The rule of law is tyranny

 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

The rule of law is tyranny

England’s Glorious Revolution of 1688 resulted in Parliament constitutionally granting rights to commoners. It ended government competition with the Catholic Church by requiring a Protestant monarchy. By constitutionally imposing a religion-Parliament partnership, England alienated if not usurped the individual’s opportunity to develop the humble-integrity that is required for responsible-human-independence. Necessity requires independence when everyone else is taking ruinous action.

This suggestion is not new. A Sumerian philosopher expressed it in primitive terms 4500 years ago, in Genesis 1:28. In a 2021 view, humankind must independently bring order to the earth. To do so, individuals must discover and responsibly use the laws of physics and its progeny, keeping metaphysical pursuits private. Because metaphysics increases rather than lessens chaos, it cannot be used for order.

Both the 1776 declaration of war against England and the 1787 U.S. Constitution conform to Genesis-1 in its separation of church from state and demand for the human individual to constrain chaos. These principles were explored this week in new ways.

The rule of physics and its progeny including imagination offers order, while the rule of law offers the errors of judges and lawyers and thus chaos.

Quora

https://www.quora.com/Is-justice-an-absolute-concept-or-just-the-application-of-rules-made-by-human-beings? by Aziz Ferjani

Google search suggests “human being” means “distinguished from other animals by superior mental development, power of articulate speech, and upright stance” (Oxford Languages). The modifiers---superior, articulate, and upright---are not absolute.

On the other hand, justice seems a noble standard against which to judge a person’s human-being or personal-integrity. The work of the human-being is to discover and responsibly apply justice.

Discovery must inefficiently begin anew with each generation, unless both the-ineluctable-evidence and unconfirmed possibilities are recorded. The record of discovery and inconclusive research constitutes human ethics, responsible-human-independence, humble-integrity, and the grounding of statutory justice.

For example, the long-assumed flat-earth gave way to globe-like reality. Gravity makes both the ground stable and oceans contained, even though earth’s surface-rotation speed is 1,000 mph. Even imagination seems constrained by the laws of physics and its progeny, such as biology and psychology:  Religious beliefs reluctantly yield to physics.

Human beings divide themselves by their acceptance of physics and its progeny. The ineluctably-good citizen neither initiates nor tolerates harm to or from any person, including self. Thus, their civic-connections uphold and improve written law-enforcement. That is, they behave so as to increase statutory justice, in order to reduce chaos on earth.

They distinguish themselves as human-beings. Other fellow citizens perceive they can take advantage of the civic-citizens through dependency, crime, tyranny, evil, and other inferior interests to self. Thus, they, intentionally or not, join a lesser species: animal, plant, or mineral.

Perhaps the most egregious person is the tyrant. Scholars, aware or not, conserve the tyrant’s power with the propaganda “elite”. Thereby, elite thinkers of fifteenth through nineteenth century Europe, especially England, developed a political theory: “consent of the governed” for “the common good” under the “blessings of God”. This theory arrogates a Sumerian political philosopher’s 4,500 year-old suggestion, recorded in Genesis 1:28:  Humankind has independent responsibility to order life on earth.

In the millennia since that suggestion, tyrants have claimed to speak for the-God of Genesis-1 and persuade individuals to evade responsibility to constrain chaos in their way of living. Consequently, many individuals tolerate infidelity to self rather than develop the humble-integrity that is required to effect responsible-human-independence.

Justice seems an absolute concept that is grounded in the laws of physics, whatever their source, and the human-being works to discover and responsibly apply the benefits.

FB add on: Justice under law seems man-made and thus tyranny against civic-people.

https://www.quora.com/Should-freedom-of-speech-have-a-metaphorical-goal-post? by Graham C Lindsay

I think so.

And I think initial communication is to explore mutual human interest. One party offers eye contact, and if it is rejected, civic-citizens appreciate privacy. With eye contact, one says, “Hello.” If the other responds with more than “Hello”, there may be chance for conversation, starting with pleasantries, sharing interests, civic-concern, ideas for action, connection, and commitment to follow-up. If the civic concern is not shared, conversation might continue on pleasantries and acquaintance develop anyway. In other words, the first objective on initially encountering a fellow-citizen has a broad range of consequences from preservation of privacy to discovery of shared civic-concern and will to reform politics.

