Obligations

 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 appreciation:  For discussion, I convert the preamble’s predicate phrases to nouns and paraphrase it for my interpretation of its proposal as follows We the People of the United States proffer & practice 5 public disciplines —- integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity, “in order to” encourage & facilitate 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

Obligations

Interestingly, I think coincidently during Constitution Day week, some people considered and asked about obligations. A responder must decide: obligations to whom? I think obligations to your person come first, and answered accordingly, IMO.

Our friend Mona Sevilla, Baton Rouge, presented an inspiring talk “Obligations” in 2008 or so. I’d like to hear it again or read it.

Quora

https://www.quora.com/Discuss-whether-we-have-obligations-towards-future-generations-If-so-what-does-this-imply? by Shiba

Shiba, I appreciate your question and say so in the “appreciations” post at promotethepreamble.blogspot.com. It implies the-ineluctable-truth. “Ineluctable” means “not to be avoided, changed, or resisted” (merriam-webster.com).

My expression of the U.S. Constitution’s proffered purpose is: we, the living “ourselves and our Posterity” practice 5 disciplines --- integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity, “in order to” encourage&facilitiate responsible-human-independence (RHI) to We the People of the United States. “Posterity” means personal-descendants and legal immigrants’ descendants: adults, children, grandchildren, and beyond into the future generations.

Necessity&justice demand RHI. The personal-will to be a human-being informs everyone who is considerate. However, some persons don’t’ accept that they are a human-being, often, because they prefer dependency; for example, indolence, abuse, crime, tyranny, evil, and such.

Consequently, the RHI-community on earth must constrain the dependents. There will always be some dependents. Within each race, civilization, culture, and nation, at least 2/3 of members of at least 2/3 of associations must acquire the humble-integrity to practice, encourage, and facilitate RHI. The obligation to encourage&facilitate entails the development and maintenance of statutory-justice. That is, written law-enforcement that 1) constrains those dissidents to RHI who caused injury to fellow-citizens and 2) eliminates injustice when it is discovered. Supporting statutory-justice in law-enforcement requires civic-humility.

Citizens who choose not to participate in the politics of RHI fail their obligations to their posterity. The U.S. generations that have accommodated Congressional repression of the 1787 U.S. Constitution’s proffered proposition, which I interpret for my citizenship, in the second paragraph above, are failing their children, grandchildren, and beyond. They know-not whether heaven/hell is an afterdeath with continual awareness of the lives of descendants.

The consequence of about 12 generations’ apathy toward the 1787 U.S. intentions produced the divergent-chaos we are suffering. Additionally, the $28.7 trillion federal debt started with elite-America poorly negotiating with China from the start: President Nixon’s announcement on July 15, 1971 that he would visit China.

But to reach back 234 years to U.S. intentions past generations neglected, we, the 2021 “ourselves and our Posterity” must&can 1) amend the First Amendment so as to encourage&facilitate civic-RHI rather than Congressional-religious-pride and 2) hold the Supreme Court accountable to the-ineluctable-evidence rather than majority-opinion, especially regarding precedent.

I read, write, and speak to listen so appreciate comments about my opinions.

https://www.quora.com/If-nobody-owes-you-kindness-does-that-mean-they-have-the-right-to-violate-your-human-rights? by Maciah MacPherson

I assume you are addressing the opportunity to use humble-integrity to gage&develop personal-integrity.

I think most people in the world are conflicted and bemused by an inculcated pursuit of higher-power rather than responsible personal-happiness.

However, the moment a person accepts the opportunity to think&say “I don’t know and will learn the facts” when they don’t know, they are no longer subjugated to internal/external beliefs/impositions. They no longer demand kindness and enjoy mutual appreciation among civic citizens, where “civic” addresses human-connections more than civil ethics.

https://www.quora.com/unanswered/What-are-the-five-sources-of-obligation? by Rahim Bidkani

I don’t know, but I’ll start a priority list. I wrote 9 acceptances.

Accept being a human-being rather than an opposite: animal, plant, mineral, or “soul”; you are a unique person. (I use the hyphen to invite the reader not to disassemble my phrase.)

Accept the self-interest of comprehending&nourishing human, individual power, individual energy, and individual authority (HIPEA) to develop humble-integrity: always think&say “I don’t know” when that is so. I couple mutually required words with “&” to invite the reader to consider mutually required actions/entities.

Accept that necessity&justice demand HIPEA-use for responsible-human-independence (RHI) rather than for some form of dependence: indolence, abuse, crime, tyranny, and worse.

Accept that justice may demand no action. For example, confirm defense-required before defending.

Accept that the humble-integrity required for RHI demands neither initiating nor accommodating injury to or from any person or human-association, including self and family.

Accept that the-good is as obvious in 2021 as it was 5,000 years ago. So, each person can understand the Genesis-1-Sumerian suggestion of RHI, Socrates’ choice to die, Agathon’s appreciation of human-beings, Jesus’ urge to personal-perfection, the U.S. founders’ rebuff to John Locke’s “property of God”, and that it’s statistically probable no human knows the-God.

Accept that a human-being has the opportunity to perfect their unique personal journey. No matter how low things may seem, self-perfection can begin the moment the intention is adopted.

Accept that no human-being can avoid “I don’t know” when asked if their personal-God is the-God.

Accept that each human-being deserves local, state, and federal Education Departments to inculcate these principles, or better, more than “to train our workers”, quoting Barack Obama’s second inaugural address.

This morning, I think there are 9 human obligations, with explanation in some cases.

https://www.quora.com/How-can-the-truth-have-different-interpretations? by Juliana Mae J. Benamer

I don’t know the-ineluctable-truth and can only share my opinion. “Ineluctable” means “not to be avoided, changed, or resisted”. I use the hyphen to invite readers not to disassemble the phrase, so as to receive my meaning.

