Alright. So here's my detailed explanation of my opposition to the idea of gay people marrying one another:
Since the 1960s and really, since the beginning, there has been a movement toward sexual libertinism. I believe it's author is Satan. If we look at sex as a buffet, there's only one entre on the menu and it's only available to those of us who are married. This is God's law. It's simple. It's ample for our needs.
What has happened is that over time, we've become obsessed with sex. Instead of the equivalent of 3 meals a day, we've become convinced that several dozen daily meals are necessary. Man cannot live on sex alone. That's why we're supposed to stick to abstinence before and fidelity after marriage: to avoid obsession.
In addition, new menu items have been added to the buffet. The first were fornication and adultery; various other opitons are there, as well. At this point, gay sex is there, too. And according to groups like MBLA, (sic) kids are on the menu, too. I won't go on because you get the picture.
So, what's a guy to do? Having only one option is so much more boring than having several, right? And what does it hurt? I'm a libertarian, right? It's none of my business.
Well, it's hurting children and by extension, society. Here's how: Your average person steps up to the buffet. He notes that married sex comes with its own whole set of responsibilities and conditions, as it should. He then notices the other options. Maybe he selects one of those. More and more people are doing it, right? Well, an indisputable fact is that a married heterosexual couple is the best vehicle for the raising of kids. And we all benefit from well-raised kids. Kids need a mom and a dad; not some next best thing. These truths are self-evident.
And that's why I would persuade gay people to not marry; and to cease and desist all other activities that go toward the further acceptance of their lifestyle by society. Because with more acceptance will come more of a dearth of ideal homes for raising kids, as more people opt out of the optimal kid-raising mechanism. And that's not good.
It really is none of my business what you do in your bed. But with TV shows like modern family where there it is, the oh-so-normal, funny gay family, we're all getting used to the idea. It seems... not so bad. What does it hurt me whatever they're doing? Well, it doesn't hurt me, directly. But kids need to grow up. They need examples to follow. They need nurturing from a mother and provision and protection from a father. There's no substitute. It's hard enough to grow up. We mustn't deprive kids of what is fundamental to their growth, maturity and development into individuals of responsible character, strength and esteem.
That is my problem with the gay lifestyle juggernaut. They're selling people on a career that takes them away from their highest and best utility while on earth: marriage and parenthood. Because it's not just fundamentally educational and edifying for the kids. It's a real growth experience for the parents and spouses, as well.
And there's the rub. Gays, if they do as I'm recommending, will miss out on being a parent and a spouse altogether. But I believe they must do it, out of concern for kids. Though, again, while I'm all for persuasion; I'm against govt initiative force against gays to make them do or not do what I feel is best.
Friday, March 30, 2012
Disclaimer to "The Sexual Buffet"
Before I get into my elaboration of my personal feelings on the matter, let me say up front that I'm against the outlawing of gay marriage. It's not right to force anyone to do anything or to forcibly prevent him from doing anything, as long as he's not hurting or threatening anyone else or violating anyone's individual unalienable rights. It's wrong for me to use force, to initiate it, even if I'm right. Force is for defense only. I'll go on to vigorously argue against gay marriage, but those are personal feelings of mine. And I have no right to enforce them on anyone, even if I feel I'm preventing him from hurting himself.
While we're on the subject. I don't need the govt's or anyone's license, sanction or permission to get married. Or, more accurately, I shouldn't need it. But the truth is, we, in our apathy, have allowed the govt to not only require us to get their permission, they also charge us money for it.
Now, I know it's hard to get your head around a concept that flies in the face of your lifetime of experience. But imagine. You're in a public place. And you're in the very act of dropping to one knee to ask your sweetheart's hand. And some random guy approaches and says, "Wait. No. Were you about to propose? No. You can't do that. I haven't given you permission."
