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
Prejudice against female&male-human-being is bigotry
Quora
https://www.quora.com/What-do-you-call-a-society-that-derives-power-from-happiness-instead-of-wealth? by Alex Boast
Good
question, Mr. Boast. And this is the third successive day I want to show
appreciation before writing my response. See the post “appreciations” at promotethepreamble.blogspot.com,
where you’ll find the other two appreciated-persons and Alex Boast, May 1.
I
wish to call one such society the emerging “ourselves and our Posterity”
according to my view of 1787-U.S.-proffered intentions: civic-discipline for
responsible-human-independence. Civic, because some members of the public
choose dependency: gaming alms, crime, tyranny, and worse.
Between
4 thousand and 5 thousand years ago, thinkers began to imagine the-God instead
of polytheism. Cities, nations, and human-races competed to attract the-God’s
favor to perceive superiority over others. Yet there was at least one political
philosopher, perhaps a Sumerian, who suggested that necessity&justice
requires humankind to independently order&harmonize life on earth. His political
view of mankind independently-responsible for peace-on-earth is expressed in
Genesis 1:27-28.
Countless
thinkers later, the British Empire was flourishing, and its 1689, Bill of
Rights, constitutionalized a Protestant monarchy. The Church-of-England has
assigned seats in Parliament’s upper chamber. In 1763, King George decided to
tax loyal subjects in the American-eastern seaboard-colonies in order to pay
French-war debts.
The
Anglo-American colonies organized to resist and negotiated with Nova Scotia to
join them, even though many Catholics lived there. In 1774, 13 colonies formed
a confederation, called themselves states instead of colonies, and began to
write state-constitutions.
The
founders, in 1776, declared war against England without disparaging the
English-Trinity, the God many colonists worshipped. For spiritual affirmation,
the founders cited “Nature and Nature’s God” and for military-authority “the
good People” appealed “to the Supreme Judge of the world”. In 1778, they
negotiated French-military providence. In 1781, Cornwallis surrendered to Rochambeau,
de Grasse, and Washington at Yorktown, VA.
Without
church-state partnership, the USA won independence from England. Nothing in the
founders’ intentions or actions lessened the view of mankind’s authority&independence,
expressed in the Genesis 1 record.
Six
years later, the 13 free&independent states were not functioning for
survival, much less success in the world. Framers from 12 states met and
negotiated a federal-republic with “the good People”, described in the preamble,
able to amend the constitution in order to hold officials for their particular
state accountable as well as officials for the United States. Nothing in the
1787 U.S. Constitution lessens the humble-integrity that is expressed in the
1776 Declaration. Only 39 of 55 framers were signers on September 17, 1787.
Some aided the tyranny of creating an Anglo-American-religious-Congress,
codified in the First Amendment.
In
the year 2021, We the People of the United States can assess the harm done by re-establishing
Anglo-American church&state-culture instead of conserving the
responsible-human-independence the 1787 U.S. intends.
The
political-philosophies involving a doctrinal-God that have been constructed
since that Sumerian suggested responsible-human-independence is astounding. The
chaos the U.S. has reached under Anglo-American religious opinion instead of
humble-integrity to humankind’s role on earth could . . . should excite every
U.S. citizen to reform to responsible-human-independence.
Students
who convert Maslow’s hierarchy of needs into a hierarchy of individual
responsibilities appreciate humble-independence in their self-interest toward
the happiness they develop for their unique person rather than submitting to
someone else’s vision for them. That’s what the 1787 U.S. promises, and we, the
“ourselves and our Posterity” of 2021 can make it happen.
It
may begin by amending the First Amendment so as to encourage&facilitate civic-humble-integrity
rather than civil-religious-opinion.
Mr.
Boast, and other readers, I write to learn and appreciate comments.
FB
add on: The intention expressed in the 1787 U.S. Constitution is
civic-discipline “in order to” encourage&facilitate the
responsible-individual’s unique-happiness rather than the vision someone else
has for them. So far, some citizens prefer dependency.
https://www.quora.com/How-should-we-fix-injustice-and-inequality? by Melissa Luci
Ms.
Luci, I think your question is profound. I am adding your name to my
appreciations post at http://promotethepreamble.blospot.com before I attempt
to respond. (Remarkably for me, I cut and pasted that message for the first
time, to Mr. Harris, yesterday.)
To
me, the combination “should-we” and injustice&inequality demand acceptance:
there is a reliable if not valid answer.
