PART II - http://www.catholic.org/featured/headline.php?ID=1521
PART III - http://www.catholic.org/featured/headline.php?ID=1521
Looks interesting - pinging myself to remember it!
Either this guy is lying or just ignorant about Any Rand. She was a champion of reason. She despised people who did things by whim ( or "will" ) . She would have also pointed out that she is being called an " irrational vitalist" without anyone defining the term. She complained plenty about Catholic dogma so she is fair game but I find it odd that they should pick her out of so many others thereby giving her prominence.
Interesting ping.
bump
later read...ping?
Interesting post!
Topics like this are philosophical, and sometimes interesting to discuss and debate, but when the subject matter is open to interpretation, it's best not to present it as fact.
(Which is what this book seems to do.)
It would be as easy to write something called "Architects of the Culture of Life", including 20 examples of contributions people have made to life and the sanctity of. Repeated enough, one could then conclude that ours is a "Culture of Life" rather than Death.
Rush got on the Culture of Death kick a while back also, which didn't help our side. The whole idea that our culture is one of "death" is absurd and someone should have spanked him for contributing to the culture of drivel.
bookmk ping
Ayn Rand was wrong about much. Nevertheless, during my youth (and before) Rand was carrying the water in the fight for freedom, whilst the Church of my youth (pre-JPII) was playing footsie with every radical socialist cause out there. Liberation theology? Bishop Thomas Gumbleton? Ring a bell? I'd rather have a beer with Rand (if it were possible) than with DeMarco anytime.
Yes, Rand attempted to secularize "virtue." Always leads to trouble.
There's a great void now that JPII is gone.
This would be an extremely educational read. I would have included at least one more person though, Margaret Sanger, but perhaps she wasn't influential enough for the author.
I have not really been aware of a culture of death, so I Googled it. After reading several articles it would appear to me that the Culture of Death is the acceptance of Death.
Someone please correct me if I have this wrong and I have no doubt this will occur. Let me make it plain that I am not defending Death, or questioning current religious thinking.
When I was young (mid 1940s mid 1960s) Death was accepted as the inescapable result of Life. We knew that no one would ever got out of life alive. Born to Die was not just a tattoo on the arm of an Outlaw Biker but an accepted fact of life. Few people were hauled away by Death kicking and screaming. Birth control was not seen as destroying life but only as preventing life a major difference.
Now it is different. Death is something to be avoided at all cost. Better to be a lying in a hospital bed as a human vegetable than to be dead. Better to send the family into medical bankruptcy than admit a member is really dead. Technology is Stronger than Death!
I could see this attitude for those who know they are going to Hell for all of eternity but for the rest of us? There was a time when Christians actually looked forward to an eternity in Paradise! Note: Suicide was not an option that was a guaranteed ticket to Hell.
I dont see the Culture of Death as anything new, but as the paradigm of life that has been with us from Day One being rejected by Modern Man a rejection of reality.
It struck me many years ago that minds unanchored in God are not just adrift but mad. This insight -- thank you, Lord! -- gets a daily workout as we observe the unending follies and delusions of the liberal class. If there is some new and creative way for them to be weird, mean, freaky, antisocial, naked or certifiable, they will find it faster than a dog finds a steak bone in its food dish.
bookmark
Excellent post.