I think by asking. you revived Socratic awareness for civic-citizens of 2021. It’s not that Socrates is alive again, it is that there’s also Benamer, the unique, powerful person. By “civic” I mean fellow-citizens who responsibly pursue the happiness they perceive and encourage&facilitate fellow-citizens’ opportunities to similarly develop their unique persons. I use “&” to create thoughts with interdependent words.

I think many fellow-citizens, dissidents to the-ineluctable-truth, employ “truth” so as to pretend they are informed about metaphysical entities no one can define, for example, the-God, or their “soul”.

Keep on asking tough questions and trust-in and commit-to your answers. If you need a friend, read Ralph Waldo Emerson’s “Self Reliance” perhaps every 5 years. Perhaps a year later, read “Divinity School Address”, which is from the American underground literature. That is, modern dissidents to Socrates and Benamer don’t want that essay read.

https://www.quora.com/How-would-you-re-interpret-Eve-in-a-way-that-affirms-the-dignity-of-all-women? by Nur Heba

The Bible is a canon of books by writers who knew not, yet left us their experiences, in effect, to express that we seem no better than them. However, sometimes a writer exposes abject ignorance.

For example, Paul wrote in part of 1 Corinthians 7:1-9, “Do not deprive each other except perhaps by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control.” Based on this text, I don’t think Paul ever fell in love --- or was loved --- by a woman. 

When I met my bride, some 54 years ago, I was so struck by her serene confidence that when it came time to consider sexual intimacy I suffered what I call hetrophopbia. That’s male fear of the awesome consequences of dedicating his life to a woman and the viable ova her body will generate during her fertile years. The woman who’s found her man has-not such-fears, and is ready to give herself to him. At that point, he must protect her and her babies waiting to be born (borrowing from Leonard Cohen).

I speculate that the author of Eve-subjugated-to-Adam was expressing male heterophobia in the beginning. Eve knew she had taken care of her body and had healthy ova. Adam, overthrown by her confidence had nothing but fear and ignorance --- didn’t even know how to appreciate her in order to make love with her. And the first penetration, if she had a hymen, may have been traumatic for him. Either way, he never overcame his angst, and wrote bitterly about his spouse.

Excepting Genesis 1, a 3,000 year-old impression of a 5,000 year-old political suggestion, the rest of the Bible is one expression after another of male heterophobia.

My wife taught me one reform I will negotiate if I am privileged with reincarnation simultaneously with her: I will find her, court her, and if I win her trust and commitment again, I will ask her father’s permission to marry her and take her family name, in order to express my intention to support her and her viable ova and offspring for my lifetime.

Low as I may be, I will not let my life ruin either my person or my spouse hood:  Eve deserved a more authentic man.

https://www.quora.com/Do-you-believe-a-future-one-world-government-as-implied-in-the-Bible-is-a-good-or-a-bad-thing? by Amy Potter

I don’t know. And my intention is to not believe anything for the rest of my life. I returned to my infantile acceptance: “I don’t know” when that is so. The intention helps me separate my thoughts from reality.

My opinion is that every human-being is unique and has the individual power, the individual energy, and the individual authority (HIPEA) to perfect their person before death. But not every person does so, because some choose early death by not pursuing their unique self-interest. I call it responsible-human-independence (RHI).

Humankind accommodates two major divisions: those who choose to develop the humble-integrity needed for RHI and those who prefer one of the dependencies: indolence, abuse, crime, tyranny, evil, and worse.

This political philosophy RHI was suggested 5,000 years ago, and the Bible, canonized only 1,700 years ago, does not accept RHI. The Bible inculcates the belief that the-God will usurp humankind’s ability and therefore responsibility to provide order and prosperity to the earth and its temporal inhabitants.

I don’t know the-ineluctable-truth. “Ineluctable” means “not to be avoided, changed, or resisted” (merriam-webster.com). However, we may have reached the divergent-chaos needed to motivate most human beings to adopt RHI as the necessity and justice for survival, even for fellow-citizens who need a personal-God to help them face uncertainty in life and the certainty of death.

The individual citizen’s HIPEA is too dominate for any government to overthrow RHI and the-God makes it clear that the personal-opportunity to develop humble-integrity cannot be usurped.

https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-difference-between-being-loyal-and-being-just? by Graham C Lindsay

We, the people of 2021, are in the best of times to consider necessity&justice (I use “&” to express mutual-dependency within the phrase and the hyphen to invite the reader to not disassemble my phrase -- to engage my expression).

Is it necessary for a people to develop&maintain wholeness&fidelity into the indefinite future; to continually improve statutory justice; to constrain human dependencies --- indolence, abuse, crime, tyranny, etc.; to continually increase strength against attack; and to responsibly utilize the latest appreciation of the laws of physics, both physically&psychologically? Yes.

I reduce these predicates to nouns: integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity, interpreting the U.S. preamble, “in order to” encourage&facilitate individual, RHI. And to encourage understanding citizens of the earth. These principles were developed from the 1787-framed U.S. Constitution, especially its preamble. The Constitution became the amendable law when Congress, with representatives of 14 states, ratified the Bill of Rights in 1791.

Necessity&justice requires conformity to a political philosophy expressed in the Middle East some 5,000 years ago: no higher power will usurp female&male-human-being’s supremacy among the living species and consequential responsibility to provide order&prosperity to the earth and all that’s in it. I call this suggestion responsible-human-independence (RHI), extracted from my 2021 personal-guidance from the before-Abraham Genesis 1:26-28 and human-discovery since then. (Search “the difference between Genesis 1 and Genesis 2-3” and read an article or more.) The connection came from my work to contemplate the 1787 U.S. intentions, perhaps impacted by the 1789 French Revolution.