Here's the tough concept I mentioned: Look, I know it's a random dude in my hypothetical example and in real life it's the govt. But how is that really different? The govt is literally made up of average, random dudes. How did they get the power and authority they have? Based on what criteria of merit? They're just like us. The vast majority are appointed or hired bureaucrats and the rest are politicians, hired by us. We're their bosses. We're sovereign (read: kings and queens) citizens. They're absolutely our underlings. Yet they have all of the power. Do you begin to see what's happened as you slumbered at the switch? We've all been asleep. Well, some of us are awake. And it's time the rest of you roused yourselves before it's too late.
You don't need; I don't need anyone's permission or license to do anything. As long as all parties to the thing I'm doing are voluntary, it's no one else's business. Look, no one needs you to protect him. Just as you're able to cruise through life making competent decisions, even making mistakes and failing sometimes. You recover and learn. You're capable; competent. Well, get this, so is everyone else. Stay out of it! Shut your yap and live your own life. Don't try to intervene and forcibly keep me from doing what I want if it's not hurting you.
There are various kinds of other licenses required by the govt. A classic example of this is the requirement that I, as a drywall contractor, be licensed by the govt. Now, I know you assume that all of my potential customers are stupid and that they must be protected from that stupidity and from me by the govt. Do I have that about right? You might not put it into those terms, but that's it, in a nutshell. Well, guess what. I've served 100s of happy customers over the years with only 1 or 2 complaints. And I've never been licensed. I refuse to obtain unneeded permission. My customers are competent enough to decide whether to hire me and whether I've done a good job. Beyond my lack of a contractor's license, I even let my business license expire, years ago. I got tired of paying the fee.
Anyway, the point is, no one got hurt from my lack of license. And in fact, I'm sure there are cases where some customer has been wronged by a bad contractor who WAS licensed. Stuff happens. You win some, you lose some. When you abdicate your personal responsibility and rely on someone else to do what you should do yourself, you're going to get burned.
Um. Let's see. Did the govt ever license a marriage that failed to work out and even hurt those who undertook it? Not to mention surgeries gone bad performed by licensed doctors, etc. Why was the govt not sued for its sanctioning of such a painful failure? The truth is, no one can guarantee security. Take hold of your freedom and the responsibility that goes with it and make your decisions. Make your mistakes. No one can save you from them. And they're very educational.
While we're on the subject. I don't need the govt's or anyone's license, sanction or permission to get married. Or, more accurately, I shouldn't need it. But the truth is, we, in our apathy, have allowed the govt to not only require us to get their permission, they also charge us money for it.
Now, I know it's hard to get your head around a concept that flies in the face of your lifetime of experience. But imagine. You're in a public place. And you're in the very act of dropping to one knee to ask your sweetheart's hand. And some random guy approaches and says, "Wait. No. Were you about to propose? No. You can't do that. I haven't given you permission."
Here's the tough concept I mentioned: Look, I know it's a random dude in my hypothetical example and in real life it's the govt. But how is that really different? The govt is literally made up of average, random dudes. How did they get the power and authority they have? Based on what criteria of merit? They're just like us. The vast majority are appointed or hired bureaucrats and the rest are politicians, hired by us. We're their bosses. We're sovereign (read: kings and queens) citizens. They're absolutely our underlings. Yet they have all of the power. Do you begin to see what's happened as you slumbered at the switch? We've all been asleep. Well, some of us are awake. And it's time the rest of you roused yourselves before it's too late.
You don't need; I don't need anyone's permission or license to do anything. As long as all parties to the thing I'm doing are voluntary, it's no one else's business. Look, no one needs you to protect him. Just as you're able to cruise through life making competent decisions, even making mistakes and failing sometimes. You recover and learn. You're capable; competent. Well, get this, so is everyone else. Stay out of it! Shut your yap and live your own life. Don't try to intervene and forcibly keep me from doing what I want if it's not hurting you.
