MrSeagull

I was liking what I read up until he stated that pharmaceutical companies were a public service and "Remove barriers to entry into free markets for drug providers that offer safe, reliable and cheaper products." That's pretty much straight-up Teddy Roosevelt progressivism - You're free as long as you serve the public good.

Then I would have to say that you knowledge is flawed. I am an active member of the Tea Party, and atheist, and an Objectivist(in training.) What I saw in these protests was a mostly genuine push by the right against bigger government. I consider this a step in the right direction. As it stands now, you're going to find a wide assortment of viewpoints in the Tea Party - From fighters for economic freedom, to borderline anarchists. Of course, you'll find the type that support big government, when it comes to faith-based legislation, mixed in, but they do not define the whole of the movement. From your last few posts, I really can't help but feel you're actively searching for villains to point a finger at.

I'm still somewhat green in regards to this philosophy, of which I've chosen to now live by. If it helps at all, one of the reasons I argue against animal rights is that it opens the door to dangerous controls. What rights would they have? If they have a right to freedom, then we cannot morally own them as pets, or for labor. If they have a right to their property, then we cannot morally evict them from property we purchase for development. If they have a right to their life, then we cannot morally kill them for sustenance or clothing. Then, how far are we willing to go to protect animals from violating the rights of other animals? Some might say that, because they lack reason and survive on instinct, they are incapable of respecting rights, so it's okay for them to violate rights of other animals (or even humans, according to PETA). It's that reasoning why I say animals do not have rights, and we as humans do, because we possess a rational mind. Here is an example on an Objectivist stance on Human Rights: http://www.aynrand.o...m_animal_rights

I can't really see how you're coming to this conclusion, unless you're baseing is off of the users here trying to rationalize Rand's view of the immorality of homosexuality. Even in those cases, they're attempting to state that she was wrong based off of false information. I've never seen anywhere that Objectivisim is incompatable with being homosexual or hetrosexual. Now, if you're baseing it off that I don't support the notion of "gay rights" - That's not because I think gays should have no rights, but that I don't think any sort of "______ rights" are valid unless it's "Individual rights." To assign any group rights is at the expense of other's rights. Instead of trying to give rights to people based off their sexual orientation (or gender/race/hair style) efforts should be focused on stopping the violation of individual rights.

Well, I suppose it's somewhat of a compulsion for me - When I see someone misrepresent or demean something important to me I feel compelled to challenge them. As I stated above, it feels like some people see their view as justified when it’s unchallenged. I will say this – I’m beginning to develop a personal enjoyment from walking away from these discussions knowing my reason stood unchallenged by anything other than logical fallacies. On the subject of the more recent discussion, I decided to walk away, as the opposing voice was degrading into attacks and insults.

For some reason, I stopped getting email notifications on this topic. Thank you all for your input, I find it very helpful and educational. I guess the reason why I participate in these seemingly less-than meaningful discussions is a mix of pride and stubbornness, mixed in with a bit of idealism – That untruths will be seen as true by others without a challenge. I’ve lately delved into a discussion with a separate individual on that same page. This person seems to come from the premise that existence without force is impossible, that theft is necessary to provide for basic needs. Here is a sample… I would provide the long, convulted discussion in whole, but I would prefer to avoid posting a gigantic wall of text. I’m standing my ground in this discussion, and now the person is degrading into strawmen and ad hom attacks.

I can't seem to find any info on this that comes from a nuetral stand - I support protection of intellectual property, but I can't help but resist giving the government this much power.

Yes, all forms of religion were banned in Rapture. "Christianity - Belief in the Christian God and Christ as the savior of humanity. This is more of an underground cult in Rapture, as it is officially banned." http://bioshock.wikia.com/wiki/Contraband http://bioshock.wikia.com/wiki/Rapture

There were also failings in Ryan's foundation when he created Rapture. The three major failings in its creation was the prohibition of religion (Don't get me wrong, I'm an atheist, but prohibition creates black markets, which helped Fontain gain power,) complete isolationism (inflating black market opportunities,) and his emphasis on the "White collar" individuals. Ryan seemed to put little emphasis on dedicated, yet unskilled, labor, which also helped Fontain/Atlas gain power. I rather enjoyed both Bioshock games, though it seems that the creators are trying to put forth a message against “extremes.” The first game is lassie-faire capitalism (though they presented more of a parody than model,) collectivism in the second game, and (what appears to be) jingoism in the third.

Sadly, I missed the majority of these streams, is there a place I can watch recordings?

Hah, I love that.

I thought the same thing when I heard that sentance, my thought was that the maurading band would be the government.

I have to say, the contents of this speech and the reactions in the comments are frightening.

FTC Ready To Subpoena Google, Report Says

You have my sympathy, DA isn't the best bastion of capitalism. It's really sad, because in a communist society, artist are usually the first on the chopping block.