Dissident factions in the U.S. have discovered that the judges and lawyers in the court system have so distorted the-rule-of-law-by-precedent-opinion that lawlessness cannot be constrained. Female&male-human-being’s failure to accept ancient principles or better have brought the world to chaos, and, in the U.S., divergent-chaos.

The first remedy is for the Court to relinquish its pride in precedent and work to lessen opinion and favor the-ineluctable-evidence. “Ineluctable” means “not to be avoided, changed, or resisted” (merriam-webster.com). When the Court does not know the-ineluctable-truth, they must weigh the necessity to render an opinion. If justice requires an opinion, they must conclude: since we don’t know the just-resolution of this conflict, we voted, and our opinion is . . . until new discovery demands change. Unfortunately, the U.S. continuum “ourselves and our Posterity” has accommodated this Court tyranny.

As an example of U.S.-Court-tyranny, England, in 1967 mimicked Louisiana’s majority-jury verdicts in criminal law, enacted in 1880 at 9 to 3. I don’t know who/how Louisiana chose 9:3, but with a 50% divided citizenry, 7:5 is statistically more promising and 9:3 is acceptable. The Court itself uses 5:4, even though justices are more qualified in the law than the average citizen. Here’s the tyranny: in Ramos v Louisiana (2020) the Court did not object to plaintiff’s opinion that “impartial” means unanimous, in opposition to 1791-U.S. Amendment VI. Worse, they citied 14^th Century English law (Anglo-American tradition) to ignore 1967 English reform. Then, England enacted 10:2 verdicts to lessen organized crime’s influence in criminal trials. In 1972 The Court voted 6:3 to force Louisiana to vote 12:0 !!!

During my lifetime, now in its fourth quarter century, I reformed from trusting “I am a born-again-Christian” to distain for that claim. I grab my wallet and head for the door. I was dismayed when Donald Trump chose Mike Pence, who seemed like a fundamentalist, as running mate. I voted 4 times for the ticket anyway and am one of the 14 million voters who made their election possible. Pence delivered my worst fear when, on January 4, at a church in Georgia, he “witnessed for Christ” and then on January 6 betrayed the U.S. Commander-in-Chief. I have developed in this forum the metaphysical evidence that Jesus in fact authored Genesis 1: before Abraham I AM, be perfect [in the-God’ image], and render until Caesar . . . .

I am glad claim to be areligious but accept the-ineluctable-truth about me. I think necessity&justice require RHI.

Justice requires necessity. Loyalty to metaphysics is not necessary.

To Suzi Cuci

I assume you are speaking of the right to know mathematics.

There’s no resistance to fellow-citizens choosing to temporarily dedicate their human individual power, individual energy, and individual authority (HIPEA) to learn mathematics according to their personal happiness —- as much as they want to know.

There’s a good overview of what to know at Pauls Online Math Notes.

https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-real-purpose-of-the-U-S-A? by Tabare Juscamayta

I think the USA-purpose is to encourage and facilitate “ourselves and our Posterity” to independently provide order and prosperity to the earth and its inhabitants. I call this function “responsible-human-independence” (RHI), using the hyphens to invite the reader not to disassemble the phrase.

I think the 55 delegates from 12 states framed 1787 U.S. with provisions to lessen political influence on the civic individual. The subsequently required, Congress-negotiated, 1791 amendment, the Bill of Rights egregiously reversed USA independence: restored English psychology, and repressed the real America ever since. We, the 2021 “ourselves and our Posterity” have the opportunity to either restore U.S.A.’s independence from Anglo-American tradition or accommodate tyranny as the twelve past generations have.

Connecting the dots to the opportunity for RHI starts 5,000 years ago. A Middle Eastern political philosophy suggests, in 2021 expression (after 5,000 years’ discovery):  In necessity&justice, female&male-human-being must&can independently provide order&prosperity to the earth and its inhabitants. I use the “&” to connect words in mutual necessity. Scribes, 3,000 years ago, theistically expressed the suggestion in Genesis 1:26-28. There, attention to the-God overshadows the human responsibility: independence on earth.

Don’t make the mistake of thinking this is Bible apologetics. This is neither subjected Eve deceiving Abraham nor subjugated Sarah enlisting a surrogate mother. The rest of the Bible is a parade of stories of irresponsible-dependency by believers. Also, before you dismiss, read a couple articles found with phrases like “the difference between Genesis 1 and Genesis 2-3”; first off, they name different Gods, perhaps neither of which conforms to the-God.

Everything that happened afterwards accumulated the events leading to King George deciding to tax the English colonies to pay war debts. The American loyal subjects begged relief starting in 1763. Rebuked, the founders formed a confederation of colonies in 1774 and ordered each to write a state constitution. Some did.

In 1776, founders declared war for independence from England, citing “Nature’s God” rather than England’s Trinity for their human authority. With France waiting to assist, the founders appealed “to the Supreme Judge of the world” for affirmation of their intentions: RHI. Additionally, they modified Englishman John Locke’s “life, liberty, and property (of Locke’s-God)” to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”, separating possible duty to fellow citizens from personal-privacy.

Here, I think, is the real purpose of the USA: individual, personal-privacy in the pursuit of humble-integrity or another no-injury choice. Only in humility can a person gage personal-integrity, I think. I do not know the-ineluctable-truth.