There are various kinds of other licenses required by the govt. A classic example of this is the requirement that I, as a drywall contractor, be licensed by the govt. Now, I know you assume that all of my potential customers are stupid and that they must be protected from that stupidity and from me by the govt. Do I have that about right? You might not put it into those terms, but that's it, in a nutshell. Well, guess what. I've served 100s of happy customers over the years with only 1 or 2 complaints. And I've never been licensed. I refuse to obtain unneeded permission. My customers are competent enough to decide whether to hire me and whether I've done a good job. Beyond my lack of a contractor's license, I even let my business license expire, years ago. I got tired of paying the fee.
Anyway, the point is, no one got hurt from my lack of license. And in fact, I'm sure there are cases where some customer has been wronged by a bad contractor who WAS licensed. Stuff happens. You win some, you lose some. When you abdicate your personal responsibility and rely on someone else to do what you should do yourself, you're going to get burned.
Um. Let's see. Did the govt ever license a marriage that failed to work out and even hurt those who undertook it? Not to mention surgeries gone bad performed by licensed doctors, etc. Why was the govt not sued for its sanctioning of such a painful failure? The truth is, no one can guarantee security. Take hold of your freedom and the responsibility that goes with it and make your decisions. Make your mistakes. No one can save you from them. And they're very educational.
Thursday, March 29, 2012
The Hunger Games
This is the sequel to Atlas Shrugged, assuming the 'shruggers' never came back from Galt's Gulch. This is what happens when force, not freedom, is the rule of the day. This is the choice before us. Seemingly, most want a little bit of force with their freedom; like cat excrement in their soup. Some of us prefer no initiative force. The problem with the power of initiative force is that it feeds on itself. It's self-perpetuating. It seeks not just to maintain but to grow. It's fun to boss people around and make them do some of the things we want them to do. It would be more fun if we could force them to do all of the things we want them to do.
In The Hunger Games, the govt got too oppressive. It exercised unrighteous dominion. So the people rebelled. They were summarily slaughtered like sheep by the govt. Then, as a yearly reminder that "treason" doesn't pay, they're made to watch their children fight to the death in an arena. It reminds me of the right to rebel and secede which characterized the revolutionary and civil wars. In the former, the right to free association was upheld. In the latter, not so much. Anyway, all three stories provide an important argument for freedom. The book and movie are well worth the time and are a great reminder of what's really important and worth preserving...freedom.
In The Hunger Games, the govt got too oppressive. It exercised unrighteous dominion. So the people rebelled. They were summarily slaughtered like sheep by the govt. Then, as a yearly reminder that "treason" doesn't pay, they're made to watch their children fight to the death in an arena. It reminds me of the right to rebel and secede which characterized the revolutionary and civil wars. In the former, the right to free association was upheld. In the latter, not so much. Anyway, all three stories provide an important argument for freedom. The book and movie are well worth the time and are a great reminder of what's really important and worth preserving...freedom.
Monday, March 26, 2012
Some poems I've written recently
Mad Inaction
The greatest sin of omission is to know and yet not do;
to fail to take the action required, to refuse to follow through.
Knowledge can be so freeing; dreams such effortless bliss.
Is to learn but not act to really know? Well, one thing I do know is this:
it's hard to finish; it's harder to start, though great ideas abound.
But once you hear success' strains, you never forget the sound.
"If it is to be, it's up to me." That's what a wise man said.
When you've been and done, you'll be blessed to find the rest all seek abed.
So, be wise yourself. Do as you know you should while the sun lights the sky.
And the rest all seek throughout this life, you'll enter the day you die.
For what doth it profit a man to know but lazily refuse to do?
You must take responsibility as each day begins anew.
The freedom, love and meaning you'll find with every waking breath
will carry you cross each earthbound care and you'll smile as you meet your death.
O Liberty
O what will you trade for your freedom?
For, everyone has his price.
Your heart's on the line; your spirit, your mind.
Will you trade it for virtue or vice?
O what can be gained from the loss of
your liberty's glorious flame?
For what could be worth the stillborn birth
of a soul under Beelzebub's claim?
