Sample Q&A:
Q: "By what standard should we determine public policy?"
A: "Why, reason of course. If only all people acted reasonably, we would have a perfect society".
Q: "Define reason."
A: "Well, well Ayn Rand says reason is the only standard by which we could judge human life. So, perfect reason. Ayn Rand says that between two reasonable people, disagreements are impossible."
Q:"Well, let's take health care. Most health care costs come from end-of-life care. In other words, keeping old people alive. So, I think, using utilitarian logic, we should simply put old people who are going to die anyway out of their misery. And ours. Perfectly reasonable."
A:"But that's disgusting! That's not reasonable!"
Q:"I think it is. I'm not crazy."
A: "No it's not!"
Q: "Sure it is. It's logical. If we just kill old people, we won't have socialized medicine, because old people account for almost all the costs. And because we're both atheists, to what authority are you going to appeal to show that your point of view is correct? We're both reasonable people, and we're disagreeing."
That may seem a little over-simplified, but it's about true. In an atheistic universe, any point of view can be correct. Kill old people, retarded people, whatever's expedient; they're just material and they're in the way. Oh, that's right. I forgot. Since in an atheistic universe you can't appeal to God's Revealed Word for guidance, I guess there's only one thing left to enforce one arbitrary viewpoint over others:
Brute force.
Philosophy is bankrupt. Which one a society adopts boils down to who has the guns.
Absurd!
It is not rational to wish death on old people, when one day you will be old as well, and receive the same. Anyone using such an example of "reason", needs to be committed.
I think you've come pretty close to the materialist/rationalist/atheist POV.
But remember; the truth is a cork, it always rises to the top.
Sample Q&A:
Q: "By what standard should we determine public policy?" "
A: "Why, reason of course. If only all people acted reasonably, we would have a perfect society".
Q: "Define reason."
A: "Well, well Ayn Rand says reason is the only standard by which we could judge human life. So, perfect reason. Ayn Rand says that between two reasonable people, disagreements are impossible."
Ayn Rand? What about God? Doesn't God use reason to do all His thinking, arriving at conclusions and judgements? Man was made in the image and likeness of God. Does that mean physical image, or a real living capacity?
Q:"Well, let's take health care. Most health care costs come from end-of-life care. In other words, keeping old people alive. So, I think, using utilitarian logic, we should simply put old people who are going to die anyway out of their misery. And ours. Perfectly reasonable."
Sure it's reasonable, but why stop there? You've not mentioned what the old guy desires, charity, or anything else.
A:"But that's disgusting! That's not reasonable!"
Yes it is. You're confusing reason with principle and rights.
Q:"I think it is. I'm not crazy."
A: "No it's not!"
...
Q: "Sure it is. It's logical. If we just kill old people, we won't have socialized medicine, because old people account for almost all the costs. And because we're both atheists, to what authority are you going to appeal to show that your point of view is correct? We're both reasonable people, and we're disagreeing."
Socialized medicine exists, because folks created a state mechanism to take the treasures and efforts of others to redistribute for whatever arbitrary reason those that hold power claim. In this case, free medical services are obtained by voting for a cash redistribution to coerced on everyone. The money and wills that are coerced don't belong to the voters, so the process is fundamentally a rights violation of all those that don't want to participate. You have the right to Life, sovereignty of will and property rights. You don't have a right, or entitlement to violate anyone elses right to perform charity action, or to obtain it. Atheist, or not!
"That may seem a little over-simplified, but it's about true. In an atheistic universe, any point of view can be correct. Kill old people, retarded people, whatever's expedient; they're just material and they're in the way. Oh, that's right. I forgot. Since in an atheistic universe you can't appeal to God's Revealed Word for guidance, I guess there's only one thing left to enforce one arbitrary viewpoint over others: Men were created in the image and likeness of God. To propose that and atheist wouldn't come to the same conclution that God has, is to deny God's Word. It is also using God's name in vain for 2 reasons, because He said, "only the Spirit knows what is in a man's heart", and He never told anyone to justify theft in His Name.
"Brute force."Is justified only to protect Life and the rights of the living.
"Philosophy is bankrupt. Which one a society adopts boils down to who has the guns."
Is God's philosophy bankrupt? Philosophy is the pursuit of knowledge and wisdom. God said that with the work of your own hands you will live. That includes the defense of your Life and rights. There is nothing wrong with self defense, only the theft of another's Life, or rights.