In 1778, the founders negotiated for military providence from France. England surrendered to France and the 13 free&independent colonies at Yorktown, VA, in 1781. The 1783 Treaty of Paris names each f&I state. The founders had separated church and state and, intentionally or not, practiced Genesis-1-RHI. But they could not manage the free&indpendent states.

Imagine the challenge to the 1787 framers: to draft U.S. domestic independence. Under the 1776 Declaration and France’s providence, the USA had responsibly won independence, separated church from state, and objected to Lockean “property of God”. Now, the states must be ordered for domestic success and global influence. The framers, leaving the founders’ confederation-expectations, created an amendable, representative republic to be held accountable to limited authority by the disciplined public in their states.

That’s right: We the People of the United States is not totalitarian. Fellow-citizens can choose dissidence, as long as they do not injure fellow-citizens or friendly visitors. The framers did not expect that the European fascination with “liberty” would prove misguided-license to take fellow-citizens’ blood in France’s bloody rebellion of 1789. Besides, independence is human character rather than a bestowal by the victor in war.

With those principles in mind, here is my interpretation, just now, of the preamble to the U.S. Constitution:  The civic people of the United States practice five disciplines --- integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity, “in order to” encourage&facilitate responsible-human-independence “to ourselves and our Posterity”. Religion is not among the disciplines. And there are no standards of achievement, because the continuum “ourselves and our Posterity” continually improve statutory-justice.

The most egregious act by Congress is the unconstitutional establishment of their partnership with religion. The Supreme Court joins the tyranny by maintaining such Anglo-American tradition.

We, the 2021 “ourselves and our Posterity” must&can amend the First Amendment to promote civic humble-integrity rather than suffer civil religious-pride. Then, the USA can begin to develop its purpose: RHI for responsible-personal-happiness rather than to submit to someone else’s image.

https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-criteria-test-of-justification-to-establish-truth-in-the-following-domains-of-truth-scientific-domain-social-domain-and-personal-domain? by John Carl Goden

Physics controls the-ineluctable-truth.

Everything that exists and every event conforms to the laws of physics and its progeny: mathematics, weak&strong waves, the chemistries, biology, psychology, imagination, fiction, lies --- everything. Lies come about because some of the-ineluctable-evidence has not yet been discovered, so humankind is not even approaching awareness of the-ineluctable-trut.

Lords and elites have learned that some people are gullible, and entrepreneurs can pick people’s pockets. Entrepreneurs present metaphysics, and if a person becomes engaged, the entrepreneur offers help.

For example, when I was about 7 years old, Preacher Lemons and Mom and Dad convinced me to fear for my soul. That night, they offered amazing grace to award me antinomianism. However, into my fourth decade, every mistake I ever made has cost me dearly.

If a metaphysical entity appeared before me and challenged me to turn my back on someone as a test of my allegiance to the entity, I’d decline.

https://www.quora.com/How-does-diversity-have-more-to-do-with-ethics-than-profit? by Adriana Moraes

By “ethics” I assume you mean reliable connections between human-beings, both individuals and the whole --- humankind. We gullible human-beings make ourselves victims of entrepreneurs. In my fourth quarter century, I’m trying to lessen my losses and misery.

A political philosopher, 5 thousand years ago, suggested that female&male-human-being can and must independently provide order and prosperity to the earth and its inhabitants. The human-infant is totally ignorant and must take charge of their first quarter century, in order to acquire the comprehension and intention to live a complete human life. By complete, I mean discover their unique personal-happiness and responsibly achieve it before death. With encouragement and facilitation, they may choose to develop the humble-integrity that is required for responsible-human-independence (RHI). However, some human-beings choose to employ their individual power, their individual energy, and their individual authority (HIPEA) to develop a dependency --- indolence, abuse, infidelity, crime, tyranny, and worse. Noblepersons and elites are aware and perceive personal gain by plying dependent-fellow-citizens’ gullibility. Therefore, the RHI-citizen must aid dependent-citizen constraint, by practicing and encouraging fellow citizens to accept “I don’t know” when that is so, and to do all they can to learn and practice the-ineluctable-truth. In other words, the RHI-citizen must aid the-good for life.

However, no culture I am aware of inculcates these principles in either their young people or adults. Consequently, some governments partner with the lords and elites --- entrepreneurs --- to pick the people’s pocket. It’s a dual attack, for profit. The entrepreneur charges the gullible for an unneeded service or product, and the RHI-culture bears the cost.

In the very beginning, entrepreneurs inculcated in men the idea that they cannot resist any woman’s charms. This is absolutely not so, because a man who has been encouraged in self-interest knows that each woman he encounters is a metaphysical crowd of perhaps 400 potential human beings. It could be made physical be collecting 13 ova/year, each for artificial-insemination, gestation, delivery, and rearing. That is, during her fertile years, she could generate 400 viable ova, each of which could become a human-being. There is no way an authentic man would risk the future of a woman and her ova. Similarly, an authentic woman would not risk her future ova by damaging her physical or psychological person or by mating with a wanton man.

Not only that, the authentic female&male-human-being is aware that developing RHI has been in the individual’s best interest from the beginning. Thus a couple who bond for life are uncompromisingly faithful to both each other and to each of their unique persons. Their offspring benefit from spousal and parental fidelity-to the-ineluctable-truth into the achievable future.

I think the person who is gullible enough to fall for diversity as surrogate for RHI is as pitiable as someone with a terminal disease. Of course, I do not write the-ineluctable-truth: I don’t know the-ineluctable-truth.

https://www.quora.com/Do-you-think-the-Framers-were-governed-by-self-interest-a-commitment-to-principle-or-some-combination-of-these-when-they-drafted-the-Constitution? by Christopher Cervantes

Mr. Cervantes, I’m glad you asked specifically about the framers. I think “the founders” got their job done: managing a colonial war against the world’s strongest empire so as to win independence. So far, the entity We the People of the United States is failing.

