What distinguishes A Civic People of the United States?
Part 1 of 6. The U.S. preamble’s three propositions.
A Civic People practice and encourage responsible human
liberty.
In the 52-word U.S. preamble, the subject is We the People
of the United States, which may seem to include all citizens. Leftist liberals
say all inhabitants, even illegal aliens, are included. Fiscal conservatives
say inclusion requires reasonability.
The U.S. preamble is a proposition with perhaps three parts.
First, there’s the opportunity to reject the proposition, perhaps risking woe.
A Civic People comprehend and commit-to the U.S. preamble’s propositions.
Fellow citizens who, aware or not, oppose the U.S. preamble include dissidents,
aliens, and some perhaps traitors. Some face law enforcement. Illegal aliens
don’t belong at all.
Each citizen may or may not consider the sentence and, aware
or not, may think the U.S. preamble is not important to his or her opportunity
for human life. A Civic People develop trust-in and commitment-to the U.S.
preamble’s propositions and therefore are unlikely to suffer statutory law
enforcement. When a dissident encounters statutory law enforcement, his or her
reaction is to challenge the law rather than reform. In this way, failure to
consider the U.S. preamble leads some fellow citizens into wasted life they
would not choose; but the bad choice is personal history. Personal reform is
the favorable method of recovery.
Second, the U.S. preamble states that the people in their
states unite to authorize and maintain (by amendment to lessen human misery and
loss) the laws for a global nation called the United States of America. We know
the USA values unity:
The consequences
of the 1861-5 Civil War indicate that the commitment in perpetuity can be
broken only by military supremacy of the dissident faction of people. People
tend to relate the 1865 consequence to states and states’ rights, when in fact,
A Civic People in their state have responsibility for maintaining fidelity to
the-objective-truth: Does their state have the moral high ground on which to
create war. Or erroneous opinion like the Confederate States of America held:
slavery is God’s punishment of a race for past sins.
Third, whereas the 1787 constitution produced a draft
preamble claiming institutional, proprietary “
self-governance,” the
Committee of Style revised the proposition to public collaboration for human
self-discipline.
With public collaboration for 5 public provisions for mutual, comprehensive
safety and security, every citizen would have the
freedom-from oppression
to exercise the human
liberty-to responsibly pursue
personal happiness rather than succumb to a life someone else would dictate.
I hope I have made the case that A Civic People of the
United States trust-in and commit-to the U.S. preamble’s propositions whereas
some fellow citizens dissent for reasons they may or may not understand.
Image: Civil War
What distinguishes A Civic People of the United States?
Part 2 of 6. The U.S. preamble’s human proposition: civic self-discipline.
Self-discipline seems personal whereas self-government seems
institutional. I don’t know where or when the term “self-government”
originated, but it has many implications. Applied to colonial politics it may
refer to local control under colonization so as to prevent oppression of the
colonists: fairness to loyal, colonial-British subjects. Applied to a religious
institution, its local control. For example, Catholic bishops in the USA are
now challenged to at last observe statutory law regarding child abuse rather
than attempt to protect themselves under canon law. Some individuals develop
self-control or self-discipline. Self-discipline implies a standard, while
self-government varies with the ruling regime.
Many, perhaps a majority, of the 55 delegates to the 1787
Constitutional Convention held that religion, in particular Christianity, in
particular Protestantism, especially sectarian American Protestantism whether
Unitarian or Trinitarian, in other words whatever-God-is, controls the
standards for human behavior. Free citizens, mostly factional Protestants,
perhaps took whatever-God-is for granted. The Committee of Style seemed to
admit there is no standard in such religious diversity and did not cite
religion among the 5 public provisions. After 232 years neglect of the committee’s
actions, it seems time to re-consider the U.S. preamble.
In 1790, with 3.2 million free inhabitants almost 99% were
factional Protestants---Unitarians, Trinitarians and other sects. Today, 14.8 %
of the population belong to those traditional sects. With 329 million
population, that’s 49 million traditional Protestants living with 280 million
fellow citizens. The equity of imposed theism, let alone imposed Christianity,
is disputed in 2019 even more directly than it was questioned in 1787. The 329
million need a new standard for public equity.