The purpose of political discussion is to constrain chaos on earth. However, no 2 people have the same awareness of the chaos. Chaos is so ubiquitous that no two fellow citizens share urgency respecting a given disorder/injustice. After 7 million years’ physical evolution, 3 million years’ psychological advancement, perhaps 150 thousand years’ development of grammar, and 5 thousand years cultural development, it is sad and shocking to consider that sex remains a dominant impediment to civic progress.

A Mesopotamian political philosopher suggested mankind’s responsibility to constrain chaos on earth, as recorded in Genesis 1:27-28 (CJB): “So God created humankind . . . male and female he created them. God blessed them: God said to them, ‘Be fruitful, multiply, fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over . . . every living creature . . .’”

In 2021, there’s evidence that everything evolved under the laws of physics and its progeny, including biology and psychology.

No one knows the cause of the laws of physics. It is not obvious that knowing the cause is as important as understanding the laws and how to responsibly benefit. For example, everyone knows that overexposure to the sun can cause death. Similarly, most people do not lie, because the laws of physics too often expose the lie; misery and loss ensue.

One is constrained to ask why sex continues to distract individuals from the necessity to constrain chaos in their lives. I assert that there are two causes. First, no culture appreciates the individual human-being as psychologically like the-God of Genesis 1. No culture encourages and facilitates responsible-human-independence. Second, elites perceive that they can persuade individuals to evade the self-discipline to constrain chaos in their lives. Only the aware individual can overcome the elites.

The metaphorical goal post of free speech seems the perfection of the human individual.

FB add on: Through free speech the individual can defeat the tyranny of the elites.

https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-difference-between-morals-and-beliefs? by Gavin Morones

Merriam-Webster online usage for “moral” seems to decline in certainty from a. to e., with modifiers principle, conception, standard, judgement, and agency, respectively. The next 2 usages are worse with probable and perceptual, respectively.

Oddly, belief gets firmer as the list goes, with trust/confidence, acceptance, and conviction, respectively.

I think these two terms bemuse more than empower human minds, because they are developed by scholars who promote the rule of law. Promoters are influenced by the elites, who persuade individuals to submit to “self-governance” or “the common good”.

It is well known that the human-being behaves in self-interest and they divide themselves according to the necessity they perceive. Some citizens think humble-integrity empowers them to responsible-human-independence (RHI), in order to handle the necessities of living. A few behave accordingly. Others think they are dependent on higher power, such as government, their God, or fellow citizens. The criminal thinks crime pays.

Elites observe that if they can persuade enough fellow citizens to consign RHI to them, the elites can live high on the hog and the dependents will neither rebel nor expatriate. Otherwise good citizens fall into this dependency-trap for two reasons: 1) tradition preserves that way of living and 2) the individual perceives they are too few to effect civic integrity, so they tolerate infidelity-to-self and share it with their descendants. However, the reality is RHI cannot be consigned or avoided without loss and misery.

A Sumerian political philosopher about 4500 years ago, before the Abrahamic religions, suggested that humankind is independently responsible to constrain chaos on earth. The primitive message is recorded in Genesis 1:27-28 and can be interpreted after the discoveries through 2021 and beyond.

Learning to constrain chaos requires discovery of cause and effect as represented by the-ineluctable-evidence. For example, local warning to evacuate for a Category 5 hurricane ought to be heeded. Similarly, civic citizens do not lie, in order to lessen human misery and loss.

Ethics for humankind is the record of discovery of the-ineluctable-truth and how to benefit. Morality is the practice to responsibly benefit. Belief invites dependency rather than RHI.

FB add on: Human ethics and morality emerge from discovery of the-ineluctable-truth and its responsible benefits. Belief without discovery invites dependency.

https://www.quora.com/Should-a-good-leader-favor-some-citizens-over-others-or-try-to-include-all-equally-Why-or-why-not? by Mary Scott

I’d like to start with the why or why not to develop an argument for establishing the entity We the People of the United States as the good-leader. It takes four historical documents--three to establish the good-leadership and one to reveal its repression since March 4, 1789.