I
think the valid answer was expressed by a Sumerian political philosopher about
4,500 years ago. Adding my meagre comprehension of what humankind has
discovered since then, I interpret Genesis 1:27-28 as follows the verbatim
quote (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.’”
And my interpretation:
Female&male-human-being
has the responsible-independence to harmonize life-on-earth.
Immediately, my
interpretation is better than in my past writing, because I express “harmonize
life” rather than “constrain chaos”; positive vs negative. Also, the verb “has”
allows me to promote responsible-human-independence (RHI) without offering its
source, which I do not know.
Heretofore, I felt
compelled to address the philosopher’s God. Your verb “should” relieves me of
that urge. I can accept without objection that the philosopher attributed the
human-condition and the gender order, male then female, to his-God, whatever
that may have been. I need not pretend the omniscience to judge his-God (or any
other, for that matter). Neither must I pretend that every individual will
eventually act on the “should”.
Following physics and its
progeny, biology, we may choose to speak of female&male since she bears the
ova needed to allow a possible-person, provided her mate is committed-to her
and their children&beyond for life.
Further, we can attribute
male-fidelity to the female, and vice versa, as fidelity to the family. We may
view fidelity as human-necessity in the smallest two associations: spouses and
their family. Further, human-connections in fidelity seem . . . is justice.
The construct so far
seems to indicate that we should accept 3 principles: first, that we are
human-beings; second that we have equal power, energy, and authority to live in
harmony; and third, that not every human-being accepts RHI. Some choose dependency:
gaming alms, elitism, coercion, force, crime, tyranny, terrorism, and worse.
Dependency is unjust to equality. The human-being should neither initiate nor
tolerate injury to-or-from a person or society.
We should fix equality
and injustice by behaving for necessity&justice. The person who wants to
develop competition with the Sumerian-philosopher’s God should, in
self-interest, maintain sufficient humility toward necessity&justice.
I am grateful for your
astute question. I write to learn and would appreciate comments.
FB add on: Self-interested necessity&justice should fix
inequality&injustice.
https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-politics-of-bigotry-and-how-does-it-affect-a-true-democracy? by Derek
Harris
Mr.
Harris, I think your question is profound. I am adding your name to my
appreciations post at http://promotethepreamble.blospot.com before I attempt
to respond.
“True
democracy” means to me: everyone licensed to vote may vote, and a vote-count at
50% plus one vote or more is the winner of the election/referendum. Majority
rules in Supreme Court opinions and most state elections, but not in
presidential elections and legislative decisions. In the U.S., “democracy”
means the act of voting rather than “true democracy”. The repressed U.S.
intention is to encourage&facilitate responsible-human-independence (RHI).
U.S.
Federalist Papers 9&10 address the complexities of democracy as 1 vote per
licensed person in appreciation of factions. Factions derive from several
influences: nature vs reason (I think physics vs metaphysics),
church-state-partnership, elitism, and slavery.
First,
some individuals tend to guide their behavior to comport to physics and its
progeny. They intend to vote for necessity&justice. However, Euro-American
law is bigoted toward human-constructs rather than physics. The 1787 U.S.
Constitution intended to end Euro-colonial-American tradition and position the
continuum “ourselves and our Posterity” to develop domestic order to approach
justice&necessity rather than tradition. However, Congress, in 1789, restored
Euro-American if not Anglo-American tradition. Thereby, many Supreme Court
justices oppose physics to preserve erroneous legal precedence. The practice is
praised “the rule of law”. But physics does not respond to law. It’s up to
individual citizens (including Supreme-Court justices) to recognize this
tyranny and end it.
Second,
this tyranny was made possible, because a faction of the framers perceived
three considerations: political power of church-state-partnership, the
dominance among colonial believers of Western-Christianity if not the English
reformed-Catholic-Trinity, and the church-irony of Chapter XI Machiavellianism
(ultimately church rules politics).
Some
dissenting framers aided plans to repress as “secular” the stated purpose of
the 1787 U.S. Constitution, thus, disenfranchising the continuity “ourselves
and Our posterity” . . . so far. The bigotry then was that elected officials
could tout personal Christianity to win election by licensed voters (about 5%
of non-slave inhabitants) who were 99% Euro-Christian. Thereby, 1782’s motto “E
Pluribus Unum” became . . . for Christians exclusively, as codified in 1956
change to “In God We Trust”. The bigotry marches on.