O say! Have you seen the proud colors
of our Heavenly Banner wave?
Have you felt your soul yearn for the freedom earned
by the lifeblood your fathers gave?
O Liberty looks upon you.
She wonders what's in your heart..
Will you ask her to stay? Will you give her away?
Or unite with her, never to part?
O man do you understand freedom
is the cure for your country's ills?
It's brighter than gold. O man, don't be lulled
to complacency. Don't lose your will!
O never defer to apathy!
Don't take for granted your rights!
And never revert to things as they were
when tyranny spread its blight.
O why won't you vie for freedom
o'er security, power and gold?
All these she'll provide as the moon guides the tide,
if you hie to her principles bold.
O reckon by light of freedom:
your guide through the long, dark night.
She'll ease your way, she'll carry the day
if you labor for her with your might.
O what would you prize above freedom?
The power to force the mob?
You'd wish to make safe your life, your faith?
Then freedom must not be robbed.
O Live and let live in freedom.
Your brothers can bear it as you.
Let Liberty reign through triumph and pain.
And her espoused self-reliance, too.
O search for your motive power,
your self-interest, your righteous desire.
To live in this land you must be a man
of action and feed your own fire.
O preserve, protect, defend freedom
as set forth by the law of this land.
Restore to her founding with anthems resounding
to God, as we make our last stand!
The greatest sin of omission is to know and yet not do;
to fail to take the action required, to refuse to follow through.
Knowledge can be so freeing; dreams such effortless bliss.
Is to learn but not act to really know? Well, one thing I do know is this:
it's hard to finish; it's harder to start, though great ideas abound.
But once you hear success' strains, you never forget the sound.
"If it is to be, it's up to me." That's what a wise man said.
When you've been and done, you'll be blessed to find the rest all seek abed.
So, be wise yourself. Do as you know you should while the sun lights the sky.
And the rest all seek throughout this life, you'll enter the day you die.
For what doth it profit a man to know but lazily refuse to do?
You must take responsibility as each day begins anew.
The freedom, love and meaning you'll find with every waking breath
will carry you cross each earthbound care and you'll smile as you meet your death.
O Liberty
O what will you trade for your freedom?
For, everyone has his price.
Your heart's on the line; your spirit, your mind.
Will you trade it for virtue or vice?
O what can be gained from the loss of
your liberty's glorious flame?
For what could be worth the stillborn birth
of a soul under Beelzebub's claim?
O say! Have you seen the proud colors
of our Heavenly Banner wave?
Have you felt your soul yearn for the freedom earned
by the lifeblood your fathers gave?
O Liberty looks upon you.
She wonders what's in your heart..
Will you ask her to stay? Will you give her away?
Or unite with her, never to part?
O man do you understand freedom
is the cure for your country's ills?
It's brighter than gold. O man, don't be lulled
to complacency. Don't lose your will!
O never defer to apathy!
Don't take for granted your rights!
And never revert to things as they were
when tyranny spread its blight.
O why won't you vie for freedom
o'er security, power and gold?
All these she'll provide as the moon guides the tide,
if you hie to her principles bold.
O reckon by light of freedom:
your guide through the long, dark night.
She'll ease your way, she'll carry the day
if you labor for her with your might.
O what would you prize above freedom?
The power to force the mob?
You'd wish to make safe your life, your faith?
Then freedom must not be robbed.
O Live and let live in freedom.
Your brothers can bear it as you.
Let Liberty reign through triumph and pain.
And her espoused self-reliance, too.
O search for your motive power,
your self-interest, your righteous desire.
To live in this land you must be a man
of action and feed your own fire.
O preserve, protect, defend freedom
as set forth by the law of this land.
Restore to her founding with anthems resounding
to God, as we make our last stand!
