This is a prime example of the logic of 'groupthink.'  Here are a few corrections:

— We the People are the PEOPLE.
— The 'government' is chartered by the people via their elected representatives.
— Individuals (i.e. the people) will determine what is in their best interests, not 'the government' which has absolutely no authority to do so because they have never been given the power to do so.
— Nowhere in the government's charter have they been given the power to guide the path of growth or development of a functional people (sorry just trying to paraphrase your poorly worded statement.)

Your groupthink and collectivist newspeak is anathema to a free people who without principled manners and a mutual respect for the common good would not remain free for long — and their rulers would embody the worst traits of them all.

Every post you make seems to come from the perspective that the common people are children needing guidance from a paternal government — and you make it pretty clear which group you belong to...

Me thinks thou protesteth too much, Fred.  Your lack of sound reasoning is a poor argument for 'science' of which apparently you know little. 

For we truth-seekers, details matter, and in particular WORDS matter and have specific meaning.  If you keep changing the meaning of words and exaggerate things all to defend your true lack of knowledge, your 'argument' becomes fallacious, that is to say lacking any standing in fact.

You're going to have to do much better.  In fact, it is better to admit you don't know than to bank on mere opinion.

Seeking the existence of God is difficult if you can't agree on what the word God means.  Better to seek truth, to seek understanding, to uncover the deceptions and expose lies.  If God indeed does exist, you'll find him once the false 'facts' are discarded.

You do seem to however acknowledge the existence of the devil by your descriptions of man, and I half-agree with you in some respects. 

Those of us who have seen the devil unmasked can recognize him gleefully pulling the strings of his puppets. Sadly, there is nothing more heartbreaking than watching those under his sway mock us as 'fools.'

I'm glad Jefferson did more than that because the Declaration of Independence stands as one of the greatest masterpieces of political expression ever crafted!

This is essentially what I do; however, watching the powers-that-should-not-be take over the world grants me no peace.  Lord help us!

I like it.  Some things can only be forgiven else there is perpetual war.  Even the Christians believe that there is a perpetual war between good and evil, and yet the solution posed by Christ is to forgive one's enemies.  That's a tough one, but worth pondering the depths of it.  But returning evil for evil guarantees evil, so logically maybe there's something to forgiving evil....  That's still a tough one for me.

Science is never settled, Fred.  And while we may not know the whole truth, it ever stands in front of us to be discerned rightly.

Whatever the origin of life and the universe, we know it was not man.  The theory of evolution is just that, a theory.  And if you do the math, it is mathematically impossible that everything in this world evolved from nothing in 15 billion years — the human genome has hardly changed in 100,000 years, certainly not enough time to randomly evolve in 15 billion.

The artist is known through his art — each stroke and color has been consciously chosen.  So too with the Creator of this world.  There is obvious intelligence behind the design of the human body, the plants and animals, not to mention the symmetry of the microcosm to the macrocosm.  It may be incomprehensible for man — that is why it is attributed to powers beyond our understanding.  I do not confuse religion with Truth, but I cannot rule out a creative intelligence behind the creation, in fact it seems self-evident to me.

And on this Thanksgiving Day I am truly thankful for the gift of Life and all that comes with it!   

Indeed.  Because we can err, we cannot be too rigid in our demands of others and even ourselves.  Sometimes I have to sit back and review my sacred cows and make sure they are indeed sacred.  Even though I am more 'conservative' in my older age, I am also more 'liberal' — forgiveness goes a long way and sometimes is the only option other than perpetual conflict.

Let's make 'liberal' liberal again!  MLLA, or something like that... ;-)

In America, no one is compelled to act against their will. I am free to do nothing if I choose, but I am equally responsible for the outcomes of my inaction. Liberty, as envisioned in the Declaration of Independence, guarantees the right to pursue happiness, not its attainment. True freedom means allowing individuals to make their own choices and bear the consequences, even when those choices seem misguided. While I may personally intervene to stop someone from harm, such as jumping off a bridge, I would accept the responsibility for overriding their free will. What I reject is legislation that compels action or inaction in matters of personal agency. Freedom carries risks, but it is the cornerstone of a society built on self-determination and personal responsibility.