First, there’s the Sumerian political philosopher who, in Genesis 1:27-28, suggests that female&male-human-being is the living species that has responsibility to constrain chaos on earth. In other words, the-God will not usurp responsible-human-independence. There is a lot for humankind to learn. Since church claims to represent the-God, church cannot usurp civic integrity. In 2021 comprehension, male attaches with and empowers female and her viable ova to “be fruitful” for life:  He would not be unfaithful to himself much less them.

Second, in 1776, the USA founders, aware of the Genesis suggestion or not, humbly separated church and state, in representing “the good People of these Colonies”. They claimed citizens’ authority on “Nature and Nature’s God” and did not disparage England’s reformed-Catholic Trinity. They appealed “to the Supreme Judge of the world” for reliability in their war for independence from England. In 1778, they negotiated French providence, and in 1781 enjoyed England’s surrender to France and the Continental Army at Yorktown, VA. The founders expressed humble-integrity in separating church and state.

Third, in 1787, accepting that the confederacy of 13 free states could not survive, 12 states sent delegates to frame domestic order in a Union of states. Not one word of the 1787 U.S. Constitution lessens the humble-integrity expressed in the 1776 Declaration. Some framers did not agree with the proposed public discipline proffered in a revised preamble, just 5 days before the document was to be signed. Also, some framers did not agree with the assignment of spiritually to individual privacy rather than the customary imposition of factional-American Protestantism. For these and other reasons, only 39 of 55 framers were signers on September 17, 1787.

The good leader according to the 1787 U.S. Constitution can state: "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.” No standards are given, because “ourselves and our Posterity” are to discover statutory justice. Religion is assigned to privacy. It seems clear that “liberty” is licensed by the victor in war, whereas responsible-human-independence may be accepted as the human opportunity suggested in Genesis 1, the 1776 Declaration, and the 1787 Constitution’s articles.

At least 2 of the 9 required of 12 participating states committed to ratify the Constitution provided the First Congress would add a Bill of Rights to mimic the English bill of 1689. No one knows if 2 dissident states (Virginia or New York) or the rebel state might have later joined with 7 states willing to ratify without a Bill of Rights.

Fourth, unfortunately, Congress codified tyranny. On March 4, 1789, Congress, representing 11 states, began and quickly established a Protestant-Congress partnership to (unconstitutionally) mimic England’s Church-of-England-Parliament constitutional partnership. In 1791, with 14 states, Congress codified the tyranny with the religion clauses in the First Amendment. The Supreme Court did not object, and since then have joined the tyranny. For example, in Greece v Galloway (2014), they label my objections “niggling”.

The good leader is the fellow citizen who encourages and facilitates the human-being’s opportunity to develop the humble-integrity to constrain chaos in their lifestyle. To behave with responsible-human-independence rather than tolerate infidelity to self. Fellow citizens who behave to increase chaos must be constrained until they reform.

U.S. Congresspersons who increase chaos must be constrained until they reform. The First Amendment must be amended so as to encourage and facilitate responsible-human-independence rather than promote religious opinion.

FB add on:  The good people neither initiate nor tolerate harm to or from any person. Fellow-citizens should treat each other the same until one’s behavior causes harm. Then, the good people, through statutory justice, should constrain the misbehaving fellow-citizen until they reform.

https://www.quora.com/Why-do-the-same-people-that-believe-in-individualism-claim-their-personal-truths-to-be-universal? by Kaustav Malik

A human-being can express only their opinion: neither an opposing opinion, the other party’s opinion nor the-ineluctable-truth. The person who asks an opinion should expect opinion rather than hold the speaker to the-ineluctable-truth.

If the opinion seems the-ineluctable-truth, the prudent listener appreciates the insight, researches validity, and considers benefitting from the information.

For example, encountering the erroneous perception that “the sun’ll come up tomorrow has far-reaching impact on a person’s appreciation of physics. Our galaxy’s sun is 90 million miles away and 1.3 million times bigger than the earth. Yet each evening, the earth’s rotation on its axis hides the huge sun. By midnight, your vantage point is 180 degrees opposite noon on the other side of the earth’s sphere. Each morning, earth’s rotation un-hides the sun. The erroneous perception that the sun quickly crosses the sky is due to earth’s surface-speed of 1,000 mph.

In a more essential issue, if someone asks the opinion, “Is your God the-God?” the listener, in prudent humility toward the-God might value the opinion, “I don’t know yet hope so” or better.