Response to poli-nate regarding Ayn Rand
In order to become such a fan of Atlas Shrugged, et al, I. of course, had to square it with my religious beliefs. But let me start with the indefensible. Adultery and fornication; restraining passions, etc.; yes, Ayn Rand takes leave of reason in those cases. And in the interest of brevity, 'nuff said.
Regarding religion and subordinating one's will to a higher power, three things: 1. I like the quote of Thomas Jefferson, "Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear." I think it's okay to not just accept everything at face value and to actually search, ponder and pray to gain personal understanding of statements by church leaders and in the scriptures. 2. Ayn Rand never attended my organized religion. And having attended several others myself, I can understand her trepidation, her rebellion against what she referred to as mysticism. 3. Extreme altruism. There is a notion held by many, if not most church members, that he who gains the least and in fact hurts himself the most in his self-sacrifice in the service of others, wins. I've been taught this idea in some form, at varying levels of intensity, all my life. And I don't think it's correct doctrine. Sacrifice is the giving up of something good for something better, e.g. a portion of your income for heavenly blessings.
The pursuit of happiness or blessings or anything good for oneself has become evil. Well, I've a challenge for you. Go and try to engage in some form of service for which you'll never be compensated in any way. You can't do it. It's impossible. In service, there's always that immediate rush of well-being, that thrill of pure joy. Boom! You just got paid. Then there's the growth of character and spirit and the enhancement of capacity that comes from your obedience and righteousness. Boom! You got paid again. Then there are the treasures you're laying up in heaven. And I've failed to mention any other blessings that may come through 'carma' or whatever. But I think you get the picture. We're astoundingly overcompensated for whatever service we give. And I refuse to accept that service is somehow compromised if we happen to get a paycheck for it. I believe all of the above still applies, even if we get paid.
I actually think even the Savior gained from His ultimate sacrifice. I believe He inherited eternal life and was glorified; and He gained the possibility of a lot of company in what would've been a pretty lonely eternity. In addition, like the main characters in Atlas Shrugged, albeit at a much higher and nonfictional level, He enjoyed the expression of his full powers. He stood up to an impossible challenge, at the absolute limit of His strength, and He did it! He succeeded. You missed a major theme of the book if you think Hank Reardon invented his amazing metal just for the money. He and the others most enjoyed taming the earth, doing what no one could, sacrificing, giving years of blood, sweat and tears, failing repeatedly only to ultimately succeed. "I can do it." is Fransisco's axiom; again, the joy in the expression of one's full powers, talents, abilities. That was their "motive power."
You mention "liberty of the most extreme variety" as of that's a bad thing. I guess that's the crux of what separates you as a conservative from me as a classical liberal (read: libertarian.) I have all of the same feelings against the immorality to which you refer. I just don't think anyone should be forced, via law, to do what you and I think is right. We don't force anyone to attend our church. We don't force anyone to not drink or smoke. I've never heard of an elder's quorum raid on a house where we suspect adultery or fornication. Yet it's somehow okay for the govt to force people when it comes to drugs, prostitution, gambling, marriage, etc. Utah isn't exactly a bastion of "fiscal conservatism" and we're what, 70% Mormon? My whole premise is an absolute intolerance for the initiation of force. I'm not perfect. I'm a hypocrite in some ways. But force is for defense, only. If someone is doing something bad but which is hurting no one; no one's individual unalienable rights are being threatened or violated, I say, live and let live. Maybe try and persuade him to stop but not force him. Think of D & C 121. And remember who it was that wanted to destroy man's agency.
You make an excellent point about the freedom to which the atonement leads us. I just want the maximum freedom for all, now and always. I believe I address all of these things much more comprehensively elsewhere in this blog.
Again, as to "subjecting our minds to (our Father's) will," yes, you have a point. And she messes up here. She assigns the use of force where it's utterly absent. The Lord forces no one. But I view it the way I view sacrifice...the good for the better (best.) And remember, all of our dealings with the Lord are voluntary exchange. The weird thing is, He seemingly gets the short end of the stick since He gives so much more than He gets. Although He gets us; and to Him, that's the highest value. So...