Third,
Federalist 10 addresses protection of the minority from the majority. It
mentions the coalition of minorities to establish a majority. It assumes the
Electoral College and other means of defeating true democracy will sustain the
rule of law. Small states are protected from large states by the balance of
powers, especially a bicameral legislature. However, Federalist 10 assumes the
officials who demonstrate patriotism&integrity in their states become
reliable officials for the Union of states. That is, a federal-republic will
prevent factions that oppose the rule of law. “The influence of factious
leaders may kindle a flame within their particular States, but will be unable
to spread a general conflagration through the other States.” This does not hold
when the factious leaders intend to defeat the rule of law itself. In 2020, racism
replaced RHI as the appeal to the majority voters, empowering politicians whose
intent is power rather than necessity&justice. Citizens who want to benefit
from lawlessness vote accordingly.
Fourth,
Euro-Christian bigotry was avoided by both the founders in the 1776 declaration
of war for independence and the signers of the 1787 Constitution (39 of 55
framers). Some scholars label it “the godless constitution”. By referring to
“property” rather than “slaves”, the framers created laws that accommodated
future emancipation of slaves. Abolitionists imagined possible-politics when
the non-slave states, then in 5:8 minority, became the majority. Religious zeal
misled 7 states to fire on the USA with its 27 state dominance to preserve the
union of 34 and growing. Some people, like R. E. Lee, listened to their
ministers, who claimed that slavery was the Trinity’s posterity-punishment for
sins of their ancestors. I don’t know if any slaves were Christians following
the Ethiopian Tewahedo Bible. But there were Ethiopian slaves.
Thus,
both true democracy and a voting system that disrupts democracy fail to uphold
the rule of law when the license to vote is granted on age and residency. The
failure can be addressed by vote-licensing based on the applicant’s comprehension&acceptance
of the domestic purpose. The resident of age demonstrates three acceptances: 1)
they are a human-being who seeks opportunity&responsiblity to develop their
person, 2) they accept the purposes of the United States, as they comprehend
them, and 3) they can cite past behavioral evidences. In other words, if a
person of voting age dissents from the U.S. purpose, they cannot be licensed to
vote. The U.S. purpose, so far repressed, is public discipline so that
individual human-beings may responsibly pursue the happiness they perceive
rather than submit to someone else’s vision for them.
The
U.S. Constitution is amendable and has the stated purpose (in the preamble), as
I perceive it: to encourage&facilitate five domestic disciplines “in order
to” assure independence “to ourselves and our Posterity”. The 5 disciplines
include integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity. Religious-belief
is a private pursuit rather than civil goal/imposition. Domestic strength
prevents impositions by foreign nations. Residents who oppose the purpose might
invite written law-enforcement, continually improved so as to approach
statutory justice. Since domestic-discipline-standards are not stated in the
Constitution, the continuum ourselves and our posterity works to discover
necessity&justice.
The
most bigoted U.S. practice is the rule of law itself. Necessity&justice
demand humankind to research physics and its progeny such as biology and
psychology in order to responsibly behave in this world. Too often, reasonable
human-constructs must be reformed when research uncovers
the-ineluctable-evidence for human-behavior in self-interest. The
Anglo-American idea that 9 justices can oppose physics with a 5:4 vote is
ludicrous!
A
civic-citizen can pursue a personal religion or personal-God, provided they
reserve sufficient humility toward temporal necesssity&justice.
Mr.
Harris, I appreciate your question. I hope to learn from reader comments.
FB add on: The bigotries of Christian-factional-opinion
continues to ruin 1787 U.S. domestic intentions: majority humble-integrity in
order to encourage&facilitate responsible-human-independence.
https://www.quora.com/Can-the-greater-good-be-used-as-a-system-of-control? by Lawson Shepherd
I think so, by a civic-people for all
fellow-citizens.
Human-beings are well informed that
necessity&justice judges behavior. The civic-citizen knows to neither
initiate nor tolerate injury to-or-from any person or society. They know not to
lie, because physics and its progeny such as biology and psychology eventually
deliver the loss and misery that lies invite.
However, because of the statistical
variations in the laws of physics, there will always be people who do not
develop the humble-integrity a human-being needs for
responsible-human-independence (RHI). That is some individuals choose
dependency rather than RHI: choose welfare-gaming, crime, tyranny, and worse.
Hence the need for justice as well as necessity. In other words, endeavors for
a utopia seem futile, based on the laws of physics.
I hope I have expressed three requirements
for “the-greater-good”: the majority accepts that they are human-beings; they
apply the no-injury principle including themselves; and they appreciate both
necessity and justice. Within these constraints, if a civic-citizen wants to
pursue a personal-God, for example, for hope and comfort against the unknowns,
it does not lessen their behavior for the-greater-good. Otherwise, they have
joined the dependents.