The framers’ task was to respond to domestic requirements, in order to survive as a nation, rather than as the 13 free and independent states, each named, in the 1783 Treaty of Paris. George Washington’s 1783 vision, four requirements, is what I call American underground literature. That is, the lords of the Anglo-American tradition don’t want those principles accessible to the continuum “ourselves and our Posterity”.

The letter I refer to is “From George Washington to The States, 8 June 1783”, online at https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/99-01-02-11404. Washington presents four pillars:

1st An indissoluble Union of the States under one federal Head.

2ndly A sacred regard to public Justice.

3dly The adoption of a proper Peace Establishment—and

4thly The prevalence of that pacific and friendly disposition among the people of the United States, which will induce them to forget their local prejudices and policies, to make those mutual concessions which are requisite to the general prosperity, and, in some instances, to sacrifice their individual advantages to the interest of the community.

 

The framers’ product, the 1787 Constitution, proffers five public disciplines: integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity. Neither founders nor framers imposed “freedom of religion” on civic-citizens’ personal-privacy. Nor did the 1776 declaration of war for independence from England.

Of the 55 framers, who specified a representative republic with provisions to spoil democracies, none would second Benjamin Franklin’s motion to begin each day with prayer. I speculate that none wanted to reverse the responsible-human-independence (RHI) the founders, the continental army, and France accomplished for Americans and posterity at Yorktown, VA, in September, 1781.

Only 39 of the 55 framers signed the 1787 Constitution. Some of the 16 dissidents had ambitions: restore sovereignty to the states rather than to the people in their states; restore the traditional allegiance to Protestant Christianity; establish a longer-service by each president or even restore monarchy; and more. Some signers were pure politicians, committed only to self-promotion.

I think James Madison was egregiously political. For example, I think he was aware of Chapter XI Machiavellianism, but helped restore the factional-American Protestant partnership with Congress: tyranny.

Founding, framing, and signing all came to tyranny when the First Congress, representing eleven states began operations soon after March 4, 1789. So far, the entity We the People of the United States, the disciplined few, have not taken the action to hold Congress and the Supreme Court accountable for the tyranny of the 1791 First Amendment’s religion clauses.

We, the 2021 “ourselves and our Posterity” can&must amend the First Amendment so as to encourage&facilitate civic RHI instead of civil religious-dependency.

RHI is in each citizen’s self-interest, and with most citizens developing humble-integrity rather than fostering conflicts over the-God, a mystery to everyone, an achievable better future will emerge.

https://www.quora.com/unanswered/What-are-the-advantages-of-owning-the-moral-standards-over-merely-abiding-by-moral-standards? by James Hera

Just yesterday, I read a Voltaire quote, in effect, learn from worthy questions. I appreciate yours, Mr. Hera, especially as a reminder to re-read Ralph Waldo Emerson’s “Self Reliance” (1841), now in my fourth quarter-century. I’ll read it today and hope you will, too. (A few minutes later, I have it in hand.)

From this unique essay, foreigners and Americans who wish the U.S. was a liberal democracy may understand why it is not in the native and legal-immigrant DNA; not the intentions of “ourselves and our Posterity”.

Perhaps I first read “Self-Reliance” in 1954, and was encouraged but not facilitated. I lived in a family and community of conflicted theists, my group being diverse Southern Baptists. Dad was a Mason and Mom an Eastern Star, and they were in passionate conflict until death parted them. (I think Flannery O’Conner would use “violent” for “passionate” only because my friend John Harbo suggested she meant “passionate” pursuit of what I call the-ineluctable-truth, when she wrote “violent”.)

When I was in puberty, I read the first and last pages of the Bible, KJV, then thought (without the articulation) those threats to me in the last two verses convince me that the representative God is too weak to be worthy of my attention. Today, I see the introduction, reflecting a pre-Adam, pre-Abraham political philosophy, as an indictment of the rest of the canonized stories. Genesis 1:26-28, perhaps political philosophy emerging from Sumer, 5,000 years ago, suggests, in my 2021 view: female&male-human-being can&must independently develop order and prosperity to the earth and its inhabitants. It seems self-evident that not accepting this suggestion invites chaos into personal living.

Consider the mystery of Adam&Eve. He was given command of all humankind, but Eve betrayed his chief hood. He was not the chief he intended to be, perhaps because he did not understand that she represented a crowd. During her fertile years, she might produce 400 ova! Consequently when he approached her for appreciative intimacy, he needed to take care not only of her and himself, but of the humans waiting-to-be-born (borrowed form Leonard Cohen). Instead of appreciating the awe of her person, he approached her with heterophobia that substantially persists in his descendants.

Or consider the mystery of Abraham&Sara. Anxious for a son, they conspired in non-monogamy or spousal infidelity, using the ancient technology: surrogate conception and motherhood. The consequence was a family with conflicting dreams: chaos instead of order.

Or consider Pontius Pilate. Appreciation of Genesis-1’s responsible-human-independence (RHI) would have empowered him to free Jesus rather than allow the religious zealots to kill him. And guidance I follow would approve letting Jesus live. Here again, read RWE’s “Divinity School Address”. Plagued by indoctrination “in the faith”, it took me 2 decades to get Emerson’s message: Phil, you can perfect your unique life from the moment you accept that intention.

When a person chooses to develop RHI, they can accept another person’s opposition without emotions; accept ultimatums without objection; hear false ideas and ask “Are you certain?” then respond with an alternative if invited.

