perhaps as soon as 2022. Either way, what is your opinion about my
concerns?
FB add on: At
last, the entity We the People of the United States (formerly "the good
People of these Colonies) has the immediate opportunity to establish
the-necessary&just responsible-human-independence (Genesis 1:27-28) that
remains proffered in the 1787 U.S. Constitution. It is a privilege that we, the
2021 “ourselves and our Posterity” can make it happen.
https://www.quora.com/Why-is-tradition-so-important-for-some-peoples-political-ideology?
Comment by Karlan Demmin
I appreciate your concerns (I changed former personal-opinion)
and hope you can propose a way to establish what was proffered in the United
States in 1787: I think, responsible-human-independence (RHI). RHI, a
civic-self-interest was distracted&repressed by “separation of church and
state” as “freedom of religion”.
In my post, I didn’t write anything about the 1776 reference
to “Creator” but can share my opinion, at this point in my search for
the-ineluctable-truth, most of which is unknown.
First, Phil-Beaver-worship-and-praise did not influence origination
of my ovum, or my spermatozoon, or my embryo. Likewise, I make no claim to
power, energy, and authority to bargain with doctrinal-God for salvation of my
mind, body, and person during my afterdeath: the vast time after those three
entities stop functioning. Consequently, my first concern is that capitalizing “creator”
seems an act of ignorant, arrogant confusion; hubris. It is Western European if
not pure English imposition of doctrine about theism. And therein represents
Anglo-American pride; America’s psychological-dependency&cowardice.
Second, even though a Sumerian political philosopher perhaps
4500 years ago claimed that his-God controls events, the philosopher expressed
necessity&justice: female&male-human-being is charged to-independently-establish
order-on-earth; peace.
Appreciating the research&discovery humankind has
accomplished since then, I perceive events are controlled by the laws of
physics and its progeny, including biology and psychology. The physics-unknowns
empower imagination-to develop metaphysics. But eventually the construct yields
to physics. That is why civic-people never lie: they expect physics to deliver
lie-invited misery and loss.
I think potential energy is the source of
physics&its-progeny. But for all I know Jesus is the-God
of the Sumerian philosopher’s God, 2500 years before Jesus was born and 700
years before Abraham was born. I am sincere when I write “for all I know”; and
am prepared to be judged by Jesus in my afterdeath.
Focusing on Genesis 1:27-28, we read in the New Testament
that Jesus said a few mysterious things: be perfect; render unto government . .
.; before Abraham “I AM”. Regardless of church doctrine, I perceive evidence of
Jesus’ lessen/message before Jesus’s was born. Thus, I imagine Jesus influenced
the Sumerian philosopher. If so, the Genesis 1 message is valid: by accepting
responsibility to constrain chaos on earth, people are accepting Jesus’s
message: they can and should perfect their unique person. If so, humankind can
approach perfection. The message also holds if physics is the-God of events.
It seems evident that the newborn human-being is pure. If
reared with encouragement and facilitation to develop the humble-integrity
required for responsible-human-independence, they can choose to perfect their
unique person before their afterdeath begins, yet are free to pursue infidelity
if they don’t perceive the self-interest of humble-integrity.
What humankind needs is a culture that advocates these
principles. A perhaps sufficient proposal was proffered in the 1787 U.S.
Constitution. It negates the Anglo-American hubris that a civic-citizen must
first be a theist and if not a theist, a believer, and if not a believer, a
subject of the church, and if not of the-church, of a church. But not an
Eastern Orthodox Church, or an Oriental Orthodox Church, or many of the other
non-Western Christian churches. The 1776 declaration tolerated differing
theism, maintaining theistic division of humankind, while the 1787 U.S. Constitution
assigned religion to the adult-individual’s privacy.
It takes courage for the individual human-being to accept
the challenge of perfecting their person before their afterdeath, meanwhile
responsibly pursuing a religion for hope against mysteries, such as death. What
the U.S. has not yet accepted is that the Lord discouraged cowards. The U.S.
must terminate its dependency on obsolete English precedent, whether it be
unanimous-jury-verdicts imposed on states by a 6:3 Court opinion,
reformed-Catholicism, Judeo-Christianity, or any other failure by legislators
and Justices to accept responsible-human-independence as fellow-citizens rather
than as tyrants.
Mr. Demmin, I hope you have empathy for these concerns and
remedies: how can they be established in one of the world’s countries, if not
in the U.S.?
FB add on: The
majority is, after all, part of female&male-human-being and by
necessity&justice responsible to frankly consider the minority-coalition's
woke&stonewalling-movement. For 234 years, the U.S. has suffered the
imposition (tolerant-stonewalling) of English, reformed-Catholic
(factional-Protestant?) Anglo-American-religious-tyranny. It is time to amend
the First Amendment so as to encourage&facilitate the humble-integrity
needed for responsible-human-independence.
https://www.quora.com/Why-is-it-a-good-thing-that-the-world-is-not-fair?
by Amy Potter
You have a good question. I think the word choices are
erroneously influenced by the “scholarship” of John Rawls; see https://www.jstor.org/stable/24354129?seq=1,
skip Rawls’ book, and oppose speakers who try to equivocate justice.
Here’s why:
Both necessity and justice inform every human-being to serve
their self-interest by developing the humble-integrity needed for
responsible-human-independence (RHI). Unfortunately most civilizations don’t
inculcate those principles to their youth, and egregious fellow-citizens bemuse
their civilization with reason that is faulty if not perverted. Physics-and-its-progeny
does not respond to reason.
