Replies

Let's see, you call me a cult member with an empty head and a glassy stare, then you admit to blindly following certain tenents of your faith. Finally, you admit to being surprised with my thinking outside of the supposed cult I am following.

Makes me wonder who is the cult member, by your description, with an empty head and glassy eyes.

I never said I agreed with Ayn Rand 100% of the time, in fact I said that I haven't read very much of her work. What I have read has made some very good philosophical arguments for the free market and capitalism. I always hear people try to degrade her philosophy with certain claims, yet I have yet to actually have these claims of her positions documented. If they exist, then I am more than willing to take a look at it and make the decision after reading it.

I don't 'blindly' follow anything, and won't dignify your indirect claim that Christianity is itself a cult. And I certainly can't be faulted for thinking you're an Ayn Rand acolyte, given your staunch (if inept) defense of her work and ideas throughout this thread, although it is good to be reminded that you're largely unfamiliar with those ideas. Lastly (and finally), I don't have the time or patience to walk you through the rudiments of reasoned argument. I do suggest, however, that you know at least something of a given position before you defend or attack it. I had to slog through the entire, turgid length of 'Atlas Shrugged', as well as 'The Fountainhead' and numerous nonfiction essays and lectures in order to grasp the essentials of her thought and philosophy. While I don't wish that particular fate on anyone of intelligence and discernment, it is required reading if one wants to engage in knowledgeable discourse or debate on the subject.

Don't miss the giants of 20th Century libertarianism like Ludwig von Mises and Friedrich von Hayek. If you are young, you should be encouraged and not discouraged to read widely in such literature. I did not think about this with my previous post. In my opinion Rand was wrong about much and never more so than in being an atheist. Let the evidence lead to your conclusion and not your conclusion to your evidence.

May I suggest that you take a look at something quite different from Rand. Pope St. Pius X wrote, in 1907, an encyclical called Pascendi Dominici Gregis (aka On the Theories of the Modernists) and a syllabus of errors called Lamentabile Sane. His predecessor, Pope Leo XIII, wrote a short but revolutionary (in the best sense) encyclical called Rerum Novarum in 1893, which might well surprise you by its libertarianism. Best of luck in entering upon the ongoing conversation of mankind.