"I swear by my God and my love of Him, that I will Honor and Esteem the Objectivists’ dedication and commitment to Egoism and Reason ".
I think this is a reasonable request, if the religionists want to join us in our campaign for individual rights. I didn’t think it was satirical or cold. It rather reminded me of Thomas Jefferson’s quote on the Jefferson Memorial:
“I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every from of tyranny over the mind of man.”
I think this is a reasonable request, if the religionists want to join us in our campaign for individual rights. I didn’t think it was satirical or cold. It rather reminded me of Thomas Jefferson’s quote on the Jefferson Memorial:
“I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every from of tyranny over the mind of man.”
The big question is “what does individual rights mean?” This is based on two things.
the Christian looks at individual rights as “granted by God” and there’s the old saw. “The Lord giveth and the Lord taketh away” We look at individual rights as an essential element for human life. We don’t “grant” or believe in, individtual rights. we recognize them.
Given that, the Christian idea of individual rights cannot be the same as ours so the term means two different things between us. Each of us looks at the ideas of the other and says “How is that individual rights?” For example. the Christian sees nothing wrong with thoroughly idcotrination an 8 year old into his belief system. I am appolled at the indoctrination of an 8 year old into ANY philosophical system: and I mean ANY! Yet the Christian does not do what he does out of evil but in an attempt to equip the child with the tools to learn right and wrong and that is how he was so equipped, it’s a mistake, not evil unless it is carried out to an absurd degree.
This is why I say it is an alliance, not a love-fest. Ultimately, we will have to go after each other and they know it subconsciously. One can but hope that this can be settled non-violently. We have the advantage; our way works whether or not there is a God and theirs does not. If there is no God, their system collapses into nihilism.
I think at best the relationship of a die-hard Christian and an Objectivist regarding the issue of individual rights will be an ad hoc one. That is, the Christian may want his freedom to practice his religion and under capitalism this will be one of his rights, but as I have pointed out earlier, the Christian cannot conceive of why someone ought to be free to be immoral according to his standards. An Objectivist does not seek to impose a moral code by force of law, whereas a theocrat does want that. A proper political system – i.e. capitalism with full recognition of individual rights – is not imposing a morality, but rather setting up the conditions under which a man can be moral: morality ends where a gun begins. In other words, under capitalism there is no requirement that a man be rational or he will be thrown in jail; so long as he abstains from the initiation of force, he is free to live as he sees fit. The primary benefit under capitalism is that a rational man is free to be rational, though he cannot be forced to be rational; and he cannot be forced to follow some ethical code that is not of his choice. One could say that a fringe benefit of capitalism is that the religious can be religious, but capitalism is geared towards the rational man, not the irrational man, and all religions are irrational.
“One could say that a fringe benefit of Capitalism is that the religious can be religious… (but)…all religions are irrational.” T.M.M.
Exactly, on both counts. Which is why, I reckon, we got that appeal from the Mormon Church, in the first place. They recognise that Objectivism/Capitalism presents their best chance of freedom from interference from the State. Quite ironical.
My largest concern - almost an obsession - has been about Freedom. I realise that this comes in two parts which do overlap : Freedom from the State, and freedom from other people.
I believe that I can handle my ‘neighbour’, if it comes to that; but State interference has always been my greatest fear. For this reason, I’m puzzled by the stance of the A.R.I., in its decision to back a statist horse, rather than the religious, right-wing one - as the lesser of two evils, in the last election.
Not an easy decision, admittedly; ( reminds me of that old American unionist song - “One fist of iron, and the other of steel, If the right one don’t get you, the left one will.”) :lol: