Posted on 07/20/2012 12:26:45 PM PDT by Kaslin
Rand was a flawed, but truly great person. As influential as any writer in the last two hundred years. I can personally attest to the fact that her writings changed my life very positively.
Was she perfect? Does it matter? She had more impact on the world than her detractors could ever hope to have. But don't bother with them. It's not worth the effort.
Don't cast pearls before swine without getting even a pork chop in return.
By the way, one of my favorite Rand quotes goes something like "Civilization is the process of setting man free from men."
We see the profound truth of that in the consequences of our failure recognize it every day.
Hank
"I doubt that. Instead, I would wager that she would have championed removing the state endorsement of marriage in general."
-----
The quote to which you responded is typical of the sort of ignorance one encounters from Rand-bashers, most of whom have read little to nothing of her work and just pass along third-hand stuff various people have spewed at them.
Here's a pretty good summary of her views on homosexualtiy from Wikipedia. Note the bolded bit at the end. Does she sound like a Friend of Faggotry?
"In response to questions from the audience at the two Ford Hall Forum lectures she gave at Northeastern University, Rand explained her views in more detail. In her 1968 lecture, she said, 'I do not approve of such practices or regard them as necessarily moral, but it is improper for the law to interfere with a relationship between consenting adults.' In 1971, Rand reiterated this position, then added that homosexuality 'involves psychological flaws, corruptions, errors, or unfortunate premises', concluding that homosexuality 'is immoral, and more than that; if you want my really sincere opinion, it's disgusting.'"
Hank
I think that's probably not true. I don't think Rand would care about your relationship with God any more than she would care about anything else you did that didn't violate the freedom of others. She might find your beliefs peculiar, but in the final analysis would recognize that her opinion of your religion didn't really matter.
Hank
Google search shows it as your own made up quote.
When I asked you for your source you gave me two sources that proved that you made it up.
If you want to “quote” Clarence Thomas, then you must use his own words, his actual quote.
Rand had any number of worthwhile things to say about intellect, general freedom, production, honest trading and what not. She was, however, a bit too flawed to be a general moral authority. Give her credit where it is due and criticism likewise.
She would defend the individual's right to dispense charity to others (a part of property rights) but then deride the charity as "cruelty" to the recipient (The Virtue of Selfishness).
She also would defend one's right to one's beliefs but deride religious believers as being in service to "witch doctors." She "excommunicated" a young Murray Rothbard from her inner circle when he was still an atheist after he introduced la Rand to his Episcopalian fiancee. Did she actually worry about such weak tea as Episcopalianism???
She had a limited and not useful view of what constituted a "righteous citizen." I can certainly concede that there are many authentically "righteous" people who are either agnostics or atheists. In some ways they are particularly heroic in their virtues since they lack the bulwark of well-considered religious belief and faith and yet they act in a quite virtuous manner toward others. With graces and sacraments and the loving hand of God, virtue is easier to achieve. Rand would not have been a reliable co-occupant of a foxhole in extreme circumstances. Just my opinion.
The top two quotes are shockingly pertinent to two very recent events: the USSC decision on Obamacare and Obama’s comments about businessmen:
2) “America’s abundance was created not by public sacrifices to ‘the common good,’ but by the productive genius of free men who pursued their own personal interests and the making of their own private fortunes. They did not starve the people to pay for America’s industrialization. They gave the people better jobs, higher wages and cheaper goods with every new machine they invented, with every scientific discovery or technological advance—and thus the whole country was moving forward and profiting, not suffering, every step of the way.”
This is the antithesis of Obama’s statement and belief. It is the foundation of capitalism and freedom: that the pursuit of self-interest will result in the most efficient use of resources and the greatest growth, to the benefit of all. To a Marxist like Obama, Rand must be viewed as the devil incarnate.
1) “We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission; which is the stage of the darkest periods of human history, the stage of rule by brute force.”
Chief Justice Roberts had given America the “ultimate inversion”. He has decided that the government can do anything it pleases, so long as they call it a tax. This taxation power is pure coercion. It will start with people being severely fined for not obeying the government’s dictates, but will quickly morph into physical force as those who refuse to comply or who don’t have the resources to comply are jailed.
Have you read her quotes on religion, particularly the absurdity of original sin?
i’m sure you’ve gotten this a lot but, why do you put a box around all your posts?
Ping request. Thanks.
Hard to say.......
What we do know however, Rand would not condone the use of Govt force, judges that override a Prop 8 vote by the people to force Gay marriage down 30 plus states that have rejected it by a majority’s vote.......
I’m not enthused much about the article, so I have resisted pinging the book club. However, the debate that has broken out has become interesting.
It is interesting that most of those who attack Rand here and other places do not choose to attack her actual statements or actions. They choose instead to put words in her mouth. It is not necessary to put words in her mouth... she has a large volume of work where she made observations on just about every aspect of our society. As far as the attacks on her character... she was a person who appears to have lived by an uncompromising honest code. Most others make her look like a saint by comparison.
We are all shaped by the times and the circumstances of the world we are born into. Escaping from a country that fell into a terrible abyss of totalitarianism, Ayn Rand certainly faced challenges that those of us born and raised in the United States in the last 50 or 60 years can hardly imagine. I enjoy and appreciate the body of work she left us. It would be no more fair for me to judge her by my standards than those liberals who judge our founding fathers by the standards of today.
bmfl
I don’t think JimRob is a big Ayn Rand fan.
He doesn’t know how to use color?
That one quote completely exposes Rands hostility towards Christians. She was a godless philosopher with rather interesting beliefs. None of which ever took into consideration the needs of the elderly or ill as her hostility towards charity shows.
She contended that Reason requires atheism.
As to la Rand, there is nothing but a black hole where the personal morality is supposed to be. A woman, wife and mother who lives a life of moral dedication might also view la Rand as "the devil incarnate."
I also doubt that Barbara Branden, for example, spends much time nowadays in Rand worship.
Rand was a brilliant writer and an extremely flawed human being. When, as is quite often the case, she is right, she appeals to the best that is within us and earns the dollars we spend on her writings. When she is wrong, she is toxic.
What makes you say so? Because he didn’t reply? Does he have to reply to every thread? I don’t think so
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.