Victory - Same-Sex Power to Marry

[moralist]

A young woman has died of injuries. A religious fanatic stabbed Shira Banki at a Jerusalem Gay Pride march.

(A child was also killed in the fire bombing of a Palestinian home. Israel is in large danger from within, by both the extreme Orthodox Right and the compromising Left. I think savage responses like these by maniacs are what its enemies forsaw, with their recent ramping up of de-stabilizing attacks and psychological pressure on the State).

This is how the extreme right and radical left meet with shared values on the dark side of the closed circle of the political spectrum.

Their common value is the angry blame (unjust accusation) of others which is the cause of every evil act.

Greg

Greg,

Left ~ right are only simplified political terms. Each is built on premises which don't differ much, one from the other.

This is where we each have a different view, Tony.

America was founded on Judeo/Christian values... which puts it on the right.

This is in direct contrast to European secular liberal socialism... which is a product of the left.

America is abandoning Judeo/Christian values for European secular liberal socialist values.

Greg

In my opinion, Objectivism belongs to the libertarian right, in that the individual is god rather than the State which is the primary object of worship by the left.

Where the secular far right becomes indistinguishable from the secular far left is on the personal behavioral issues of dope, perversion. and abortion. That is where the two meet in complete agreement to make a circle of the political spectrum.

Greg

[Brant Gaede]

"Objectivism," rational egoism, is, essentially, a very lonely place.

A place free of peer pressure and state pressure to obey and conform.

The "left" "right" semantic paradigm that our public discourse attempts to force on any speaker does not work in "Objectivism."

We should endeavor to avoid using those terms in that context.

A...

Unfortunately, since the ARI has taken up the dominant public face of Objectivism, because of its neo-con orientation, it's a vain fight. On a practical level what you say is only applicable now to libertarians and libertarianism and they aren't very philosophical today. Ayn Rand made Objectivism too special, making it vulnerable to take-over by who took it over, as if it were a thing to be owned and held like a house in a gated community of true believers. Objectivism as represented by what is now the Atlas Society lost out to Peikoff's minions because it didn't have the gravitas of inheritance, exclusivity and cultural conservatism. Libertarianism has no gravitas to speak of, either. For several reasons, Rand was unable to morally displace Judeo-Christianity with the Objectivist Ethics although she was able to better inform them with a different kind of grace. This gave the ARI the strength it needed to completely marginalize the Atlas Society, which started out as a mostly intellectual enterprise and after some decades has mostly run out of gas. That Rand couldn't herself live up to her radical vision as expressed in Atlas Shrugged doesn't mean the libertarians didn't understand it qua political philosophy and run with it. That took them, logically, into anarchism, which is a Utopian vision implied by what became known post AS as Objectivism. Both were wrong for it's Utopianism that must be eschewed as only, maybe, an ideal obscured by the realities of human nature and social congress and the failure to even consider what happens to Utopia once you got it, for the obverse of that observation is the necessity of never getting there at all. Utopia is hell. Fighting for Utopia as such by creating a personal intellectual and cultural Utopia such as the ARI is hell right now. Someone like Greg avoids this by avoiding the intellectual and using what works where he finds his morality respecting reality raw. He's a bottom-upper. Utopians are all top-downers. They may even be totalitarians like the communists and the Nazis. The only rational Utopia is the one you make for yourself, not others. The only education is self education. The inertia of the human world means the self education takes centuries before the effect is noticeably generalized. Yes, we know what is "right," but usually delude ourselves about what is right right here and now. It's not Utopia, that's for sure.

--Brant

[anthony]

Greg

Greg,

Left ~ right are only simplified political terms. Each is built on premises which don't differ much, one from the other.

This is where we each have a different view, Tony.

America was founded on Judeo/Christian values... which puts it on the right.

This is in direct contrast to European secular liberal socialism... which is a product of the left.

America is abandoning Judeo/Christian values for European secular liberal socialist values.