I’m a chemical engineer, married to one woman and 3 children
for life. Nonetheless, I have a view of the political philosophy proffered some
4,500 years ago by a Sumerian thinker. Genesis 1:27-28 asserts that necessity (due
to higher psychological powers than other living species) demands
female&male-human-being to independently constrain chaos on earth. In other
words, neither the-God (whatever-it-may-be), nor government, nor humankind can usurp
the human-individual’s responsibility to discipline self.
If there were a RHI-utopia, it could be ruined by either
humanity or an individual equivocating justice.
To constrain chaos on earth, the civic culture must limit
human-dependency: nourishing banal, carnal appetites like drugs and sex;
committing crime; aiding tyranny; terrorizing fellow citizens; and worse.
Therefore, citizens who develop RHI aid discovery&enactment of statutory
justice. That is, as unjust-written-law-enforcement is discovered, it is
amended so as to approach if not attain justice.
A culture of humble-integrity may seem unattainable. I think
that is only because it has never been tried.
Revising the word “liberty” (license bestowed by the war
victor) to “responsible-human-independence”, the 1787 U.S. Constitution,
together with the 1776 declaration of war for independence from English-law
proffers such a culture. In the amendable law, the entity We the People of the
United States holds both their state and the union of states accountable to
statutory justice to the continuum “ourselves and our Posterity”.
The preamble proffers public discipline that consigns to
privacy anyone’s choice to pursue a religion. We the People of the United
States encourage and facilitate 5 public disciplines---integrity, justice, peace,
strength, and prosperity, “in order to” develop responsible-human-independence
“to ourselves and our Posterity”.
We, the “ourselves and our Posterity” of 2021 have
self-interest in amending the First Amendment so as to encourage and facilitate
civic integrity rather than civil religious-opinion.
There’s justice in physics-and-its-progeny not yielding to
human constructs like John Rawls’ “justice” and religion’s mysteries.
FB add on: Confronting
John Rawls’ “justice”.
https://www.quora.com/Is-an-eye-for-an-eye-still-a-viable-option-in-our-world?
by Bill Sands
I don’t think so. Vigilantism nourishes injustice, and
mutilation increases dependency.
Necessity demands that human-beings constrain chaos on
earth. But not all human-beings constrain chaos. Therefore, part of their work
to constrain chaos is to constrain dissidents.
The civic citizen neither initiates nor tolerates injury to
or from any fellow citizen. They aid the development of statutory justice.
When they suffer injury, they report to law-enforcement for
determination of guilt and any punishment due the perpetrator. Only when
stoppable injury is imminent should the civic citizen police an incident. When
the prevented-incident ends, law-enforcement should be informed.
What do you think?
Bill Sands:
i
think it helps to hear differing opinions and then come to a conclusion one
person said an interestng thing at the time eye for eye was written it was
writen not as license but as constrant as revenge was unrestrained it was too
limit people to a measured response i fond that interesting, and am interested
in how the concept of revenge is evolving in modern society i grew up in a mob
town it was a rough place with rough justice
do
times change do people change ? let us hope they do or will some day
Phil responds:
I see your point and am glad I asked.
Connery says “Well . . . the Lord hates a
coward.” I relate to that.
My obsession these days is to persuade U.S.
citizens to consider the demands of both necessity and justice: to constrain
chaos in personal living.
Few fellow-citizens accept the demands and
therefore tolerate infidelity during their lifetimes. This is so, because of
their failure to separate church and state. They wait for their doctrinal-God
to usurp their responsible-human-independence (RHI).
Both government and the-God make it plain that
humankind must independently develop RHI, even though some fellow-citizens
prefer dependency—-drugs, sex, crime, tyranny, terrorism, theism, etc.
Governments that partner with theism inculcate
in their youth and beyond a lifetime hope for a higher power that will relieve
the excesses of clergy and politicians; relieve the tyranny. This evil is
described in Machiavellian irony (to protect his life, I think) in “The
Prince”, Chapter XI.
Neither the 1776 declaration of war against
England nor the 1787 U.S. law suggests the civil imposition of theism. The 1787
Constitution proffers five public disciplines—-integrity, justice, peace,
strength, and prosperity, “in order to” develop responsible-independence “to
ourselves and our Posterity”. Neither religion nor theism is included in the
disciplines.
However, Congress, with hubris against
necessity and justice, created a religion-Congress-partnership starting in
March, 1789, and codified the tyranny with the 1791 First Amendment.
A Sumerian political philosopher perhaps 4500
years ago suggested that the-God assigned to female&male-human-being the
independent responsibility to constrain chaos on earth. See Genesis 1:27–28.
If the fellow-citizens who want RHI wish to
legally challenge 234 years of stonewalling the 1787 U.S. Constitution, we must
amend the First Amendment so as to encourage and facilitate humble-integrity
rather than theistic-hubris.
The Lord will not usurp the power assigned to
female&male-human-being.
Thank you,
Mr. Sands, for sharing.
Notable writers I won’t read
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/11324722-the-righteous-mind (deciding not to buy “The Righteous
Mind”
It seems Jonathan
Haidt recommends fellow citizens tolerate and nourish each other’s emotions
rather than encourage and facilitate responsible-human-independence. I strongly
disagree.
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.