For example, when a believer rebukes me for not accepting the antinomianism they enjoy, I ask, “Are you certain?” If they answer yes, “I ask, what if “’I AM’ implies that Jesus authored Genesis 1:26-28?”

On the other hand, if a person stonewalls me, saying “I am an atheist”. I respond, “That’s a leap of faith I cannot take.” (Borrowing from Kierkegaard)

Comment:

A couple hours later, I did a family task then re-read “Self-Reliance”.

In 1841, Emerson wrote, “. . . the reformers summon conventions, and vote and resolve in multitude. Not so, O friends! will the God deign to enter and inhabit you, but by a method precisely the reverse. It is only as a man puts off all foreign support, and stands alone, that I see him to be strong and to prevail. He is weaker by every recruit to his banner. Is not a man better than a town? Ask nothing of men, and in the endless mutation, thou only firm column must presently appear the upholder of all that surrounds thee.”

This is only a sample of my new highlighting.

First, I cannot think a new thought, but can develop an art of expression. Thus, I write “the-God” to invite the reader to not separate the specificity lent by the article “the”. Thus, Emerson’s thought seems, in my art:  The-God will not usurp the human-being’s opportunity to constrain chaos in their life’s connections, including any personal-God they may prudently pursue. In my art, “the-God” is the actuality: intelligent controller/designer, potential energy, an infinite singularity, chaos, or what the-entity-is.

Second, Emersion saw (perhaps in Lamarckism, dating from Hippocrates) evidence that humankind is mutating toward self-reliance. Darwin’s Origin of the Species came later. Perhaps Homo integritas (integrity) is developing among us Homo sapiens (wise).

Thank you again, Mr. Hera: I learned plenty.

https://www.quora.com/Why-does-it-seem-that-theres-a-war-over-truth-the-truth-in-the-US? by Bruno Uzoka

Why in the U.S.?

I think “freedom of religion”, codified in 1791 in the U.S. Congress and U.S. Supreme Court, is the U.S. problem. When government partners with religion, no one can be held accountable. The offender can always say they acted on faith, sainthood, or infallibility. Religion empowers government to impose metaphysics on the people, even though the laws of physics are not to be avoided, changed, or resisted. Humankind’s obligation to necessity&justice is to discover the laws of physics, comprehend them and their interconnections, and responsibly practice them.

It seems self-evident that neither the-God nor a government can impose order and prosperity between human-beings. It’s up to each individual to 1) constrain chaos in their life and 2) actively pursue statutory justice in order to constraint dependent fellow-citizens. Dependencies include indolence, infidelity, substance abuse, crime, tyranny, evil, and worse.

Dependencies are disclosed by ineluctable evidence. “Ineluctable” means “not to be avoided, changed, or resisted”, merriam-webster.com. When the-ineluctable-evidence is discovered, the-ineluctable-truth is known. “Truth” can be gaged by the-ineluctable-truth.

If these principle are accepted, the U.S. has a new basis for gaging the truth and admitting to self “I don’t know” when that is so.

For example, consider this dialogue when the-ineluctable-evidence is mutually required to civic-citizens:

“Is your God the-God?”

“I don’t know. Do you?”

“No.”

There’s no emotion, no angst, no guilt: only the-ineluctable-truth: neither party knows the-God and both reserve the humility to say so, even though each accepts for the other the other’s personal-God.

Close examination of existing literature shows that widespread reluctance to accept “I don’t know” when that is so distracts people from necessary research for discovery. Many people take a short-cut called “believing”.

The Bible starts with a pre-Adam, pre-Abraham political philosophy that is perhaps 5,000 years old --- before monotheism. In my 2021 view, it posits: female&male-human-being can&must independently provide order and prosperity to the earth and its living species. We think humankind is 3 million years-old, Homo sapiens 300 thousand years old, language 150 thousand years old, grammar 5 thousand years old, and monotheism 4 thousand years old. It is not unreasonable to think the above expression of responsible-human-independence came from experience and observations of living: necessity and justice. And it came as soon as grammar emerged.

But 2,000 years later, 3,000 years ago, a scribe attributed the ancient practical suggestion to the metaphysics of Genesis-1; a God of creation. See Genesis 1:26-28. Western history since then is a record of noble persons and elites constructing doctrinal-Gods with which to control domestic and foreign human-beings. No culture in the history of the world has encouraged and facilitated Genesis-1’s responsible-human-independence (RHI).

Everything that happened since then brought to the U.S. the opportunity to establish RHI.

The founders wrote the 1776 declaration of war for independence from England. “The good People of these Colonies” took full responsibility and appealed “to the Supreme Judge of the world” to affirm their intentions; in 1778, France granted military provisions. The founders claimed human-authorization from Nature’s God rather than from the English-Trinity, which some colonists worshipped. Conforming to Genesis 1, the founders separated church and state.

After winning independence, the founders could not manage domestic unity or global power.

The framers met in 1787 to provide domestic order. They designed a representative republic that disrupts democracy, 5 public disciplines with standards to be discovered by the continuum “ourselves and our Posterity”, and the entity We the People of the United States under RHI holding government accountable. The five disciplines did not include religion.

Thus, both the 1776 Declaration and the 1787 Constitution affirm the non-Judeo-Christian Genesis 1:26-28’s RHI.

To restore our opportunity for the responsible-human-independence to pursue the-ineluctable-truth, we, the 2021 “ourselves and our Posterity” must and can amend the First Amendment so as to encourage and facilitate civic-integrity rather than civil-religion.

https://www.quora.com/Why-has-there-been-a-revival-in-the-study-of-virtue-ethics? by Graham C Lindsay

Virtue ethics seems a subset of religion and secularism studies that have been flourishing since about 1987. I’ll get to that in a minute.