Greg

If you are not going to agree with my first line, the rest would be unacceptable... ;-}

Greg, it's always seemed to me that JudaeoChristan values and philosophy have been (and are) at their finest when pushing two things to the front - rationality and individualism. The Founders in their wisdom - and whether they were Creationists, deists or theists, or some mixture, is still under discussion, I believe - had an original understanding of humanity which certainly embraced both factors.

You do believe that, Christian or not, they were still human beings, though? Not directly finding inspiration from a Higher Authority, but instead reliant upon their inestimable observation and intellects?

[Selene]

"Objectivism," rational egoism, is, essentially, a very lonely place.

A...

So simple, so true. For all men and women.

"Alone", however, doesn't have to translate to "lonely".

Being alone awakens all the exciting possibilities. It carries the implication:

What are we each going to do about it?

Ah, glad you understood where I was going with that...poor choice of word "lonely," as it does have a negative connotation.

This is the place where you, Greg, myself and many others here on OL and folks I have met in my life that would be completely comfortable living with in the same community of individuals.

A...

[Peter]

Tony wrote: Which doesn't make either 'real' - except for the concrete forms that men have built around them. Both have used and needed physical force to back them up. It's just that presently - in the West - secular humanists dominate. end quote

Greg responded: America was founded on Judeo/Christian values... which puts it on the right. This is in direct contrast to European secular liberal socialism... which is a product of the left . . . . In my opinion, Objectivism belongs to the libertarian right, in that the individual is god rather than the State which is the primary object of worship by the left . . . . Where the secular far right becomes indistinguishable from the secular far left is on the personal behavioral issues of dope, perversion. and abortion. That is where the two meet in complete agreement to make a circle of the political spectrum. End quote

You are leaving out just about everything concerning the political spectrum Greg. It has little if anything to do with religion. It is correct to say some religions associate on other issues with the left or the right on the POLITICAL SPECTRUM and there is a good video that correctly explains the political spectrum and perhaps someone knows a link to it. And as Brant mentions, Objectivism can at time morph into a religion.

And to Tony, what a good idea that human psyches and religion are, “the concrete forms that men have built around them.” I would include people’s devotion to sports teams as very similar to religion, and the sports person’s religious icons are mascots, stadiums, and sports stars who are almost like prophets. And I would throw in the political fervor shown at our Democratic or Republican Conventions as even more concrete forms similar to religion. Many commentators on our American Right like Rush Limbaugh have theorized that modern Progressivism (marxism without Marx) is religious in nature. That will not listen to reason if you disagree with their quasi-religion. They will demonize the dissenters.

[moralist]

Greg

Greg,

Left ~ right are only simplified political terms. Each is built on premises which don't differ much, one from the other.

This is where we each have a different view, Tony.

America was founded on Judeo/Christian values... which puts it on the right.

This is in direct contrast to European secular liberal socialism... which is a product of the left.

America is abandoning Judeo/Christian values for European secular liberal socialist values.

Greg

If you are not going to agree with my first line, the rest would be unacceptable... ;-}

We only disagree on the things that don't matter anyways.

The Founders in their wisdom - and whether they were Creationists, deists or theists, or some mixture, is still under discussion, I believe - had an original understanding of humanity which certainly embraced both factors.

You do believe that, Christian or not, they were still human beings, though? Not directly finding inspiration from a Higher Authority, but instead reliant upon their inestimable observation and intellects?

In my opinion, the wisdom that the Founders had concerning human nature was from God. In that same wisdom they designed a three part government in God's image based on the Trinity. But it was only created to govern decent people. So as people gave up decency, the less the government worked for them and more it worked against them. Now, the only way the US government can function is to become unconstitutional because it has to govern so many rotten people.

Did you know that in the 1700's, people used to picnic on the White House lawn. Such was the benign relationship of decent people to the their government. Today, people have become so rotten that no one is allowed anywhere near the White House lawn protected by high spiked metal fences, concrete barriers, and armed Secret Service agents.

Rotten people can only be governed by a hostile government.

