+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 8 of 8

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    2,245

    Republicans and Jesus Christ ....

    Republicans are Trying to Mix the Ideologies of Jesus Christ with an Atheist and That Doesn’t Make Any Sense

    It’s amazing to me how few conservatives know who Ayn Rand is. Especially considering that she’s quite possibly the most influential person behind most of the Republican party’s economic ideologies.

    She was a person who spoke out against social programs, believed that people should only worry about themselves, opposed big government and worshiped at the “glory” that is unregulated capitalism. In other words, she’s the epitome of what most Republicans support economically.

    Hell, Ron Paul named his son Rand Paul after the woman, and Paul Ryan has cited her as one of his key influences in his life.

    There’s just one problem – Ayn Rand was an atheist. Not that there’s any problem at all with being an atheist (more power to you) but there is a big problem with a political party that builds its social platform on “Christian” values while basing its economic ideology on that of someone who didn’t believe in God.

    More at http://www.forwardprogressives.com/r...nt-make-sense/ .

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Amsterdam
    Posts
    15,510

    Re: Republicans and Jesus Christ ....

    I think that's the problem with just having two parties. There's generally a deal breaker issue that divides. When you look at alot of the Southern Republicans it simply comes down to guns (for them), they hate black people, and the gays. So that kinda pushes the gays and minorities into the democrats. But what if a gay person had Republican ideals? Or a liberal Christian? Most people are in the middle with issues and it is impossible to please everyone.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    27,212

    Re: Republicans and Jesus Christ ....

    from the atlas society page................ if you’re referring to an objective, rational view of the universe as it really is (the perspective Objectivism adopts), God simply doesn’t come in the picture. He does not exist.and this comparison of the 2 belief systems called religion and objectivism here............ :elvis: : :freak3: :judges:

    http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2012/0...nct-religions/
    i do not endorse/recommend any advertising on scam.com associated with my name /posts or otherwise. thank you

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Glendale Az
    Posts
    1,249

    Re: Republicans and Jesus Christ ....

    It’s amazing to me how few conservatives know who Ayn Rand is.
    Conservative Repellicans are not all Christian, Roddy. Most Christian Conservatives identify with most of her ideas, but draw the line on others. And just because someone is a Conservative doesn't mean that they agree with Rand's teachings. She wasn't a Conservative, per say. She developed a teaching called Objectivism. But ultimately, she was a Classic Liberal.

    Objectivism ideas are mostly what I believe in. You could say Classical Liberalism is to the right of Conservative.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism

    Classical liberalism is a political philosophy and ideology belonging to liberalism in which primary emphasis is placed on securing the freedom of the individual by limiting the power of the government. The philosophy emerged as a response to the Industrial Revolution and urbanization in the 19th century in Europe and the United States.[1] It advocates civil liberties with a limited government under the rule of law, private property rights, and belief in laissez-faire economic liberalism.[2][3][4] Classical liberalism is built on ideas that had already arisen by the end of the 18th century, including ideas of Adam Smith, John Locke, Jean-Baptiste Say, Thomas Malthus, and David Ricardo. It drew on a psychological understanding of individual liberty, natural law, utilitarianism, and a belief in progress.[
    Ayn Rand was an atheist
    Big time Atheist, as myself.

    Then you have the political venue that is presently overtaking our country, called Social Liberalism.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_liberalism

    Social liberalism is the belief that liberalism should include a social foundation. Social liberalism seeks to balance individual liberty and social justice. Like classical liberalism, it endorses a market economy and the expansion of civil and political rights and liberties, but differs in that it believes the legitimate role of the government includes addressing economic and social issues such as poverty, health care and education.[1][2][3] Under social liberalism, the good of the community is viewed as harmonious with the freedom of the individual.[4] Social liberal policies have been widely adopted in much of the capitalist world, particularly following World War II.[5] Social liberal ideas and parties tend to be considered centrist or centre-left.[6][7][8][9][10] The term social liberalism is used to differentiate it from (right-wing) classical liberalism, which dominated political and economic thought for several centuries until social liberalism branched off from it around the Great Depression.[1
    Unlike Classical Liberalism, Social Liberalism seeks to create harmony and equality among citizens. Unfortunately, all it does is degenerate into a self-imposed segregation by classes of the different groups of individuals who bind themselves together creating an internal group view of being "different." They become clans.