A human being has too much physical and psychological power
to suffer imposition of a God he or she neither submits-to nor praises.
Whatever-God-is cannot be collaborated in civic appreciation. Therefore, the
committee wrote a proposition for responsible human liberty predicated on
public collaboration for 5 areligious provisions that nevertheless protect the
human liberty to practice a responsible religion.
The 5 public provisions are Unity, Justice, Tranquility,
defense, and welfare. The purpose is to encourage liberty to the continuum of
living citizens. Religion, being omitted from these 6 key words is treated as
private rather than civic, civil, or legal. Thus, citizens who are willing to
collaborate for equity under the U.S. preamble’s proposition keep religion a
private consideration: Separation of state from church is a practice by willing
citizens. Those who would impose a religion on fellow citizens are dissidents
to justice under the U.S. preamble.
This does not mean that a person’s responsible religious
beliefs are wrong. Whatever-God-is must be powerful enough to deliver justice
to every responsible person. Perhaps responsible believers are on psychological
trajectories that lead to “the same point of light,” to borrow a phrase.
Perhaps such people can be readily identified by their collaboration under the
U.S. preamble’s proposition. By discovering and articulating the people’s
proposition in many civic, civil, and legal applications, we hope to increase
its practice in the USA.
Image: confidence
What distinguishes A Civic People of the United States?
Part 3 of 6. “Self-discipline” an example of the human language A Civic People
works to develop.
The pursuit of individual, human
self-discipline rather
than proprietary
self-governance illustrates what distinguishes A Civic People
of the United States from We the People of the United States. The former
collaborate for comprehension and understanding while the latter tolerate
ignorance, arrogance, and proprietary power. The former encourage acceptance of
the unknown or undiscovered as well as the-objective-truth while the latter
tolerate speculation using reason and other human constructs. Similarly, A
Civic People seeks collaboration for individual happiness with civic integrity
rather than compromise, cooperation, submission or other form of accepting
arbitrary constraints on each single human lifetime. Moreover, We the People of
the United States has, so far, re-instituted many colonial-British injustices,
and A Civic People of the United States proposes to reform the U.S.
Constitution so that it comports to the U.S. preamble’s proposition.
A prime British injustice is their constitutional
church-state legislative partnership: a fixed number of Canterbury seats in
Parliament. It is well known that church-state partnerships live high on the
hog by picking the people’s pockets. The people neither emigrate nor rebel,
because they wait an eternity for their personal God to deliver justice. Since
God and government are a partnership, they look to government to deliver God’s
justice. In the USA, the legislative church-state partnership is maintained “by
tradition” but is codified by US Supreme Court decisions such as Greece v.
Galloway (2014). A Civic People of the United States may collaborate to amend
the First Amendment so as to approve and encourage individual civic integrity
rather than defend the institutional business called “religion.”
A Civic People address these issues in language that most
humans can relate to and collaborate to resolve.
Image: language
What distinguishes A Civic People of the United States?
Part 4 of 6. Freedom-from the oppressions: 1) “don’t talk” and 2) humans tend
to choose bad behavior.
I was reared under the oppression that citizens avoid if not
prevent two conversations: politics and religion. If you talk, you’ll discover
people are bad. However, it seems plain that many citizens guardedly talk religion
and politics. I have yet to talk to an individual who prefers bad behavior.
In these 230 years of USA operations, these three subjects---religion,
politics, and evil tendancy---have become so polarizing that significant pain
and suffering has become a way of life in the USA. A Civic People of the United
States holds that open discussion is essential for freedom-from oppression so
as to encourage the liberty-to pursue personal happiness with civic integrity. Openness
is essential to each citizen’s one lifetime with freedom-from institutional
impositions intended to hold power throughout eternity.