Greg

[Brant Gaede]

The Founders in their wisdom - and whether they were Creationists, deists or theists, or some mixture, is still under discussion, I believe - had an original understanding of humanity which certainly embraced both factors.

You do believe that, Christian or not, they were still human beings, though? Not directly finding inspiration from a Higher Authority, but instead reliant upon their inestimable observation and intellects?

In my opinion, the wisdom that the Founders had concerning human nature was from God. In that same wisdom they designed a three part government in God's image based on the Trinity. But it was only created to govern decent people. So as people gave up decency, the less the government worked for them and more it worked against them. Now, the only way the US government can function is to become unconstitutional because it has to govern so many rotten people.

Did you know that in the 1700's, people used to picnic on the White House lawn. Such was the benign relationship of decent people to the their government. Today, people have become so rotten that no one is allowed anywhere near the White House lawn protected by high spiked metal fences, concrete barriers, and armed Secret Service agents.

Rotten people can only be governed by a hostile government.

Greg

I think you mean the 1800s.

When Lincoln was President it was possible to walk into the joint and ask to have an audience with him, much as my aunt once did--not with the Pres but the governor of Ohio maybe 60 or 80 years later. My grandfather once asked to speak with FDR and consequently Wiley Rutledge was appointed to the Supreme Court. He was a prominent New Deal insider, however. Then there were those Puerto Ricans who invaded Blair House (the other joint was being rebuilt) and only one Secret Service officer was between them and Truman, but he had a Tommy Gun.

Arguing by asseveration, which seems to be the only kind of arguing you know how to do, is like axiomatic reasoning, but that's just a metaphor for axiomatic reasoning requires axioms. The factual statements you therefore make may or may not be factual actually. These babies of yours, in ancient Sparta, would have been left to die as not good enough in themselves to grow up to be Spartans. I'm sure mistakes were made, but more babies were on the way.

--Brant

[moralist]

The Founders in their wisdom - and whether they were Creationists, deists or theists, or some mixture, is still under discussion, I believe - had an original understanding of humanity which certainly embraced both factors.

You do believe that, Christian or not, they were still human beings, though? Not directly finding inspiration from a Higher Authority, but instead reliant upon their inestimable observation and intellects?

In my opinion, the wisdom that the Founders had concerning human nature was from God. In that same wisdom they designed a three part government in God's image based on the Trinity. But it was only created to govern decent people. So as people gave up decency, the less the government worked for them and more it worked against them. Now, the only way the US government can function is to become unconstitutional because it has to govern so many rotten people.

Did you know that in the 1700's, people used to picnic on the White House lawn. Such was the benign relationship of decent people to the their government. Today, people have become so rotten that no one is allowed anywhere near the White House lawn protected by high spiked metal fences, concrete barriers, and armed Secret Service agents.

Rotten people can only be governed by a hostile government.

Greg

I think you mean the 1800s.

When Lincoln was President it was possible to walk into the joint and ask to have an audience with him, much as my aunt once did--not with the Pres but the governor of Ohio maybe 60 or 80 years later. My grandfather once asked to speak with FDR and consequently Wiley Rutledge was appointed to the Supreme Court. He was a prominent New Deal insider, however. Then there were those Puerto Ricans who invaded Blair House (the other joint was being rebuilt) and only one Secret Service officer was between them and Truman, but he had a Tommy Gun.

Arguing by asseveration, which seems to be the only kind of arguing you know how to do, is like axiomatic reasoning, but that's just a metaphor for axiomatic reasoning requires axioms. The factual statements you therefore make may or may not be factual actually. These babies of yours, in ancient Sparta, would have been left to die as not good enough in themselves to grow up to be Spartans. I'm sure mistakes were made, but more babies were on the way.

--Brant

Yes, of course, 1800's.

The US government turned rotten only because people turned rotten. It's unconstitutional devolution perfectly matches the depravity of the general population.

Bottom up... not top down.

Greg

[Brant Gaede]

There were a lot of depraved Americans in the 19th Century.