    IOW, it promotes a "victim mentality" amongst the individual persons in the different classes.

    These groups make statements to the powers that be like "We're a Minority" (and we have a vote) so we need more power from the government (which has all the power in this system) so we can be equal to everyone else!"

    The individuals have been taught both by the psuedo "benevolent" actions of their government, and by subliminal teachings learned while growing up promoting the axiom stating that they deserve to be taken care of by someone outside of themself.

    The main thing that goes awry is that this Social Liberalism replaces the sovereignty of the individual with the sovereignty of the individual group.

    No real, absolute individualism as it is guaranteed by our Constitution can exist under Social Liberalism, since the victimized individual voluntarily abdicates it for his allegiance to his group.

    The smallest minority, as Ayn Rand put it, was always "the individual human being." This philosophy of the pursuit of happiness found in the Constitution includes everyone in it.

    The victimization of the individual causes quite a few folks to identify with a minority group. This action, by default, means a penchant for the individuals in the group to forsake responsibilities in the areas which would cause him or her to do their own work, generating a low level of self-reliance, and promoting a level of outer dependence.

    Instead of doing this inner work, they find that their new-found 'club' can exercise it's weight against the powers in charge, overloading the system supported by government especially when there are so many groups.

    Under Classical Liberalism, everything you do with your life is your business, your property, and your responsibility. Under Social Liberalism, a lot of what you do is sponsored by a government. A government which feeds the victim can also stop feeding the victim, as his outside support can always be forfeited at any time.

    What you must do in order to succeed in Classical Liberalism is do the work required, without answering to any state sponsor, as long as you do not infringe upon rights of another individual to follow his path.
    Last edited by GHOST DOG; 04-21-2014 at 12:04 AM.
    Most people can't think, most of the remainder won't think, the small fraction who do think mostly can't do it very well. The extremely tiny fraction who think regularly, accurately, creatively, and without self-delusion- in the long run these are the only people who count... Robert Heinlein

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    27,212

    Re: Republicans and Jesus Christ ....

    Quote Originally Posted by GHOST DOG View Post
    Conservative Repellicans are not all Christian, Roddy. Most Christian Conservatives identify with most of her ideas, but draw the line on others. And just because someone is a Conservative doesn't mean that they agree with Rand's teachings. She wasn't a Conservative, per say. She developed a teaching called Objectivism. But ultimately, she was a Classic Liberal.

    Objectivism ideas are mostly what I believe in. You could say Classical Liberalism is to the right of Conservative.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism

    Big time Atheist, as myself.

    Then you have the political venue that is presently overtaking our country, called Social Liberalism.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_liberalism

    Unlike Classical Liberalism, Social Liberalism seeks to create harmony and equality among citizens. Unfortunately, all it does is degenerate into a self-imposed segregation by classes of the different groups of individuals who bind themselves together creating an internal group view of being "different." They become clans.

    IOW, it promotes a "victim mentality" amongst the individual persons in the different classes.

    These groups make statements to the powers that be like "We're a Minority" (and we have a vote) so we need more power from the government (which has all the power in this system) so we can be equal to everyone else!"

    The individuals have been taught both by the psuedo "benevolent" actions of their government, and by subliminal teachings learned while growing up promoting the axiom stating that they deserve to be taken care of by someone outside of themself.

    The main thing that goes awry is that this Social Liberalism replaces the sovereignty of the individual with the sovereignty of the individual group.

    No real, absolute individualism as it is guaranteed by our Constitution can exist under Social Liberalism, since the victimized individual voluntarily abdicates it for his allegiance to his group.

    The smallest minority, as Ayn Rand put it, was always "the individual human being." This philosophy of the pursuit of happiness found in the Constitution includes everyone in it.

    The victimization of the individual causes quite a few folks to identify with a minority group. This action, by default, means a penchant for the individuals in the group to forsake responsibilities in the areas which would cause him or her to do their own work, generating a low level of self-reliance, and promoting a level of outer dependence.

    Instead of doing this inner work, they find that their new-found 'club' can exercise it's weight against the powers in charge, overloading the system supported by government especially when there are so many groups.

