Ayn Rand vs Christianity

[Mr. Shaman]

Have the religious right ever figured out that Ayn Rand hated the idea of sacrafice for other human beings?


It occurs to me that many of the people who worship Rands ideas also claim christianity.

They are ideas which are diametricly opposed to each other.

Ayn Rand agrees more with Christianity than what you socialist libs say.

You're (quite) obviously expecting Teabaggers to do as much reading as Snooki Palin.

​

 

[editec]

Have the religious right ever figured out that Ayn Rand hated the idea of sacrafice for other human beings?


It occurs to me that many of the people who worship Rands ideas also claim christianity.

They are ideas which are diametricly opposed to each other.

Spot on.

Rand is rather Neitzscheian in her views.

It's quite apparent that her heros are based on Freidrich's concept of Übermenschen.

Look, anybody subscribing to the philosophical position that GREED IS GOOD (which is Ayn's position in a nutshell) has assumed a philosophy that is antithetical to one of the basic premises of Christianity.

LOVE THY NEIGHBOR AS THYSELF

"Greed is good" was not the message I got from her book. In fact, it was quite the opposite. Hell, if you have read it, the greedy people in the story were not the John Galt's of the world, but the James Taggert's and Wesley Mouch's. I guess it is all in your perspective, but the industrialists of the story believed in an honest pay for an honest day's work. I see nothing at all wrong with that.

It was the people that represented society that believed in receiving what was not theirs to begin with that were greedy. Rand portrayed none of these individuals as being "good".

Immie

Her novel was a FICTION, amigo.

One can posit anything one wants, and create villians out of anybody or anyhing in fiction.

Does her novel in any way reflect the reality of the society we have?

Of course not.

 

[Bfgrn]

You prove your case first, you nitwit. You made a claim, back it up with some numbers.

Otherwise, there's nothing to disprove.

Here is a typical sample of right wing worship.

"atlas shrugged" will change the face of american politics - USMB

this is your last chance to read the book before the movie comes out.

i have waited my whole life for this. when i was in high school i discovered ayn rand, it changed my life , and much to my delight, would end up in a conservative website framed by objectivism.
i remember thinking, someday, once the internet is invented, this will be my political philosohpy and i will take it to the people..

life imitates art. we are dagney taggert and hank rearden (the protagonists) and the democratic party (led by one barrak obama... if that is your real name), is the government, and "mr. thompson".

you are going to be seeing and hearing and feeling atlas shrugged a lot in the coming time until the 2012 election.

as wonderfual as the original novel is, no, magnificient... the movie will better present to the masses, that big government is not only wrong, in this country, according to our constitution, it is immoral.

 

[AllieBaba]

What is your point and how does it address what I said?

It's a singular example that in no way proves anything.

 

[boedicca]

The Thread Title is inaccurate. The real version should be:

Truthmattersnot vs. Reality & Logical Thinking

 

[Bfgrn]

What is your point and how does it address what I said?

It's a singular example that in no way addresses anything.

The tread has 1113 posts...READ them...

 

[AllieBaba]

You posted nonsense in response to a post of mine and claimed..something.

I asked you to clarify because as far as I can see, it's irrelevant to my post.

You don't want to, I don't care. But you didn't make your point. whatever it was.

 

[Bfgrn]

You posted nonsense in response to a post of mine and claimed..something.

I asked you to clarify because as far as I can see, it's irrelevant to my post.

You don't want to, I don't care. But you didn't make your point. whatever it was.

Let's recap...I will highlight for your enlightenment.

Avatar4321
havent read her, let alone worshiped her ideas. I have no idea what she says right now, im not in a particular rush to find out. I have other things im studying.

Truthmatters
Thats just you .

Now realise she is a hero of the rights ideas wether you agree do or not.

Truthmatters
Not one of you can address this fact?

AllieBaba
Fact?

Lol...what a loon.

 

[AllieBaba]

So..you linking to one message on this board proves that she's a hero of the rights ideas? Whatever that means?

Ok.

 

[Immanuel]

Spot on.

Rand is rather Neitzscheian in her views.

It's quite apparent that her heros are based on Freidrich's concept of Übermenschen.

Look, anybody subscribing to the philosophical position that GREED IS GOOD (which is Ayn's position in a nutshell) has assumed a philosophy that is antithetical to one of the basic premises of Christianity.

LOVE THY NEIGHBOR AS THYSELF

"Greed is good" was not the message I got from her book. In fact, it was quite the opposite. Hell, if you have read it, the greedy people in the story were not the John Galt's of the world, but the James Taggert's and Wesley Mouch's. I guess it is all in your perspective, but the industrialists of the story believed in an honest pay for an honest day's work. I see nothing at all wrong with that.

It was the people that represented society that believed in receiving what was not theirs to begin with that were greedy. Rand portrayed none of these individuals as being "good".

Immie

Her novel was a FICTION, amigo.

One can posit anything one wants, and create villians out of anybody or anyhing in fiction.

Does her novel in any way reflect the reality of the society we have?

Of course not.

Yet, why would YOU create villains out of the industrialists in the fictional society? The villains were clearly not the industrialists, but rather those who ran the political scene and destroyed society.

Does her novel in any way reflect the reality of the society we have?

No, of course not, it was a fictional society that demonstrated her points to the extreme. It was her view of what unchecked liberalism would lead to. Personally, I think she makes a good case for it too.

Immie

 

[Bfgrn]

So..you linking to one message on this board proves that she's a hero of the rights ideas? Whatever that means?

Ok.