FB add on: A civic-conservative preserves the newborn-human posture “I don’t know” when that is so.

https://www.quora.com/What-causes-societies-to-flourish? by Rod Vessels

I don’t know.

But I think the belief that most fellow citizens are working for an achievable better future keeps the majority behaving for that result. Accepting that misbehaving fellow citizens may reform is critical.

The U.S. is in chaos, and reform may follow. My suggestion is to amend the First Amendment so as to encourage and facilitate civic integrity rather than maintain the tyranny of civil religion.
Under God cannot compete with under the-God (whatever-it-may-be). The 2021 “ourselves and our Posterity” ought to reclaim the 5 public disciplines proffered in the preamble and the 1787 U.S. Constitution. The disciplines are integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity. Standards are to be discovered by “ourselves and our Posterity” and the purpose is responsible-human-independence. These goals cannot be achieved in partnership with religion.

FB add on: The-nation “Under God” cannot overthrow the-God and must reform to its 1787 intentions.

https://www.quora.com/There-is-no-justice-in-this-world-and-nothing-is-fair-Do-you-agree-with-me-or-not-Why? by Hussean H.k

I don’t agree.

A political philosopher suggested 4500 years ago that female&male-human-being is independently responsible to constrain chaos on earth. The message is reported in Genesis 1:27-28.

Most people do not accept the suggestion and therefore seek a higher power to constrain chaos in their life. Neither government nor the-God of Genesis-1 will usurp a person’s opportunity to develop the humble-integrity necessary for responsible-human-independence.

I think there are individuals who accept being human and having individual power, energy, and authority (HIPEA) to develop humble-integrity rather than tolerate infidelity to self.

https://www.quora.com/What-obstacles-to-critical-thinking-are-how-do-they-prevent-critical-thinking-and-how-can-they-be-avoided? by Angelica Hernandez

It seems to me critical thinking should be avoided, in order to facilitate the humble-integrity necessary to develop personal-integrity.

Google tells us “Critical thinking is the intellectually disciplined process of actively and skillfully conceptualizing, applying, analyzing, synthesizing, and/or evaluating information gathered from, or generated by, observation, experience, reflection, reasoning, or communication, as a guide to belief and action.”

Humble-integrity conforms to the-ineluctable-truth, most of which is unknown. The newborn human condition is “I don’t know”. It seems prudent to maintain that posture as long as the-ineluctable-evidence has not been discovered. For example, if asked, “Is your God the-God?” It seems sufficiently humble to respond, “I don’t know yet take comfort in thinking so.”

There are too many subjective phrases in “critical thinking”. Who judges intellectual discipline? Skill? Who decides the information is worthy? Why is belief sufficient for action? I don’t think the-ineluctable-evidence yields to reason or any other human construct. I don’t know much of the-ineluctable-truth.

https://www.quora.com/What-keeps-people-from-forming-a-good-society? by Rodney Vessels

Of course I don’t know.

What I think is there are two causes: 1) life is so short the typical individual does not accept the responsibility to constrain chaos in their life until infidelity-to-self seems (not is) too extensive for recovery, and 2) elites take advantage of predictable individual-reluctance to exercise responsible-human-independence. Elites bemuse individuals who want mutual, comprehensive safety and security in order to responsibly pursue the happiness they want rather than submit to a “higher power” (government, the-God, or both) that envisions something else for them.

These principles seem expressed in three pieces of literature and repressed in one. Thus, at least one remedy is available if and only if most people accept that they are human-beings and therefore have the HIPEA to responsibly pursue the happiness they perceive. HIPEA stands for human capability for unique perfection. Each human-being has individual power, individual energy, and individual authority with which to develop the humble-integrity needed for the responsible-human-independence to approach their unique, perfect person before death. Even in a culture of humble-integrity, some people would develop HIPEA for infidelity. For example, some people think crime pays.

Unhappily, no civilization, society, or culture encourages and facilitates the principle of the individual constraining chaos in their life. However, such a culture was proffered in the 1787 U.S. Constitution then repressed in the 1791 Bill of Rights. Intentionally or not, the signers, 39 of the 55 framers of the 1787 Constitution conformed to both the founders’ 1776 declaration of war for independence from England, and a political-philosopher’s suggestion about 700 years before Abraham was born:  Female&male-human-being is charged to independently constrain chaos on earth. The independence refers to the other living species as well as the-God of Genesis 1:27-28. After the discoveries as of 2021, the-God could well be necessity under the laws of physics and its progeny, including psychology.