Once again, Fred, that is YOUR opinion and you are entitled to it.

But I am of the same mind as Benjamin Franklin:

“It is a working man who is a happy man. It is the idle man who is a miserable man.”

And:

“Idle hands are the devil’s playthings.”

Fred, As long as you do not try to compel me to obey a false authority, I believe we could be good and loyal friends even though we hold different ideological views.  I wish you nothing but happiness and fulfilment — and that should be at no else's expense but your own.

And if we can come to an agreement on how to uplift others, I would be happy to do so with you.  That IMHO is the American way.

"Fear is the path to the dark side.
Fear leads to anger.
Anger leads to hate.
Hate leads to suffering." 
   ~ Master Yoda

A republican form of government is the best form for coming to an agreement.  After all, the USA was formed by 100% agreement of the colonies to a declaration of independence.  Without agreement, there is no authority. A government that assumes power without consent is a despotism whether it calls itself 'democratic' or not.  Our natural born rights are not up for vote — it is out of our natural right of self-defense and self-reliance that we AGREED on our compact.  That compact becomes null and void if the parties to it break their word.

Because we will not all agree, we must be left free and respectful of each other's rights.  If a group of us want to form a community that follows agreed upon rules, they may do so voluntarily and as long as as they respect the rights of those that do not wish to join, even if in a minority.

Fred, your version of socialism is based on many virtuous ideals, some of which I share with you, but I prefer to live my life in my own way.  We can play games from time to time, but ultimately we put our tokens back in the box and return to our respective homes.  Don't confuse 'socialism' with 'socializing.'  The former is by compulsion and the latter by consent.

Just pointing out "it's unfair" is not a solution (if there really should be a solution).  I mean, HOW are you going to make fair what is unfair?  How do you make the call as to what is fair or not?  What is too little?  What is too much?  Who is to take on the God-like role of authority?  This is not a new idea, and everywhere it has been implemented, the civilization burned to the ground.

But I'll bite, "HOW?"

How prescient! 15 years ago and nothing has changed — except they followed through with some of their most devious of plans since then.

Are we waking up, please? 

'Conspiracy Facts' 'Trump' 'the Narrative.'

Freedom, at its core, is the beautiful ability to just be — to exist without feeling the need to fix everything, change everyone’s mind, or chase after every fleeting goal. It’s the freedom to take a deep breath, sip your coffee, and think, 'Wow, I’m just here, and that’s enough.' The pursuit of happiness? Sure, go for it — just don’t trample anyone else’s rights while you’re at it. That’s the tricky part of liberty: balancing your dreams while respecting other people’s lives, property, and (sometimes baffling) choices without making them live by beliefs they never signed up for.

And freedom is an opportunity, not a chore. It invites us to give joyfully, to help willingly, to serve cheerfully — all with a full and honest heart. That’s true empowerment. But let’s be clear, the moment helping others becomes a mandatory to-do list item handed down from on high, it’s not empowerment — it’s oppression. Nobody thrives under a yoke, no matter how shiny it looks.

Now, freedom does come with some fine print: agreements. When people come together, they tend to make deals, whether it’s about sharing chores, trading skills, or deciding who’s picking up the pizza. These agreements might temporarily limit our liberty, but they also hinge on our honor — keeping your word because trust matters. Here’s the heart of it: liberty and truth go hand in hand. Without truth, those agreements crumble, and what’s left? Chaos. Love and trust can’t survive in a world of half-truths and empty promises. Without them, we’d end up in a bleak spiral of delusion, bitterness, and, well, the kind of chaos no one has time for.