Her morality is simply to give value for value in free exchange. No force or fraud; and need is not a valuable medium of exchange. But if you read "The Virtue of Selfishness" you see she's okay at least with the sacrifices of a parent for a child; the voluntary. She just takes the forced sacrifices of socialism to the extreme and comes off seeming to say that no one should charitably give to anyone. But her heroes in Atlas give to others charitably. She just disguises it by emphasizing what the giver feels he's getting out of it.
There may be a lot more to say and I've said most of it in this blog. To summarize, see my monkey post about the true virtue of selfishness. Truly, in service to others, we gain the most.
Regarding religion and subordinating one's will to a higher power, three things: 1. I like the quote of Thomas Jefferson, "Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear." I think it's okay to not just accept everything at face value and to actually search, ponder and pray to gain personal understanding of statements by church leaders and in the scriptures. 2. Ayn Rand never attended my organized religion. And having attended several others myself, I can understand her trepidation, her rebellion against what she referred to as mysticism. 3. Extreme altruism. There is a notion held by many, if not most church members, that he who gains the least and in fact hurts himself the most in his self-sacrifice in the service of others, wins. I've been taught this idea in some form, at varying levels of intensity, all my life. And I don't think it's correct doctrine. Sacrifice is the giving up of something good for something better, e.g. a portion of your income for heavenly blessings.
The pursuit of happiness or blessings or anything good for oneself has become evil. Well, I've a challenge for you. Go and try to engage in some form of service for which you'll never be compensated in any way. You can't do it. It's impossible. In service, there's always that immediate rush of well-being, that thrill of pure joy. Boom! You just got paid. Then there's the growth of character and spirit and the enhancement of capacity that comes from your obedience and righteousness. Boom! You got paid again. Then there are the treasures you're laying up in heaven. And I've failed to mention any other blessings that may come through 'carma' or whatever. But I think you get the picture. We're astoundingly overcompensated for whatever service we give. And I refuse to accept that service is somehow compromised if we happen to get a paycheck for it. I believe all of the above still applies, even if we get paid.
I actually think even the Savior gained from His ultimate sacrifice. I believe He inherited eternal life and was glorified; and He gained the possibility of a lot of company in what would've been a pretty lonely eternity. In addition, like the main characters in Atlas Shrugged, albeit at a much higher and nonfictional level, He enjoyed the expression of his full powers. He stood up to an impossible challenge, at the absolute limit of His strength, and He did it! He succeeded. You missed a major theme of the book if you think Hank Reardon invented his amazing metal just for the money. He and the others most enjoyed taming the earth, doing what no one could, sacrificing, giving years of blood, sweat and tears, failing repeatedly only to ultimately succeed. "I can do it." is Fransisco's axiom; again, the joy in the expression of one's full powers, talents, abilities. That was their "motive power."
You mention "liberty of the most extreme variety" as of that's a bad thing. I guess that's the crux of what separates you as a conservative from me as a classical liberal (read: libertarian.) I have all of the same feelings against the immorality to which you refer. I just don't think anyone should be forced, via law, to do what you and I think is right. We don't force anyone to attend our church. We don't force anyone to not drink or smoke. I've never heard of an elder's quorum raid on a house where we suspect adultery or fornication. Yet it's somehow okay for the govt to force people when it comes to drugs, prostitution, gambling, marriage, etc. Utah isn't exactly a bastion of "fiscal conservatism" and we're what, 70% Mormon? My whole premise is an absolute intolerance for the initiation of force. I'm not perfect. I'm a hypocrite in some ways. But force is for defense, only. If someone is doing something bad but which is hurting no one; no one's individual unalienable rights are being threatened or violated, I say, live and let live. Maybe try and persuade him to stop but not force him. Think of D & C 121. And remember who it was that wanted to destroy man's agency.
