Posted on 07/14/2002 1:06:27 PM PDT by chudogg
It's scary how much alike Rand and Hillary! Clinton are.
I find that statement quite bazaar. Rand and Hitlery??? They are about as opposite as two people can be. One is a statist, a fascist of sorts. The other one has a premise based on freedom from government intrusion.
One reason I don't trouble myself overly about it is- at this point it is all "theory". Like when libertarians talk about how a libertarian society would work. Well, sure, we can sit around and masterbate intellectually about what it would be like to live in a truly free 'anything goes', every man for himself world/society, but we DON'T live in that type of world and we won't in the foreseeable future. I personally can't get past how we would keep terrorists out of our borders in a libertarian world but that's an aside.
It's all just speculation- this is the world I find myself in. It is not a libertarian Atlantis and neither, thank God, is it a socialist utopia. I have to work with what I've got. Right now, I find myself in a world of sh!t, with Radical Islam trying to kill us on one side and the liberals trying to tax us and regulate us to death on the other. I'm just trying to get by in this present day world the best I can and I still figure my best bet is voting GOP/Bush in 2002- 2004. It's hard to look a lot further down the road than that with all that's going on in the world. When we get the dems thrown out of gov't, taxes really low, the gov't out of our lives- then I might be willing to sit around and give serious consideration to whether we should go "libertarian" or whatever. You know what I mean?
I'm reading the passages again, and my original impression is the same. There is a heading Or did you say its the love of money thats the root of all evil?".............followed by:
To love a thing is to know and love its nature. To love money is to know and love the fact that money is the creation of the best power within you, and your passkey to trade your effort for the effort of the best among men."
This statement implies that she is going to present a case that the loving money is a good thing in itself; then atheist Rand proceeds to reiterate what Christians have been saying forever. She tempers the statement with a certain aquiescence to the notion that a certain morality in financial dealings is necessary.
This is a "new" way of thinking?!
Then yes, she has a cult following. They are called, thinkers and doers. Try to survive life without them.
The person she ripped off has a following also. Try surviving death without Him.
Read the book several times.
Good tool to flush any crap out of your mind about socialism
Her philosophy is very hard to apply to ones life and be happy.
Life is more than a "philosophy"
If you follow the link provided (in post 7), and read the different translations, you'll find that most of them say love of money is "the root of all kinds of evil" or words to that effect. Only the original KJV says it's "the root of all evil."
It does seem like a valid question, though, since it's pretty easy to conceive of evils which are not motivated by love of money.
I suggest you take a look at the link i posted, thats why i put it up there.
New American-For the love of money is a root of all sorts of evil
King James-For the love of money is the root of all evil
I would say their is big difference in meaning in the two passages.
Hmmm, Ayn Rand's Libertarian Capitalism similar to National Socialism???? Nope, i dont see it.
I suggest you take a look at the link i posted, thats why i put it up there.
Sorry, I overlooked the link.
Besides, when you spoke of differing translations I thought you were addressing the previous discussions in the thread about the whether it said "money is the root of all evil" or "the love of money is the root of all evil".
Whether it says "the root of all evil" or "all sorts of evil" etc. is a lesser distinction which I have seen debated when it comes to to other scriptures as well, and probably can be easily resolved by looking at the original langauge.
Most people who "reject" time-honored philosophies find it necessary to reinvent them with a new coat of paint.
Great truths are truths wherever you find them....
and you will find them if they are, in fact, true.
The Declaration itself claims that that truths are self-evident.
You got a bone to pick with it as well?
You got a bone to pick with it as well?
Nah. That comes right before this:
that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights
Idiot.
But then again, he was humble...
unlike some of his followers.
Alpha and Omega.
But then again, he was humble... unlike some of his followers.
Funny, I don't remember making a post stating how great I was.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.