First, plato.stanford. edu has an article “virtue ethics” claiming three current approaches to standards: “duties or rules (deontology)”, “consequences of actions”, and “moral character” (“virtue ethics”), ordered by increasing interest.

I viewed Google-book ngrams and learned that “virtue ethics” barely departs 0 frequency in 1809-1813, again in 1896-1894, then slowly leaves 0 from 1948 until 1987 when it increases 75 fold through 2017. “Secularism” has a similar recent pattern, with 2.5 fold increase from 1987 to 2017, ending 3.7 times higher than “virtue ethics”. Adding “religion” drives both “secularism” and “virtue ethics” to the zero line for the entire span, 1500 to 2017. “Religion” declines during 1756 to 1830, then precipitously drops through 1917. It then increases slowly through 2017, with a pattern like that of “secularism” toward the end. From 1987 to 2017, its increase is 1.6 fold, but at 37 times higher than “secular”. In 2017, deontology and consequentialism frequencies were at 42% and 69% of “virtue ethics” frequency, respectively.

I speculate that this reflects a healthy concern that Machiavellian, Chapter XI tyranny (The Prince, 1513) may not survive eternally --- even for the next decade. Machiavelli said (using my 2021 art): only a fool would object to religion&government partnering to pick the people’s pockets; “ourselves” inculcates in “our Posterity” the faith that the family personal-God will eventually relieve “ourselves and our Posterity” of the misery and loss to the r&g partners. It matters not that each personal-God may not conform to the-God; the people will neither rebel nor emigrate. But in the next paragraph, Machiavelli speculates that eventually religion will develop military power, wealth, and veneration so as not to need government. Recall though, that Machiavelli may have written irony to preserve his own life yet share with his fellow citizens, some of whom might be in the partnership at their own risk. The decline in religious reliability, for example, priests protecting pedantry, logically prompts people’s concerns.

I work to persuade fellow-citizens to accept the duty to comprehend and responsibly apply physics and its progeny – mathematics, the chemistries, biology, psychology, imagination, fiction, indeed everything for living, leaving their afterdeath to metaphysics they did not construct. That is, to accept that physics cannot respond to metaphysics. In other words, necessity and justice in living is a personal, independent-obligation that can either aid or hinder humankind’s responsibility for order and prosperity to the earth and its living species.

I’m reminded of an Albert Einstein syntax:  Living without responsibility brings death; dying without living means nothing.

https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-difference-between-natural-law-and-man-made-law? by Mike Wilson

Legislators who develop personal-integrity, using humility as their guide, effect responsible-human-independence (RHI) when they sign a law. Cowards and tyrants attribute their personal, metaphysical errors to their God, and call their legislation “natural law”. My opinion is that the-God, whatever that entity may be, does not claim “natural law”. And the Supreme Court Justice who adds the interrogatory “. . . so help you God?” to the Presidential oath is blasphemous to the U.S. Constitution.

For example, no government can warrant life, or liberty, or property, or the pursuit of happiness, let alone the set. FDR’s “freedom from want” helped originate “liberal democracy”. I’m glad I’m neither author.

On the other hand, developing a personal-God to provide aid the individual perceives is a matter of personal-privacy. I would never deny a believer a religious symbol that aids recovery from a heart attack or other wellness-emergency. Aspirin, deep breathing, and bedrest helped me through a heart attack and minor stroke, but I have no idea if my wife and daughter prayed for my protection. Legislators can demand “secularism” but cannot enforce what they cannot define.

The sooner the Supreme Court reforms from its intent to rule on precedent, erroneous or not, the better.

Justices cannot persuade physics to change it laws, and physics’ progeny conform to its laws. Mathematics, the chemistries, biology, psychology, imagination, and metaphysics conform to the laws of physics: imagination helps research the-ineluctable-evidence but cannot induce physics to conform to metaphysics. By “ineluctable” I mean “not to be avoided, changed, or resisted”, merriam-webster.com.

Research that avoids pursuits of agenda, by continual fidelity to the-ineluctable-evidence, may eventually discover the-ineluctable-truth. For example, the earth is like a globe, rotates daily on its axis, orbits the sun, and the sun is not the center of this universe.

To any question regarding the power and knowledge of the-God, my response is “I don’t know, work to learn, and nevertheless practice RHI.”

I appreciate the question and hope this helps strengthen the U.S. republic.

https://www.quora.com/Our-identity-is-based-on-how-we-see-the-world-What-is-your-opinion-about-this-sentence? by Angelo M.Magdaluyo

I think it’s a politically-oppressive statement. It’s promulgated by Alinsky-Marxist organizers (AMO) as a tactic for dismissal of a valid argument. The person who spends time over “world view” is inviting self-enslavement to the speaker.

The world is and always has been a conflicted, threatening place. Nevertheless, each human being has the individual power, the individual energy, and the individual authority (HIPEA) to either develop humble-integrity or not. With humble-integrity, from cradle to grave, the civic-citizen says “I don’t know” when they don’t know.* “Civic” implies fidelity to human connections more than conformity to municipal rules.

A human being is born ignorant and can and ought-to spend their first quarter-century acquiring the comprehension and intention to live a complete human lifetime, during which they will discover their unique, wondrous person. During their second major timespan, perhaps 2 quarter centuries, they can and should participate in the human quest for order and prosperity, thereby accumulating wisdom about personal discovery and perfection. Hopefully, during their fourth quarter century they will encourage the young to perfect their persons. By “perfect” I do not mean become the ideal human-being: I mean achieve the excellence that is possible based on abilities, environment, and intentions. Achievement begins the moment the human-being decides to perfect their unique person.