The fact that the 1776 declaration of war does not refer to Genesis 1 does not mean that the founders were not aware of it and possible interpretation that peace on earth is humankind’s responsibility: the-God will not usurp humankind’s independent opportunity. In any event, the declaration expresses humble-integrity to both church and state and separates the two. It asserts authority to “the good People of these Colonies” on “Nature and Nature’s God” and appeals “to the Supreme Judge of the world” for affirmation of their intentions. In 1978, the founders expressed world judgment on military power by appealing for French providence. In 1781, England surrendered to France and the Continental Army at Yorktown, VA. The 1776 declaration separated church from state, conforming to Genesis 1.

The former colonies ratified their global status as thirteen free and independent states as recorded in the 1783 Treaty of Paris. However, the USA confederacy of states was too weak, so 12 states sent delegates to Philadelphia to frame a Union of states. The consequence is the United States, a federal republic wherein the good people in their states hold elected and appointed government officials accountable to the public discipline specified in the 1787 Constitution. So far, the entity We the People of the United States have not accepted the civic-integrity required for responsible-human-independence. Most citizens develop and maintain civic apathy on the principle that their HIPEA is insufficient to cause government reform. That’s the conclusion elites have fostered since March 4, 1789, when Congress was seated representing eleven states, two maintaining dissidence, and one remaining a rebel.

The history from Genesis 1 to the 1787 U.S. Constitution is exponential increase in chaos on earth. Chaos was already underway, with the chance for reform when monotheism emerged in cultural evolution. However, Abraham and Sara did not observe fidelity to posterity and created chaos: primitive technological procreation. Abraham mated with Hagar rather than observing monogamy with Sara. The consequential chaos is divergent in 2021. We, the “ourselves and our Posterity” of 2021 do not have to continue to tolerate tyranny against the three documents with common principles.

We can accept HIPEA, develop humble-integrity, and constrain chaos in our individual lives. A first step is to amend the First Amendment so as to encourage and facilitate U.S. civic integrity rather than promote civil religion. With the power of the Internet, We the People of the United States can accomplish this reform before 2022 ushers in.

Back to your question, I think people don’t form a good society because no one has suggested establishing the culture intended by the three documents that preceded the 1791 Bill of Rights.

If you want U.S. reform to the intended humble-integrity to happen, help make the message go viral.

FB add on:  Most people want mutual, comprehensive safety and security so they can responsibility pursue the happiness they perceive rather than submit to someone else’s vision for them. Here’s reference to political literature that proffers U.S. reform.

https://www.quora.com/Should-youth-steer-away-from-pseudo-moralistic-stances? by Tara Wright

I’m glad you asked, but prefer to share what I think youth should do:

First, as soon as possible, accept that you are a human-being and what that means. First, you are charged (by necessity cited in the literature: Genesis 1:27-28) to constrain chaos in your life; I think this suggestion is affirmed by the 1776 Declaration and the 1787 U.S. Constitution, but not by the 1791 Bill of Rights. Second, you are a god-facing-death, because you have the individual power, the individual energy, and the individual authority (HIPEA) to develop the humble-integrity required to perfect your unique person. Third, tolerating harm, whether by you or from another person/institution lessens your journey; never lie, in order to lessen human misery and pain. Fourth, the adults in your life cannot imagine the future you face and therefore can only share experiences and observations to avoid.

Second, establish your intention to acquire the comprehension and intention to approach perfection before death. Therefore, patiently, privately learn from education and community rather than tolerate indoctrination. As you proceed, develop humility toward the teachers, who are also struggling to perfect their unique persons but do not yet live in a culture that encourages and facilitates this way of living and therefore cannot articulate your goals. By all means, develop sincerity and kindness toward fellow citizens, no matter where they are on their path to unique perfection. Recognize that there will always be physical and psychological variations that cause people to deviate from self-interest: some people think crime pays. Develop and never lose trust-in and commitment-to the-ineluctable-evidence, much of which has not been discovered. Be comforted by the statement “I don’t know” when that is so.