    Under Classical Liberalism, everything you do with your life is your business, your property, and your responsibility. Under Social Liberalism, a lot of what you do is sponsored by a government. A government which feeds the victim can also stop feeding the victim, as his outside support can always be forfeited at any time.

    What you must do in order to succeed in Classical Liberalism is do the work required, without answering to any state sponsor, as long as you do not infringe upon rights of another individual to follow his path.
    interesting and how would such an ideal be SEEN expressed as compared to what we experience NOW!? i could have a OLD TRAILOR truck for a HOUSE right next to an well manicured MANSION?! i could have RAINWATER instead of CITY water for my sustenance!? i could raise PITBULLS and chickens and play LOUD MUSIC all NIGHT and fire my PISTOL up in the air while inebriated!? drive a homade vehicle with NO lights and no MUFFLER and plant anything i wanted wherever i wanted on my land and never cut grass!? and run naked around the house inside and out and relieve myself anywhere on my own land!? i'm sure i MISSED a couple freefall conditions that beg to be called constitutional!? :1crysad: ing1: :yelcutelaughA: :judges:
    i do not endorse/recommend any advertising on scam.com associated with my name /posts or otherwise. thank you

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Glendale Az
    Posts
    1,249

    Re: Republicans and Jesus Christ ....

    i could raise PITBULLS and chickens and play LOUD MUSIC all NIGHT and fire my PISTOL up in the air while inebriated!?
    Lexx.....you didn't read the whole piece........

    What you must do in order to succeed in Classical Liberalism is do the work required, without answering to any state sponsor, as long as you do not infringe upon rights of another individual to follow his path.
    My "path" like most others, involves peace and quiet at the correct times. We are supposed to be a "rule of law country. Too bad the Socialists in Washington only uphold the laws that they see fit to uphold, in the way that only they like.

    IOW, if our government doesn't like the law, don't ignore it, change it or shut up and follow it!
    Most people can't think, most of the remainder won't think, the small fraction who do think mostly can't do it very well. The extremely tiny fraction who think regularly, accurately, creatively, and without self-delusion- in the long run these are the only people who count... Robert Heinlein

  7. #7
    conserv4ever is offline You Can't Handle the Truth! User Rank
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    2,259

    Re: Republicans and Jesus Christ ....

    Quote Originally Posted by rodney walker II View Post
    Blah, blah, blah....

    Hell, Ron Paul named his son Rand Paul after the woman, and Paul Ryan has cited her as one of his key influences in his life.

    Words, words, words
    Always wrong, aren't you. Here are the facts. "Rand" is a nickname given by his WIFE. "Rand" is short for RANDALL (his legal name). He was called Randy throughout his school years.

    Watch and learn:






  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    27,212

    Re: Republicans and Jesus Christ ....

    Quote Originally Posted by conserv4ever View Post
    Always wrong, aren't you. Here are the facts. "Rand" is a nickname given by his WIFE. "Rand" is short for RANDALL (his legal name). He was called Randy throughout his school years.

    Watch and learn:





    oh COMON, you tellin us it's just a COINCIDENCE!? maybe they just PLAYED it SAFE so to speak!? hhhhhmmmm and what about RANDOLF!? that sounds more KNIGHTLY or .......................REINDEER maybe!? :rryumy: :freak3: :spin2: :yelcutelaughA:
    i do not endorse/recommend any advertising on scam.com associated with my name /posts or otherwise. thank you

Similar Threads

  1. Jesus Christ Is Against Gun Control
    By rogerbovee in forum Conspiracy Theories
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 02-06-2013, 02:56 AM
  2. Christ Jesus is the Son of God,and not God himself
    By muarader64 in forum Religious Scams
    Replies: 119
    Last Post: 12-14-2008, 09:09 AM
  3. Jesus Christ! You've got to be kidding me.
    By yossarian in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 05-20-2008, 04:39 PM
  4. Was Jesus Christ a Jew?
    By mudpuppie in forum Religious Scams
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: 12-13-2007, 06:56 AM
  5. Jesus Christ!
    By Unlucky36 in forum Mail Order Scams
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 06-02-2006, 04:18 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may edit your posts
  •