Real giving, the kind that changes lives and uplifts spirits, has to come from choice — not compulsion. When it’s done willingly, it builds connection and keeps us human. Benevolence is vital for society, but it can never be forced through legislation. That’s like telling someone to be spontaneous. It’s missing the whole point.

Freedom thrives when we can look at one another and say, “I choose to care, not because I have to, but because I want to.” And in that choice, we find not just liberty but joy, truth, and a whole lot of love. And maybe even pizza — because agreements need snacks too.

Hmm, no, that's the wrong context.  Man is inherently free and unavoidably responsible for defending his freedom and dare I say the freedom of his neighbors.

Amen to that!

"As you sow so shall you reap."

I heartily disagree.  Sounds more like Christian aspirations than those of socialists.  Again, socialism is the great appropriator, now claiming the morality of the faithful while ignoring the source of life and intelligence. 

Socialists seek to play god, but inevitably they become useful servants of the devil, leaving death and despair in their wake.

Fred, your repetitive platitude is vague and lacking any substance, and thus not one that will be spoken by anyone but yourself.  If that's the only thing unique about you, the rest of what you say fits in perfectly with authoritarian, socialist, communist ideology — which is nothing new.  Your 'slogan' is grammatically incorrect and in fact has no meaning.  I see that you have merely changed a couple words from your previous signature, perhaps in hopes of this version being recorded in the annals of history.  It will be forgotten as soon as you stop repeating it because it is not truth. 

Truth stands unassisted, not requiring constant affirmation to assert its presence.

The core of truth lies in the understanding that while man is born free, not bound by the need for governance, he is inherently subject to the laws of nature embedded within reality—laws that must be discovered rather than created. The principle of cause and effect, encapsulated in the proverb "As you sow, so shall you reap," serves as the first law of nature, and thus follows the Golden Rule: treat others as you would wish to be treated.

The imposition of one man's will over another, contrary to their wishes, directly contradicts these natural laws, a contradiction that becomes evident when the Golden Rule is ignored. Socialism is an imposition under the guise of benevolence—driven by unchecked greed and hubris. Its unsustainable foundations predict an inevitable collapse. 

What are you talking about, Fred?  This quote is right out of the socialist's handbook?  You can't have socialism without lawyers and courts and offenders... that's why we need socialism, right?  You can't regulate all that you want to regulate without a 'justice system', right?  You're speaking out of both sides of your mouth (to put it politely).

It is plain to all who has the mental disorder, Fred.  Without firearms, the government could not defend their corruption and theft.  It is not that people are mentally ill for preparing to defend themselves, but that it is entirely reasonable that among us are people who would use force to take what is not theirs and enslave those weak in body and in mind — like Fred.  How can a people be enslaved? When they have been dis-empowered in every way possible, when they have been 'programmed' to believe they are the subjects and subservient to arbitrary authority and 'experts.'

We know who the mentally ill are, and it is not us.  10 million gun owners did not commit a crime today, nor will they tomorrow, but they stand as a bulwark against the arbitrary rule Fred spews out every day.  Talk about deranged... you are their poster-boy.

Why would 'someone' benefit from saying our coastal cities are in trouble of being submerged into the sea, if there's is no possibility?  Let me count the ways!  POWER!  Does anyone have the power to dictate to the world what they must do to prevent this theoretical danger?  Not yet, but they are working on it.  What is the proposed 'solution'?  Declare CO2 a pollutant and regulate it world wide, tax the people for any amount of CO2 that they may produce in the course of their lives — short of taxing their breath, I suppose, but who knows?!  Granting powers and centralizing them into fewer and fewer hands, choking the necks of nations, cutting off their air, closing down their power stations, regulating their farms and production.  POWER!

You communists always end up killing millions in pursuit of such utopian ideals, empty promises that only fatten the Politburo.  You are an utter fool, Fred, and willingly so.

BTW the tide lines of Plymouth Rock are the same as they were in 1620.   

Hubris, indeed!