--Brant

[merjet]

Did you know that in the 1700's, people used to picnic on the White House lawn.

1800s? Building of the White House wasn't finished until 1800.

[anthony]

"Objectivism," rational egoism, is, essentially, a very lonely place.

A...

So simple, so true. For all men and women.

"Alone", however, doesn't have to translate to "lonely".

Being alone awakens all the exciting possibilities. It carries the implication:

What are we each going to do about it?

Ah, glad you understood where I was going with that...poor choice of word "lonely," as it does have a negative connotation.

This is the place where you, Greg, myself and many others here on OL and folks I have met in my life that would be completely comfortable living with in the same community of individuals.

A...

I appreciate the thought. Then you know where I'm headed with "aloneness". When this basic fact of existence (autonomy of an individual) has been completely grasped and embraced, don't you think it is the beginning and motivation for all values?

'Connection', as I've remarked - to other individuals and to reality, by way of friendship, romantic love, creative productivity, trade, shared conviction--and so on.

(Some of my argument about art has been based on ''connection'').

[Selene]

Interesting.

When this basic fact of existence (autonomy of an individual) has been completely grasped and embraced, don't you think it is the beginning and motivation for all values?

Being self aware is the foundational "unit" for what I value.

I have often reflected on the fact that when you say, "I love you to another person, dog, painting, concept, etc., it is a meaningless statement until you know and define the "I."

A...

[moralist]

There were a lot of depraved Americans in the 19th Century.

--Brant

There's WAY more today...

...and the government is ample physical evidence of the fact that people create government in their own image through their own failure to govern themselves.

The US government exists as a self inflicted instrument of moral law.

Greg

[anthony]

Interesting.

When this basic fact of existence (autonomy of an individual) has been completely grasped and embraced, don't you think it is the beginning and motivation for all values?

Being self aware is the foundational "unit" for what I value.

I have often reflected on the fact that when you say, "I love you to another person, dog, painting, concept, etc., it is a meaningless statement until you know and define the "I."

A...

But yes! No contradiction here.

Paraphrasing Rand's "To be conscious is to be conscious of - something":

Also,

To be self-aware is to be aware of - something. That singularity, an autonomy, a sovereignty ... aloneness.

[Selene]

Interesting.

When this basic fact of existence (autonomy of an individual) has been completely grasped and embraced, don't you think it is the beginning and motivation for all values?

Being self aware is the foundational "unit" for what I value.

I have often reflected on the fact that when you say, "I love you to another person, dog, painting, concept, etc., it is a meaningless statement until you know and define the "I."

A...

But yes! No contradiction here.

Paraphrasing Rand's "To be conscious is to be conscious of - something":

Also,

To be self-aware is to be aware of - something. That singularity, an autonomy, a sovereignty ... aloneness.

Excellent distinction - I knew "lonely" did not quite convey what I was trying to express.

Aloneness does not ring negatively to me.

Thanks.

A...

[Mikee]

This idiot should be fired and barred from working for any government agency in the interests of separation of church and state.

[Selene]

This idiot should be fired and barred from working for any government agency in the interests of separation of church and state.

Mikee, there is no "separation of church and state" in the United States Constitution.

[Brant Gaede]

WHAT?!

[Mikee]

This idiot should be fired and barred from working for any government agency in the interests of separation of church and state.

Mikee, there is no "separation of church and state" in the United States Constitution.

You are correct. However: "In Everson v. Board of Education (1947), Justice Hugo Black wrote: "In the words of Thomas Jefferson, the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect a wall of separation between church and state."^[2]"

[moralist]

You are correct. However: "In Everson v. Board of Education (1947), Justice Hugo Black wrote: "In the words of Thomas Jefferson, the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect a wall of separation between church and state."^[2]"

Too bad there isn't separation between the state and the secular political religion of liberalism!

[anthony]

True, Greg. But you understand that the do-gooders have to have hold of the power in order to do good?