A human-being “identifies” their person according the point they have reached in their quest for their psychological maturity. It is their accomplishment based on the sequence of decisions they have made so far.

No nation teaches these principles. The nation that encourages and facilitates HIPEA has education departments designed to inculcate responsible-human-independence (RHI) before puberty, age 10 to 15 depending on the individual. The U.S. proffered such principles in 1787 but gradually has gradually forsaken the republic and  since 1960 is producing socialist/communist Democrats who say things like “Together we determined that a modern economy requires railroads and highways to speed travel and commerce, schools and colleges to train our workers.” (President Barack Obama, Second Inaugural Address). Workers? Good grief! We are human beings, the most powerful living species! Obama serves “liberal democracy” (divergent chaos) rather than the human-beings living in America.

But wait! Obama was the “Amazing Grace” president. What can I possibly be implying?

Many 1789 political representatives were well aware that the 1787 U.S. Constitution ended factional-American-Protestant-partnership with Congress. Some wanted a “divine” Congress on par with the constitutional Protestant-Parliament-partnership. The U.S. Supreme Court affirms the tyranny. The consequence is the divergent chaos we are in today. “Freedom of religion” is Chapter XI Machiavellianism: religion and government together can pick the people’s pockets and believers will neither rebel nor emigrate, taking comfort in the promise that their-God will eventually relieve their descendants of the loss and misery. However, we are aware of the suggestion in Genesis 1:26-28, that the-God will not usurp the human-being’s RHI.

Thankfully, “world view” frequency, increasing from zero in 1990, peaked in 1992 is on the decline. Its frequency was surpassed by that of “political philosophy” in 2003. It peaked and declined in 1640 to 1655, then steadily increased from 1760 until now (Google-books ngram).

We, the 2021 “ourselves and our Posterity” can and must amend the First Amendment so as to encourage and facilitate RHI rather than maintain Congressional tyranny: change the civil-religion clauses to responsible-human-independence clauses.

* There are exceptions. For example, the President of the United States is reluctant to say “I don’t know”. But President Donald Trump often reported his agenda, the opposition, and negotiations then said something like, “We’ll see how it turns out.” Appreciating Trump protecting the secrets of “ourselves and our Posterity”, I am fascinated by Matthew 7:6; does its message inform his humility?

Facebook comments

facebook.com/chris.nalepa.7/posts/10220132023547639, Aug 22, 2021

Chris,

I listened to every minute of this, and appreciate it very much. I will listen to her 2 hour podcast.

I'd like to add that the concerns she expresses are not constrained to COVID profiteering. If my daughter, Rebekah, who has survived life in NYC for 2 decades and is a self-educating wellness-expert had not insisted on staying with my wife 24-7 during a 13-day hospitalization after last winter’s ice storm and 2 days without power then 2 days moved to a relative’s home as our outage continued --- all of that traumatic for a PSP patient, Cynthia might not be with us today.

Not only that, if I had not supported Rebekah, for example, asking a nurse why she took for granted blood pressure of 190/110. And another day and another nurse: why isn’t she on a nutrition IV? Do you know the cafeteria is picking up mostly uneaten meals? On the 7^th day, “Nurse Ratchet” (Kate Dalley’s art) got mad at Rebekah over nutrition-IV difficulties and left Cynthia without ANY IV’s for 6 hours. When I inquired, that nurse told me Cynthia could survive 2 days with the IVs! When the shift change occurred, I urged and monitored events for 2 hours. I thought: what does a husband do when he thinks his wife’s life is threatened? He calls 911! Then I realized I had Cynthia’s wheel chair in the trunk of the car. I discussed it with Rebekah and she called another hospital to inquire about the move. I didn’t wait. When I returned to the room, I was suffering chest-pains because of the seriousness of what I was about to do. Two nurses were there --- eight hours late, but there. They got the difficult nutrition IV going, and I took the wheel chair back to the car.

I share this story not to criticize good people, but to alert family, friends, and fellow-citizens. When you need health care, immediately start reading about the ailment you are dealing with, because Kate Dalley’s advice may motivate life-saving family-care that was not as essential in the past. And, I do not think COVID is the cause. I think COVID exposed the consequences of a continuum of profiteering, much like the opioids crisis. I am grateful for the excellent medical care my doctors and nurses have provided me and my family, and COVID has not seemed to lessen the quality.

One other urgent point. More than ever before, if you are aware of a habit that threatens hospitalization, change it. If you need the hospital, go to the hospital. But if you can stop a bad habit and avoid hospitalization, change the habit.

Chris Nalepa | Facebook, Aug 28, 2021, 7:24

Chris, I fully agree with your concern, and feel I have suffered oppression from "Anglo American tradition" all my life. It is time to establish a 1787 American culture, practicing U.S. psychological independence from England after 232 years under an adolescent Congress and English-precedent Supreme Court. The responsibility to establish psychological-independence rests with us, the 2021 "oursevles and our Posterity". (Now burdened with $27.8 trillion in National Debt and climbing.)
⁠
I just answered a question about Votaire's "It is dangerous to be right in matters where established men are wrong." In considering your "OUR VOICE" share, I discovered my questioner erroneously attributed to Voltaire the title of a recent book, by, of all things a retired judge: "“it is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong".
⁠
No study in my recent past has flummoxed me as this one, and I am still learning --- discovering the political label I might put on my person.
⁠
I write and speak to listen, and anyone who'd be kind to read and comment on my tome, it's at https://www.quora.com/Voltaire-said-It-is-dangerous-to-be-right-when-the-government-is-wrong-Does-this-quote-have-any-meaning-in-a-liberal-democracy-was-he-just-referring-to-autocracies/answer/Phil-Beaver-1

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.