Our approach is to articulate perspectives about humans,
politics, and religion so as to relieve the tensions and doubts many citizens
suffer.
First, religious beliefs are personal, non-competitive, and
have no standards against which they may be judged. If an illegal proposal is
construed as a religious belief, it is easy to show that the statutory law is
being compromised, as in the case of rape by a clergyperson seeking protection
under canon law. Civically, the harmless belief that Jesus’s was a virgin birth
can be held private so as not to affect non-believers, and the safety of civic
believers can be maintained. The believer can admit to self that he or she
believes yet does not know, and therefore, would not impose the beliefs on
another person.
Second, politics is public power. Each citizen may seek
equity under public power---the 5 provisions listed in the U.S. preamble. The
power of justice is obtained under the rule of law. Collaborators for equity
seek an agreement for justice under law. In the U.S., the proposition for
justice under statutory law is the U.S. preamble. A Civic People may
collaborate to hold the U. S. Supreme Court accountable under the U.S.
preamble’s civic, civil, and legal proposition. The standard under which the
U.S. Supreme Court is judged is the-objective-truth rather than
Judeo-Christianity. However, because individual citizens do not admit to
themselves that their liberty to pursue individual happiness with civic
integrity is in their hands, U.S. political power is controlled by competing
oligarchies.
Third, humans tend to be good. A Civic People of the United
States collaborates to discover and articulate the-objective-truth with clarity
that resonates with human experiences and observations so convincingly that
most individuals will embrace responsible human liberty with gusto, putting
aside the imposition that without higher power the human individual chooses bad
behavior. Every human has the authority to be good.
Image: self-reliance
What distinguishes A Civic People of the United States?
Part 5 of 6. Practicing and promoting civic integrity.
What is civic integrity? A Civic People of the United States
maintains a glossary. See
https://promotethepreamble.blogspot.com/2014/10/glossary-for-december-15-discussion.html.
A Civic People practice and promote civic integrity as the
basis for individual happiness.
“Civic integrity” means
publicly expressing reasons for personal
behavior and adopting any improvements the public discovers. “Integrity” is a
practice: confronting a concern; doing the work to confirm the concern is not a
false impression; if there's discovery, extending the work to understand how to
benefit; behaving according-to or benefitting-from the discovery; publicly
expressing the reasons for the behavior and adopting any expressed
improvements; and remaining alert to new discovery that requires change. This
is the rewarding work of responsible human liberty.
“Individual
happiness” means freedom-from both external and internal constraints
such that the individual has the psychological liberty-to behave according to
personal preference without imposing on another individual.
It takes over three decades for an individual to complete
building the wisdom parts of his or her brain and with good coaching to enter
the pursuit of adulthood. Developing psychological maturity takes upwards of
seven decades. These norms can be lessened with education for responsible human
liberty.
Image: integrity and honesty
What distinguishes A Civic People of the United States?
Part 6 of 6. Liberty to the continuum of living people.
By developing words and phrases that represent the human
experience rather than institutional proprieties, A Civic People of the United
States journals the U.S. evolution toward statutory justice.
Statutory justice is written legal
code that assures justice according to the-objective-truth; judicial
perfection. The U.S. preamble's ultimate proposition is to improve statutory
law so as to achieve statutory justice.
Through the glossary of terms, past discoveries are made
available to living people, and their task of personal discovery of what-came-before
and its leading edge is lessened. Thereby, A Civic People realizes its dream:
lessening the misery and loss that many humans, who want to live without
arbitrary burden, suffer from proprietary political power.
With a small fraction of personal time on earth, the
individual can keep track of both the past and the leading edge of
psychological evolution. A Civic People need not be trusted: its journal of
discovery is reliable from the record of civic collaboration.
The journal of psychological progress in citizenships
standards distinguishes A Civic People of the United States from We the People
of the United States without compromising responsible human liberty.
Image: journal
Copyright©2019
by Phillip R. Beaver. All rights reserved. Permission is hereby granted for the
publication of all or portions of this paper as long as this complete copyright
notice is included.
