[myself6]

Trying to force a wedge into a perceived “crack” is a waste of time.

[sueuprising]

“Trying to force a wedge into a perceived “crack” is a waste of time.”
Could you explain what you mean? I am not sure why people who value Tea Party rallies would be so consumed by Ayn Rand. I recall she was an atheist. The founding fathers were not libertarians to my mind, they were republicans.

[PittsburghAfterDark]

The problem with trying to drive a wedge between the altruistic nature of Judeo-Christian charity, objectivity and production is this...

If it is in the objective decision of a producer to award a portion of his production to a religious organization or charity he has done so of his own free will and accord. There has been no implied or directed pressure to do so.

This is in sharp contrast to the moochers and looters in Atlas Shrugged who preyed upon the willingness of the victim to subvert his production through guilt or taxation. At no point in that book was religion brought up.

I took that to mean that religion was separate from either since participation in it wasn’t coerced by implied moral societal stigma or implied government/legal action.

This is one of those examples where I see the problems with the Atlas Shrugged society and the Rayndians in general. Any dissension is immediate cause of banishment from the group.

[2001convSVT]

Spot on. I plan on going “Gault” as soon as I can.

[Bigg Red]

mark

[OKSooner]

" Trying to force a wedge into a perceived “crack” is a waste of time. "

This guy is right on the money. Be an Objectivist/Randian, or be a Christian / "Religious person".

But don't pretend to be both at the same time. That's just having it both ways. I know some "Objectivist" Christians and they have an impossibly arrogant habit of inviting themselves into other people's business and making decisions "for their own good" but not lifting a finger toward the decisions that they themselves make, creating nothing but conflict.

Objectivism is nothing more than an apology for pure, arrogant, and self-interested heartlessness.

[drangundsturm]

Even in John Galt's lengthy monologue he says explicitly that giving to charity should be his own choice alone, not forced by the government (paraphrasing here, I don't have the book in front of me.) Thus Rand clearly was not against altruism, she was against "forced altruism". Although she is clearly anti-religious.

It's also quite a stretch to jump from voluntary altruism to forced altruism based on religious grounds.

Consider this: Jesus asked us all to take care of the poor, to clothe the naked, feed the hungry, etc. Jesus never said: "And please take money from your neighbor forcibly and use that for the poor as well."

Those who make the argument that Jesus would want the government to tax people at high rates in order to redistribute wealth (the "Jesus was a communist" crowd) are on vanishingly thin ice.