I think such a culture was proposed by the
signers (39 of 55 framers) of the 1787 U.S. Constitution. The proposed-culture
has been repressed by Congress since March 4, 1789, when, representing only 11
formerly free and independent states, they reinstated Euro-American, factional
Protestantism to compete with England’s constitutional,
reformed-Catholic-membership-in Parliament.
Consequently, I write to encourage
fellow-citizens to amend the First Amendment in-order-to encourage and
facilitate civic humble-integrity rather than civil-religious-opinion.
What do you think?
FB add on: Today, I overcame personal-bemusement with the
totalitarian, utopian dream “government of the people, by the people, for the
people” (Abraham Lincoln) as well as the common “of, by, and for . . .”. I
prefer responsible-human-independence by citizens for necessity&justice for
all.
https://www.quora.com/What-does-the-phrase-contrary-to-popular-belief-honesty-hurts-more-than-lies-mean? by Renata Flores Apelo
Human-beings are well informed that
physics and its progeny ultimately disclose lies and usually in brutal ways.
The civic-citizen never lies, in order to lessen human misery and loss.
“Honesty” means innocently expressing
ignorance of the-ineluctable-truth. It’s a cousin of “conscience”, which
expresses the egocentric guide to “personal-integrity”. The human-being who
develops any of these three guides to civic-behavior is lying to themselves.
Civic-behavior, meaning
appreciating&assuring reliable human-connections rather than tolerating
infidelity to self, requires humble-integrity. In other words, the human-being
may gauge honesty, conscience, and personal-integrity by humble-integrity.
The individual pursues humble-integrity by
maintaining their childhood attitude “I don’t know” as long as they don’t know.
For example, does your spouse’s flirtation outside the marriage signal neglect
or infidelity? Questions like that cannot be answered egocentrically, so
honesty, conscience, and personal-integrity are insufficient.
Humble-integrity is pursued by doing the
work to discover&utilize the-ineluctable-evidence. For example, a juror who
believes DNA to exonerate but disbelieves DNA to convict criminals honestly
expresses integrity-privation. In 1967, England made possible 10:2 jury
verdicts to defeat organized-crime’s influence on jury trials. In 2020, the
U.S. foolishly imposed 12:0 verdicts with a 6:3 opinion: integrity-privation is
found in high places.
When my PCP diagnosed lung-cancer, I
asked, “You mean to tell me in a few months we may be discussing my
termination?” He answered, “That’s possible. We are going to do everything we
can to prevent it.” I was reassured, but started teaching my dear wife the
things I do for the family. I also research things I could do to starve the
malignancy. The PCP could have attempted some “white lie” to ill effect.
The woman who on husband’s death bed
confessed adultery to clear her conscience could have let him pass in peace.
Necessity&justice demand the
human-being to never lie, in order to lessen human loss and misery.
FB add on:
Necessity&justice
inform the human-being that honesty, conscience, and personal-integrity are
gauged by humble-integrity.
Not if the message for change is difficult.
For example, take “civic” to refer to human connections more than municipal
compliance. Now, consider the message: the civic-citizen neither initiates nor
tolerates injury to-or-from any person or society.
The society that adopts this principle
must inculcate it in their youth and beyond, and when 2/3 of citizens are in
some stage of commitment&practice, a better future is possible. However,
people are too busy living the life they think they can live to care about such
lofty ideas.
Without imposing this principle on my
family and others, I practice it in my daily connections with them and hope my
example is noticed. My family is not likely to notice, because the articulation
is new and my practice is not old. Unfortunately, the articulation came in my
77th year.
If I had been reared under the principle,
I would have practiced it with my family and friends with no need to bore them
with my noble idea. Since the noble idea is not practiced, nobody wants to hear
it.
I think it’s a mistake to aspire to change
a society, especially one as small as a family, except by example. What the
individual can do is change themselves and share the message when invited.
An alternative is to write the best book
ever and let those who read it effect the change if they want to.
https://www.quora.com/Do-open-source-users-have-a-moral-obligation-to-the-community? by Semra Oz
I don’t know the specifics of your
question. May I answer in general?
If so: In a culture that encourages and
facilitates each individual to accept developing a human person, most people
behave so as to neither initiate nor tolerate injury to-or-from any person. As
they practice this principle, they begin to accept the human individual power,
energy, and authority (HIPEA) to develop humble-integrity rather than tolerate
infidelity to self. With long success, they imagine they could perfect their
unique person until death terminates mind, body, and person.
