Progressives misuse civility to defy civic-integrity

 

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

Progressives misuse civility to defy civic-integrity, against their own self-interest

In taking to the streets in neighborhoods where Supreme Court justices live, progressives have taken the Alinsky-Marxist organizational (AMO) view:  If an AMO-progressive thinks their rights have been denied/questioned, they claim the liberty to commit violence. It matters not that fellow citizens object to psychological violence: progressives license themselves. The justice’s family is inconvenienced and neighbors’ lives are disrupted. Progressives invite constraint.

The civic-citizens of the United States keep on practicing the 1787 U.S. intentions: integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity. Therefore, they do not learn the names and home addresses of the progressives so as to perpetrate psychological violence on the progressives.

To the civic-citizens, it’s not a matter of the law. They trust-in and commit-to the long-standing U.S. intentions: responsible-human-independence (RHI) “to ourselves and our Posterity”.

RHI is grounded in the-ineluctable-truth. Ineluctable means “not to be avoided, changed, or resisted”. Whatever constrains each person’s choices does not yield to AMO. I think physics& its-progeny constrain choices, yet I do not know the-ineluctable-truth.

For the first time, I doubt claiming humility to the-ineluctable-truth. Just now, I perceive humility an evaluative claim, and I am incapable of descerning the-ineluctable-truth.

News

theepochtimes.com/elon-musk-says-biden-wrong-to-think-he-was-elected-to-transform-the-country_4464694.html?utm_source=mr_recommendation&utm_medium=left_sticky

I think Musk is being political to allow his name to be associated with accusing President Donald Trump. The U.S. has never seen President Trump as Commander-in-chief with the civic-citizens supporting his platform. The U.S. intends 5 public disciplines: integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity. The Democrat Party, the FBI, the CIA, the Justice Department, the diplomatic core, and most of the deep state demonstrate that they have no integrity, let alone justice, peace, and strength. If Trump runs, I'll probably vote for him.

msn.com/en-us/news/crime/non-unanimous-verdicts-at-issue-at-louisiana-high-court/ar-AAX5TlL?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=3b1b3109d14d415c906a1c1580585848#comments

This is a case against the U.S. Supreme Court's unconstitutional activism. Here are some factual realities. First, Ramos v Louisiana asserts that 1791's Amendment VI requires states to provide unanimity when it requires impartiality. Second, with a population that is civically divided 50:50, it is statistically unlikely to reach justice with 12:0 voting. England allows 10:2 jury verdicts in criminal trials in order to lessen the influence of organized crime. The Supreme Court decides on 5:4 opinions, and mandated 12:0 to Louisiana with a 6:3 opinion. Third, their 6:3 opinion was grounded in 14th century English law, ignoring their current 10:2 verdicts. Fourth, the Louisiana Legislature acted unconstitutionally when it made ending Louisiana's 10:2 rule a referendum rather than upholding the law. Fifth, some citizens think DNA is valid to release innocent people but invalid to prove guilt and would not articulate their opinion. The people of Louisiana and the USA can demand reform to the more reliable majority jury verdict.

Quora

quora.com/Where-does-your-importance-come-from? by Gary C. Davis

You are the only entity that can practice, facilitate, and encourage chaos-constraint in your way of living. You are the only human-being who can& may choose to develop a peacemaker on earth. Only you can develop responsible-human-independence (RHI) to your person.

quora.com/What-does-the-world-need-equality-or-equity? by Albert Palmer

There’s only one entity that can& may provide peace in the world: the responsibly-independent-human-being. We know this from experience and observations so far; that is, through 2022.

Since not every person chooses responsible-human-independence, necessity& justice require laws, law-enforcement, and continual improvement of the constitutional-republic.

Statutory-justice steadily approaches equality& equity.

The civic-citizen choose to practice, facilitate, and encourage peace, aiding the rule of law to deliver both equality& equity.

quora.com/Must-everything-have-an-onus-of-truth? by Jay Ondrick

I suppose “onus” means “burden”. Perhaps “truth” means factual reality about something. We may reason that factual reality is not a burden if the something is of no interest.