[Selene]

This idiot should be fired and barred from working for any government agency in the interests of separation of church and state.

Mikee, there is no "separation of church and state" in the United States Constitution.

You are correct. However: "In Everson v. Board of Education (1947), Justice Hugo Black wrote: "In the words of Thomas Jefferson, the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect a wall of separation between church and state."^[2]"

Is your argument that one Supreme Court Judge wrote one short sentence in a decision that established something in the Constitution that not one of the Framers thought existed?

Interesting logic.

Hugo Black was of course quite wrong about that also.

Hugo...such a nice liberal man...

[moralist]

True, Greg. But you understand that the do-gooders have to have hold of the power in order to do good?

Yeah, Tony... and the people's dependence on the government gave it the power to tax regulate and litigate their lives.

"The sanction of the victim".

Greg

[Brant Gaede]

This idiot should be fired and barred from working for any government agency in the interests of separation of church and state.

Mikee, there is no "separation of church and state" in the United States Constitution.

You are correct. However: "In Everson v. Board of Education (1947), Justice Hugo Black wrote: "In the words of Thomas Jefferson, the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect a wall of separation between church and state."^[2]"

Is your argument that one Supreme Court Judge wrote one short sentence in a decision that established something in the Constitution that not one of the Framers thought existed?

Interesting logic.

Hugo Black was of course quite wrong about that also.

Hugo...such a nice liberal man...

My Father told me about the political fallout Roosevelt faced over the appointment of Black to the Supreme Court. It seems that to be a successful politician in the South in the 1920s and 30s you had to be a member of the Klan. The Klan was completely potent politically. I think it peaked at over a million members. Dad said to avoid hearing about Hugo and dealing with pesky reporters, Roosevelt got on a train--took a train trip--so he was mocked by this ditty: "Clackety Clack! Hugo Black!" (I wish I knew of more words from this. I don't even know if there were more words.)

While the Klan shrank over the decades to next to nothing to be all but completely destroyed, the Democrats had to absorb and deal with southern racism for decades or lose power in the South and nationally. This gave southern Democrats in Congress disproportionate power well into the 1960s until they were displaced by the Republicans and the death and retirement of ingrained and extremely powerful men in Washington.

In a way it was just a continuation of the War Between the States and North-South antagonism that led to that war. This time without the real let's-use-bullets war. Lincoln freed the slaves by force but the Southern snapback was to re-enslave the former slaves, again by local political force. "The South shall rise again." The Civil War was only one of many disastrous consequences of slavery. These consequences continue to this day with the victimhood-entitlement culture so many blacks have absorbed. The Great Society was really just another way of re-enslavement of blacks by the Democrats, this time by destroying the black family by making young black males not responsible for anything but multiple pregnancies. Why work to protect and support your children? You are not allowed, in fact, to be there or it's all that money off the table. Then the Republicans stepped in big time during the Reagan Administration by turbo-charging, if not manufacturing out of whole cloth, "The War On Drugs." This has made the illegal drug trade immensely profitable and attractive to young black males for the easy money. Ergo, gangs and violence and crime and prison and generations of black children with no fathers on hand maintaining the family. A mother and several children is not a family. It's a group of related people completely dependent on government assistance. It is a two generation well into the third generation assault on blacks by liberals and conservatives with the liberals the worst of the lot. Liberals are much more racist than conservatives overall. They want power and blacks voting for Democrats is one big way to getting it and keeping it.

(Another way is massively sweeping illegal immigrants into the voting booth to complement traditional and accelerating Democratic Party vote fraud, especially in national elections. Just like Chicago and Texas elected Kennedy in 1960 only much worse today. Electronic tabulation of voting is the biggie, even more important than who gets to vote.)

--Brant

[Selene]

Dr. Carson was in Harlem yesterday and he was phenomenal...

 

Spoke cogently about the Alinskyite use of blacks as "pets."

 

The guy is a wonderful motivational speaker, very close friends of mine heard him speak at a convention and they were really impressed.  They are not folks who are easily impressed.