But not every person accepts being human
and further discovers HIPEA and if so chooses the humble-integrity that is
necessary for responsible-human-independence. Some individuals think dependency
pays: imposing a personal-God, gaming welfare systems, crime, tyranny, evil,
and worse.
Facing any choice to act or not, a
human-being has the HIPEA to neither initiate nor tolerate injury to-or-from
any person.
https://www.quora.com/What-responsibility-or-moral-commandment-arises-out-of-our-ability-to-witness-our-own-unity-with-all-beings? by Ale Valverde
I think most human-beings yield to
necessity&justice more than mystery and infidelity, and articulation of the
difference would aid an achievable better future.
Necessity&justice demands that the
species female&male-human-being, the only species with the
awareness&grammar to develop humble-integrity toward physics and it
progeny, must . . . must . . . must independently constrain chaos on earth.
Any motivation&inspiration the person may pursue must not supplant
constraining chaos in their way of living.
The human-infant is totally ignorant. The
newborn does not intuitively stand in one hour and
find a tit in 3 hours, as a foal does. However, soon the typical child begins
to assess necessity&justice and is attracted to self-interest. However, the
community does not encourage&facilitate development of the humble-integrity
by which the child may, by age 25, acquire the comprehension&intention to
live a physically&psychologically-complete human-life.
Consequently, many adults are dependents:
welfare gamers, cheaters, criminals, abusers, tyrants, terrorists, and worse.
Our education departments---local, state,
and national---must encourage& facilitate the acquisition of
comprehension&intention to the continuum “ourselves and our Posterity”, in
order to behave with responsible-human-independence during each complete
lifetime. Perhaps there will always be persons who choose dependency and
therefore continuous human-need for statutory justice.
The reform to a culture of humble-integrity
can happen as soon as 2/3 of fellow-citizens begin the transition from the
Euro-American tyranny “the-rule-of-law” to responsible-behavior under the laws
of physics and its progeny such as biology and psychology. Humankind’s
responsibility-on-earth has always been to discover the-ineluctable-evidence,
research its responsible application, and behave accordingly. That does not
imply that developing a personal-God for comfort and hope against the unknowns
is irresponsible; it’s just that believers retain sufficient humility toward
the-God, whatever that entity may be.
What’s wonderful is how fast humankind landed
a vehicle on mars then made a flight there. That suggests how quickly the chaos
can be constrained, with most U.S. human-beings developing
human-necessity&justice rather than tolerating infidelity to mystery.
FB add on: I think an achievable better future is available by
publically articulating necessity&justice more than mystery&infidelity.
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, answering comments by Otto
Bihrer, continued from last week
I appreciate the dialogue. But why pink?
You’re wearing Western if not
British-Empire “the-rule-of-law” shades. Take them off and consider that “consent
of the governed” is coercion by the-victor-in-war (with its partner, the
established religion) for citizens to join the new tyranny, for
“the-community-good”.
Necessity&justice inform
female&male-human-being to constrain chaos on earth in order to
encourage&facilitate the responsible-human-independence whereby a person
can responsibly pursue the happiness they want rather than submit to a
fellow-citizen’s vision for them. Fellow-citizens who accept this
civic-responsibility commit to develop&maintain statutory justice
(continually improved law-enforcement), to constrain dependent citizens:
welfare-gamers, criminals, tyrants, terrorists, and others. “Civic” herein
applies to human-connections more that municipal regulations.
I realize it’s a shock for anyone to
question Euro-American tradition, but it should not be. The U.S. proposition
was proffered by the framers’ signing-faction (39 of 55) on September 17, 1787,
then unconstitutionally repressed by Congress on December 15, 1791.
However, consider the easy concepts I am
expressing and discover how to improve my approach. Your suggestions might
surprise you.
The suggestion that neither the-God nor
government will usurp the human-individual’s opportunity to constrain chaos in
their life is not new. What may be-new is a concrete-proposal to establish a
1787-proffered-culture to encourage&facilitate
responsible-human-independence, a personal-interest, rather than
mystery-dependency. Mystery empowers human-tyranny.
That an achievable better-future is possible
is no mystery, now that the domestic chaos is as palpable as food poison.
FB add on: The U.S. suffers not just Anglo-American tyranny: it's
Euro-American religious war that could-have, should-have, ended in the U.S.
soon after September 17, 1787.
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