You make an excellent point about the freedom to which the atonement leads us. I just want the maximum freedom for all, now and always. I believe I address all of these things much more comprehensively elsewhere in this blog.
Again, as to "subjecting our minds to (our Father's) will," yes, you have a point. And she messes up here. She assigns the use of force where it's utterly absent. The Lord forces no one. But I view it the way I view sacrifice...the good for the better (best.) And remember, all of our dealings with the Lord are voluntary exchange. The weird thing is, He seemingly gets the short end of the stick since He gives so much more than He gets. Although He gets us; and to Him, that's the highest value. So...
Her morality is simply to give value for value in free exchange. No force or fraud; and need is not a valuable medium of exchange. But if you read "The Virtue of Selfishness" you see she's okay at least with the sacrifices of a parent for a child; the voluntary. She just takes the forced sacrifices of socialism to the extreme and comes off seeming to say that no one should charitably give to anyone. But her heroes in Atlas give to others charitably. She just disguises it by emphasizing what the giver feels he's getting out of it.
There may be a lot more to say and I've said most of it in this blog. To summarize, see my monkey post about the true virtue of selfishness. Truly, in service to others, we gain the most.
Friday, March 23, 2012
Read Atlas Shrugged, you monkeys!
I wrote this in response to someone who tried to refute Rand's 1000s of pages with 2-3 of his own:
Rand addressed one man's finite life as the ultimate measure and value, which it is. She spoke of thriving, not surviving. What? A man who doesn't reproduce has lead a life bereft of value? You came close to capturing Rand's thesis in that stmt, (that according to the theory of evolution, animals exist to reproduce, not to survive, live or thrive) just replace reproduction with production (meaning: man exists to produce or create, to thrive, to fully express his potential, as expressed by the characters in Atlas Shrugged). I think I get you. In a nutshell: you refuse to accept the reality of absolutes in life and you envy a mind able to create a philosophy so you try and fail to poke your miniscule holes in that philos.
Objectivism can be confirmed in the scriptures. there's nothing wrong with it; except abortion (oh, and adultery and fornication...it's an exciting book, you really should read it, but not for THOSE things -insert emoticon here-), which can be wholly maligned with objectivist theory. (An unborn baby is entitled to all unalienable rights enjoyed by us all, including life and property. His mind and body are his property, just like mine are mine. He is no more helpless or un-viable than he is immediately after he's born. A thin layer of muscle, fat, skin and tissue belonging to his mother notwithstanding. She has no more right to murder him than I, if he wanders onto my property, even if circumstances dictate that I must keep him for 9 months, at considerable danger and hardship to myself and against my will. What if I lived somewhere that was snowed in routinely for 9 months out of the year and someone dropped him off on my front porch the day he was born, corresponding with the first day of the snow-in? Well, that's what you call a tangent. But I'm sure Ayn Rand has been convinced of the error of her ways by someone on the other side, by now. Anyway...)
Selfishness IS virtuous. The most selfish thing you can do; what you should do if you want to do yourself the most good and gain the most possible is to follow God's commandments; e.g. serve others. Serve as many people as you can in the best way you possibly can with your best ability and talent..you will gain more than any you serve. My mission to Brazil taught me that. To call it "enlightened self-interest" is just semantic.
Please take the time to read and listen to "Fransisco's money speech" and "the story of the twentieth century motor company," both available on youtube and taken from Atlas Shrugged. It'll take you 15 min. each. Pony up, you wuss. I've read the whole book 3 times and I'm no genius. Plus, I have the attention span of the proverbial, easily distracted gnat.
And please don't try to elevate yourself, your mind, by denigrating a mind with which you're not worthy to share oxygen. It's obvious you think you sank her with your paltry points and you didn't come close. Remember, "Thou shalt not covet...anything that is thy neighbor's" including her mind.
