Please understand, I am writing this strictly as a courteousy, because there may be some sincerity in your question. I do not do this to explain myself—I do not explain to anyone.
If you mean by “love” what most people do, some vague, but perhaps intense feeling, that is some causeless “sense” of desire and passion. If so, we have nothing to talk about.
Love is an act or recognition, a recognition of a value in another individual, a value so high all other values are subsumed by it. A rational person can only love one who is worthy of that love. Indescriminate unearned undeserved love is the kind of love given or sold by a whore or a prostitute.
A rational person loves their family because they are the greatest value in the world to him or her. A man or woman who “falls” in love has simply found the one that is so valuable to them, that life without them would not be worth living. The children resulting from that kind of love are both their “work” and their “potential” which it is their personal joy to produce. As in all work, there is the possiblity of disappointment. As in all work, one puts of immediate pleasures for the sake of long-term rewards. These are all rational choices, and if not rational—well just look around you at the disasters most make of the lives and families because they are not rational. Feelings and sentiment can never replace reason.
The entire subject of love is a very big one. If you are sincere, the following are two articles I wrote some time ago now:
“Sex, Love, and Marriage”
http://theautonomist.com/autonomist/articles7/marriage.html
Ayn Rand, Beauty, Love, and Tenderness
http://theautonomist.com/autonomist/articles11/gentlelove.html
[In the above you will find one of my disagreements with Rand. I diagree with several things, but there is no need to lie about her. Both articles were written very hurriedly, I’m afraid, and do need editing, which I’ll get to some day.]
As you will see, if you read the articles, true romantic love is not even possible without rational objective values.
Now you never responded to the lie about Rand’s books not having children in them. I think you ought to at least be honest enough to do that.
Hank
I was in the process of editing my second post to you covering that precise matter, when the FR server went down for me.
To resume my post:
I pity your family.
You know nothing of my family. Thus your insult is driven by something less than reason.
You apparently have never read Rand...
I have read The Fountainhead, and found the leading characters are not preoccupied with family or children. I read only the first 1/3 of Atlas Shrugged, therefore I apologize for missing out of the discussion of children toward the end. It doesn't change my critique though. Children are not given much of a role in her novels. And she didn't have any herself with her 'ideal' man, who was far short of the 'ideal' men she writes about. Her novels are in an ideal universe bearing little relation to reality.
but I do get tired of all the lies told about Rand.
What kind of “family” man are you, who repeats lies like that?
Again, you resort to insults when I merely asked you to demonstrate how love, compassion, respect for humanity in general can be deduced from logic and empirical observation alone. You accuse me of deliberate lying, then compound that insult by implying that I am repeating something I have heard. My opinions are my own, as are my mistakes. You also jumped to a false conclusion when you wrote:
"Now you never responded to the lie about Rand’s books not having children in them. I think you ought to at least be honest enough to do that.
Being accused of lying and dishonesty leaves a particularly bad taste in my mouth. Will you next accuse me of making up a story about the server being down and interfering with my intended post? Or will you be honest enough to see your error and make apology for jumping to unwarranted conclusions? If not, then we can have no further productive discussion, merely a trading of insults, which I will not engage in. If I have insulted you (as distinguished from criticizing you, however harshly), please point it out to me. I never intend my posts to others to become a war of insults.
Finally, (and I know I repeat myself) you still have not addressed the initial question in my first post to you! You are evasive in the least, but I will not label you 'dishonest' or a 'liar'. I respect you for your good qualities and forgive the negative ones. God knows we all have plenty of them ourselves.