For example, a person may live their entire life thinking their God is a powerful God and accepting the attendant promises. Then, the person discovers the-God and wonders if their-God is approved by the-God. Unable to decide, the person then examines expectations from their-God.

If losing the expectations is not really a burden, the possibility that the-God constrains the consequence of each human choice is not an onus.

In factual reality, what constrains the consequences of each human choice is not critical if the person practices, facilitates, and encourages civic-integrity.

quora.com/What-are-the-pros-and-cons-of-gender-equality-that-should-be-upheld? by Sera Ergi

In the rush to promote itself as the word of God, Christianity hides from the world the practical Jesus.

For example, Jesus suggests a man does not divorce his wife, because: “a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh”.

When 2 become one, assessment of equality is not possible.

I hope my wife of 52 years marriage plus 2 in courtship feels I am equal to her. She is the wittiest, serenely-confident person I know. When I enter the room, her eyes are on me and excite my appreciation.

Christianity is only about 1600 years old, so it is not too late for reform. Having 45,000 sects seems problematic but need not be. What’s needed is acceptable humility toward whatever constrains the consequences of a human-being’s choices.

I think mastering Jesus’ reported ideas is prudent.

quora.com/Is-there-a-way-to-bring-the-truth-out? by Gary C. Davis

There is a way to bring the truth out:  Demand the-ineluctable-truth.

Every person can& may disallow the word “truth” by demanding response to the-ineluctable-truth. “Ineluctable” means “not to be avoided, changed, or resisted”. The-ineluctable-truth does not respond to reason, mystery, or belief.

The-ineluctable-truth is discovered by examining the evidence. Ineluctable-evidence is verified by human-being’s experiences& observations. When discovery has not happened, the person must accept, “I don’t know the-ineluctable-truth”. The prudent person does not act on emotions, such as, to kill someone who is not attacking them.

Consider, systematic judicial corruption: When the U.S. Supreme Court votes 6:3 to require the states to provide 12:0 jury verdicts instead of 1791-U.S.-Amendment-VI-impartiality, you know the 6 are wrong. You discover the 6 corrupt justices applied 14^th century English law even though 21^st century English law allows 10:2 criminal-jury verdicts. You look further and discover that Louisiana judges and lawyers are benefiting from the federally mandated reviews of 1500 murder convictions with non-unanimous juries.

In another example, when a church proclaims “We have a strong God” they are arrogant toward the-God:  The church that retains humility toward whatever constrains the consequences of human choice& action is prudent. I think physics& its-progeny constrain human choice. For example, a person can& may claim to be the-God, yet bleeds.

Demanding the-ineluctable-truth is not easy. However, accepting “truth” creates chaos.

Now that you know a way, use and promote it. Every time you utter “the-ineluctable-truth” you’ll probably hear “What’s that?” When you explain it, you’ll receive appreciation and wonder as to why they did not know the word “ineluctable”. You can change the future. The challenge is to educate 2/3 of civic-citizens to prefer “the-ineluctable-truth” rather than “the truth” and to seek ineluctable-evidence.

Facebook

facebook.com/brenda.rivet May 12, 2022

Here's a wonderful story about Cynthia's serene confidence and goodness: it comes from family.

If I am lucky enough to be 1) reincarnated and 2) allowed to find Cynthia again, I will court her again. With her approval, I'll ask her dad for her hand in marriage AND to change my name to Phillip R. Marionneaux. I think he would accept my surprising declaration and hope the wedding-officiant would, too.

I'd be expressing the practical Jesus' political philosophy: "a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife". I'm pretty sure "PaPa" would accept me taking the family name and Cynthia's brother and sister would not object.

Unfortunately, my church didn't inform me about the practical Jesus. At least, I missed those lessons.

Connection? The Brusly High baseball field is named for Cynthia's dad, Charles K. Marionneaux.

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.