Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: Religion Moderator

Sarah Posner
RSS

June 7, 2011
9:44AM
The Problem with Ayn Rand Isn’t Atheism
Post by Sarah Posner
Comments (17)
Email
Print
Share

Detroit Examiner columnist Brandon Schlacht takes issue with the American Values Network ad, targeted at liberal Christians, which criticizes Republican affection for Ayn Rand. Schlacht writes:

Members of the American Values Network have come out in opposition to Ryan based on their Christian faith and Ayn Rand’s atheism; however, while Ryan was indeed influenced by Rand and would like to see her Objectivism influence more of Washington’s policy, his budget is not wrong due to Ayn Rand’s lack of belief in a supreme being. The real issue is not atheism, but Randian dogma, which holds a strict commitment to cutting government, promoting libertarian ideals, and allowing for the best to emerge, even if it occurs at the expense of the downtroden. . . .

The real issue isn’t God with Paul Ryan’s budget, but his strict belief that one ideal and one political ideology will fix the crippling budget problems the U.S. faces.

The American Values Network is run by the principals of the Eleison Group, a political consulting firm which describes itself as “a full-service consulting firm helping political, non-profit, business and government entities better understand America’s rich and complex faith landscape and build relationships with people of faith from across the ideological spectrum on the local and national level.” It is boasting on its website of its attendance at the upcoming Netroots Nation conference where principals Burns Strider and Eric Sapp will be on a panel, “Moving Forward With Faith.” The description on the Netroots Nation website reads, “A clear lesson to [sic] from our recent history is that faith and values communities are increasingly proving to be critical to successful progressive advocacy.” Other panelists include Elizabeth Denlinger, Director of Campaigns at Sojourners, which her biography describes as “one of the largest networks of progressive Christians in the nation,” a characterization some progressive Christians take issue with. (I’m also speaking on a different panel at the same conference.)

Eleison and the AVN are focused on making “people of faith” “comfortable” with Democrats, who’ve gotten a bad rap about being “hostile” to religion. That rap, incidentally, came from Democratic “faith” strategists, not because Democrats are demonstrably anti-religion, but it has resulted in some painful pandering to make up for these alleged deficiencies. Eleison’s Democratic clients have included Alabama’s Parker Griffith, who went on to become a Republican, and North Carolina’s Heath Shuler, a prominent Blue Dog who recently spoke at the Family Research Council’s Watchmen on the Wall conference for pastors, where he insisted that if Christians “had provided for people in our community,” then we “wouldn’t’ve needed a debate on health care.” The Family Research Council, incidentally, has signaled its full support of the Republicans’ budget-slashing. But at least Shuler’s not an atheist!

At the AVN website touting the anti-Rand ad, AVN notes, “The choice is simple: Ayn Rand or Jesus Christ. We must choose one and forsake the other.”


51 posted on 06/08/2011 10:58:25 PM PDT by buccaneer81 (ECOMCON)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies ]


To: buccaneer81

I get the problem with AmericanValuesNetwork.com - but the source here is FirstThings.com, a respected publication.


55 posted on 06/08/2011 11:06:09 PM PDT by Religion Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies ]

To: buccaneer81
"But in those places where the presbytery took that office, though many other doctrines of the Church of Rome were forbidden to be taught; yet this doctrine, that the kingdom of Christ is already come, and that it began at the resurrection of our Saviour, was still retained. But cui bono? What profit did they expect from it? The same which the popes expected: to have a sovereign power over the people. For what is it for men to excommunicate their lawful king, but to keep him from all places of God's public service in his own kingdom; and with force to resist him when he with force endeavoureth to correct them? Or what is it, without authority from the civil sovereign, to excommunicate any person, but to take from him his lawful liberty, that is, to usurp an unlawful power over their brethren? The authors therefore of this darkness in religion are the Roman and the Presbyterian clergy...

...The fairies in what nation soever they converse have but one universal king, which some poets of ours call King Oberon; but the Scripture calls Beelzebub, prince of demons. The ecclesiastics likewise, in whose dominions soever they be found, acknowledge but one universal king, the Pope...

...When the fairies are displeased with anybody, they are said to send their elves to pinch them. The ecclesiastics, when they are displeased with any civil state, make also their elves, that is, superstitious, enchanted subjects, to pinch their princes, by preaching sedition; or one prince, enchanted with promises, to pinch another."

Thomas Hobbes... Leviathan... 1651

69 posted on 06/09/2011 2:49:37 AM PDT by Sir Francis Dashwood (Arjuna, why have you have dropped your bow???)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson