"These needs include self-esteem, love, art, and philosophy...."
Whose "reason?" Who is to say what "reason" is? Who decides: the ruler, the Congress, a toss of the dice, you?
And who decided that the needs are those stated? A hermit may say he/she doesn't need love or art or philosophy, for example. What is self-esteem, and according to whom? Again, according to whom?
It seems to me that the entire article/discussion comes at religion/objectivist thinking from a "religious" perspective all your own. I simply reject your religion.
I would argue that religion is the overarching principle for many folks (myself included), but reason is the everyday tool I use to perceive the world. I would further argue that the non-initiation principle is quite compatible with Christian doctrine.
So as near as I can tell there are fewer differences between objectivists and religious folks than some here would believe.