Third, appreciate that there at least four phases to perfection of a human-being. From age 3-7, accepting that you are a human-being. Through age 11 to 22 accepting HIPEA and choosing to use it to develop humble-integrity rather than tolerate infidelity to self. From 18 to 36, embracing the opportunity to provide a product or service fellow-citizens need and using you time in professional service to acquire the experiences and observations that work toward human perfection. Apply the guidance: neither initiate nor tolerate harm to or from any person. Apply civics (integrity in human-relations) and participate in local and national development of statutory justice: correction of unjust law systems. From 65 and beyond, retire to an activity that encourages and facilitates acceptance of being a human-being.

Fourth, master these principles as standards for your self-reliance in affirming them for use or rejecting them using your HIPEA.

Clearly, I have shared opinion, because I do not know the-ineluctable-truth. I share opinion trusting that through self-reliance you regard it so. Also, I write to learn and would appreciate your comments.

FB add on: The intended U.S. culture might encourage and facilitate youth to responsibly develop self-interest.

https://www.quora.com/Is-there-something-you-believe-in-that-is-wrong? by Adam Osman

Seems rather than is wrong:  A culture that is designed to conform to the Genesis 1:27-28 demand that female&male-human-being constrain chaos on earth was proffered by the 1787 U.S. Constitution: practicing five public disciplines will empower “ourselves and our Posterity” to develop responsible-human-independence.

https://www.quora.com/What-constitutes-life-that-makes-the-right-to-life-the-most-important-human-right? by Madz Ortiz

Without life, the individual cannot develop the humble-integrity that they need to perfect their unique person before dying.

Law professors

https://lawliberty.org/the-project-to-understand-america/

I think both sides miss the American intentions, expressed only in the document that 39 signers out of 55 framers issued on September 17, 1787. Two other documents support its intentions: the humble-integrity: that is needed for responsible-human-independence.

Genesis 1 separates church from state and the 1776 declaration of war against England expresses integrity to both private-church and civic-state.

It’s important for readers to consider responsible-human-independence rather than prejudicial scholarship as a means to comprehend the American intention to public-discipline. Political philosophy has been developing since bipeds accepted species-dominating awareness. They emerged 7 million years ago, too soon for the discovery that dinosaurs perished 65 million years ago.

Individuals began to discover necessity. Only the independent humans who develop humble-integrity toward the-ineluctable-evidence may hope to constrain chaos on earth. The dissident fellow-citizens exacerbate conflict.

We need reach back only 4500 years to observe these suggested principles, later expressed in the 1776 Declaration and the 1787 Constitution. Before Abrahamic theisms emerged, a political philosopher expressed in Genesis 1:27-28 (CJB): “So God created humankind in his own image; in the image of God he created him: male and female he created them. God blessed them: God said to them, ‘Be fruitful, multiply, fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea, the birds in the air and every living creature that crawls on the earth.’” I refer to the author’s God as “the-God”, hoping to express humility.

Unhappily for most people, elites among human societies perceive personal advantage to convince their tribe that the elites partner with a God to substitute for responsible-human-independence. That is to say, the tribe can have a God that usurps the human responsibility: peace on earth. Under “higher power” the individual submits to “consent of the governed”. These enslaving phrases come from European literature of the sixteenth through eighteenth century and in the scholarship that followed.

I leave it to readers (except on request) to leap from Genesis 1 to the 1776 Declaration and on to the 1787 Constitution. It is sufficient to assert that the 1787 intention includes female and male, does not mention race, negates civil religion, and errs to confuse independence (a human acceptance), as “liberty” (license from war’s victor).

BTW: the Civil War was about the South’s religious opinion that abolitionists in the North were evil in trying to accelerate the American-factional-God’s (millennial) plan for redeeming black slaves for the “sins” of their ancestors. It was a white-Christian versus white-Christian war, as demonstrated first in “bleeding Kansas” in 1856. See https://encyclopediavirginia.org/entries/letter-from-robert-e-lee-to-mary-randolph-custis-lee-december-27-1856/. Also see “religious opinion” in the CSA’s Declaration of Secession.

YOUR COMMENT HAS BEEN AUTOMATICALLY APPROVED AND POSTED. [Not] However, posted on facebook.

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.