You are having trouble keeping up, aren't you? The thread I provided a link to has 1113 posts. If you read the responses from the right it is clear Rand is a right wing hero, crystal. And there have been other threads with similar commentary about Ayn Rand.

How much proof do you need?

Ayn Rand: Capitalism’s enduring crusader

How big is Rand’s comeback?
She’s more popular than ever. Rand has always had a strong following in the U.S., but her magnum opus, the 1,088-page Atlas Shrugged, has enjoyed a huge surge in sales since the start of the financial crisis. It sold 200,000 copies in the U.S. in 2008 and so far this year, the book is selling at its fastest rate since it was first published, in 1957.

What is Atlas Shrugged about?
The evils of government control.

To whom does the book appeal?
People who are more scared of governments than of bankers. Many conservatives and libertarians see the federal response to the current economic crisis as the beginning of a government takeover of private enterprise. Obama’s economic strategy “is right out of Atlas Shrugged,” writes Stephen Moore in The Wall Street Journal. “The more incompetent you are in business, the more handouts the politicians will bestow on you.” More fanatical free-marketers even predict a Rand-style revolution, in which those tired of making sacrifices for their fellow citizens decide to “go Galt,” by refusing to work or pay taxes. On Capitol Hill, Republican Rep. John Campbell of California has been handing out copies of the novel to his interns.

Tea Party Embraces Ayn Rand

The Wall Street Journal declared in an Op-Ed by Stephen Moore—its senior economics writer—in January 2009 that Rand’s work had moved “From Fiction to Fact.” Rush Limbaugh gave monologues that quoted Rand and called her “Brilliant.” Among politicians, Ron Paul has described Atlas Shrugged as “telling the truth.” Amity Shlaes tried to map the characters of Atlas Shrugged onto the real world in a piece for Bloomberg.

Who is Ayn Rand? For conservatives she is no longer the author who defended The Fountainhead’s rape scene as “rape by engraved invitation” but the prophetic writer on the Obama Presidency: “We are living in an Ayn Rand novel” argues conservative rising star Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan.

 

[AllieBaba]

Good grief.

My 7 year old is more adept at debate than most of the left wingers on this site.

I have to wonder...do the smart ones go to some other site? Or is this the cream of the crop?

 

[xsited1]

Good grief.

My 7 year old is more adept at debate than most of the left wingers on this site.

I have to wonder...do the smart ones go to some other site? Or is this the cream of the crop?

 

[Bfgrn]

Good grief.

My 7 year old is more adept at debate than most of the left wingers on this site.

I have to wonder...do the smart ones go to some other site? Or is this the cream of the crop?

Well so far there is no 'debate'...all you have done is deflect and obfuscate. I know you right wingers are overwhelmed easily, so breath into a paper bag.

 

[kwc57]

So what philosphy should it embrace?

To do those things it is limited to do in the Constitution. We are a nation of laws.

 

[kwc57]

Real Christians are socialists

Not so fast there. You might actually want to read the provided commentary in your link. There is a vast difference in voluntary giving and sharing and the government forcing you.

Barnes' Notes on the Bible

All that believed - That is, that believed that Jesus was the Messiah; for that was the distinguishing point by which they were known from others.

Were together - Were united; were joined in the same thing. It does not mean that they lived in the same house, but they were united in the same community, or engaged in the same thing. They were doubtless often together in the same place for prayer and praise. One of the best means for strengthening the faith of young converts is for them often to meet together for prayer, conversation, and praise.

Had all things common - That is, all their property or possessions. See Acts 4:32-37; Acts 5:1-10. The apostles, in the time of the Saviour, evidently had all their property in common stock, and Judas was made their treasurer. They regarded themselves as one family, having common needs, and there was no use or propriety in their possessing extensive property by themselves. Yet even then it is probable that some of them retained an interest in their property which was not supposed to be necessary to be devoted to the common use. It is evident that John thus possessed property which he retained, John 19:27. And it is clear that the Saviour did not command them to give up their property into a common stock, nor did the apostles enjoin it: Acts 5:4, "While it remained, was it not thine own? and after it was sold was it not in thine own power?" It was, therefore, perfectly voluntary, and was as evidently adapted to the special circumstances of the early converts. Many of them came from abroad. They were from Parthia, and Media, and Arabia, and Rome, and Africa, etc. It is probable, also, that they now remained longer in Jerusalem than they had at first proposed; and it is not at all improbable that they would be denied now the usual hospitalities of the Jews, and excluded from their customary kindness, because they had embraced Jesus of Nazareth, who had been just put to death. In these circumstances, it was natural and proper that they should share their property while they remained together.

 

[JBeukema]

Real Christians are socialists

Not so fast there. You might actually want to read the provided commentary in your link. There is a vast difference in voluntary giving and sharing and the government forcing you.

1) All governments are God's will
2) Why? Because governments have guns? What's a gun compared to the lake of fire?

 

[JBeukema]

So what philosphy should it embrace?

To do those things it is limited to do in the Constitution. We are a nation of laws.

So whatever's on a piece of papers?

What if that paper says to kill the Jews and establishg a master race?

 

[kwc57]

So what philosphy should it embrace?

To do those things it is limited to do in the Constitution. We are a nation of laws.

So whatever's on a piece of papers?

What if that paper says to kill the Jews and establishg a master race?

We are talking a specific piece of paper here that is the foundation of this nation. Care to show me those items in our Constitution? What, not there? You're argument is invalid then.

 

[JBeukema]

So abolition is evil because COTUS forbid getting rid of slavery?