Likely, your gripe is mostly with capitalism, per se. Freedom (aka capitalism) creates a situation where the best in each field matriculate to the top. And, to you, that feels unfair. Different abilities lead to different outcomes and results. God gave all of us talents. But we value some over others. Each of us does this by choice, under capitalism. Otherwise, we're forced into our choices. I suck as bball. Should the other players be deprived of limbs so I can compete?
Life as the ultimate value is evidenced by the life we assume or imagine is lived by Our Father in Heaven; eternal life. It's about the fullest expression of one's power. The characters in Atlas Shrugged enjoyed their money, sure. But moreso, they enjoyed taming the earth and using their minds and bodies to create, to do the things that "can't be done;" to invent. Not just to have an idea, but to bring it to life, to make it happen! That's life, living, thriving; THE ultimate value.
Rand addressed one man's finite life as the ultimate measure and value, which it is. She spoke of thriving, not surviving. What? A man who doesn't reproduce has lead a life bereft of value? You came close to capturing Rand's thesis in that stmt, (that according to the theory of evolution, animals exist to reproduce, not to survive, live or thrive) just replace reproduction with production (meaning: man exists to produce or create, to thrive, to fully express his potential, as expressed by the characters in Atlas Shrugged). I think I get you. In a nutshell: you refuse to accept the reality of absolutes in life and you envy a mind able to create a philosophy so you try and fail to poke your miniscule holes in that philos.
Objectivism can be confirmed in the scriptures. there's nothing wrong with it; except abortion (oh, and adultery and fornication...it's an exciting book, you really should read it, but not for THOSE things -insert emoticon here-), which can be wholly maligned with objectivist theory. (An unborn baby is entitled to all unalienable rights enjoyed by us all, including life and property. His mind and body are his property, just like mine are mine. He is no more helpless or un-viable than he is immediately after he's born. A thin layer of muscle, fat, skin and tissue belonging to his mother notwithstanding. She has no more right to murder him than I, if he wanders onto my property, even if circumstances dictate that I must keep him for 9 months, at considerable danger and hardship to myself and against my will. What if I lived somewhere that was snowed in routinely for 9 months out of the year and someone dropped him off on my front porch the day he was born, corresponding with the first day of the snow-in? Well, that's what you call a tangent. But I'm sure Ayn Rand has been convinced of the error of her ways by someone on the other side, by now. Anyway...)
Selfishness IS virtuous. The most selfish thing you can do; what you should do if you want to do yourself the most good and gain the most possible is to follow God's commandments; e.g. serve others. Serve as many people as you can in the best way you possibly can with your best ability and talent..you will gain more than any you serve. My mission to Brazil taught me that. To call it "enlightened self-interest" is just semantic.
Please take the time to read and listen to "Fransisco's money speech" and "the story of the twentieth century motor company," both available on youtube and taken from Atlas Shrugged. It'll take you 15 min. each. Pony up, you wuss. I've read the whole book 3 times and I'm no genius. Plus, I have the attention span of the proverbial, easily distracted gnat.
And please don't try to elevate yourself, your mind, by denigrating a mind with which you're not worthy to share oxygen. It's obvious you think you sank her with your paltry points and you didn't come close. Remember, "Thou shalt not covet...anything that is thy neighbor's" including her mind.
Likely, your gripe is mostly with capitalism, per se. Freedom (aka capitalism) creates a situation where the best in each field matriculate to the top. And, to you, that feels unfair. Different abilities lead to different outcomes and results. God gave all of us talents. But we value some over others. Each of us does this by choice, under capitalism. Otherwise, we're forced into our choices. I suck as bball. Should the other players be deprived of limbs so I can compete?
Life as the ultimate value is evidenced by the life we assume or imagine is lived by Our Father in Heaven; eternal life. It's about the fullest expression of one's power. The characters in Atlas Shrugged enjoyed their money, sure. But moreso, they enjoyed taming the earth and using their minds and bodies to create, to do the things that "can't be done;" to invent. Not just to have an idea, but to bring it to life, to make it happen! That's life, living, thriving; THE ultimate value.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)