I am Anti-Capitalist
At least according to this young lady. What I want to know is, what do abortion "rights" have to do wtih capitalism, other than the simple supply-demand aspect? But from what this young lady tells us, because I don't believe in abortion, I'm an anti-capitalist. I'm sorry, I'm having a hard time understanding the corrolation here. Capitalism is a form of economics, not a socail science, religion, nor does it even have anything to do with your government (at least if it's done properly which I'm sad to say is not the case in America...see Microsoft). I am against abortion, I always have been. This individual does not agree with me. That's fine. Lots of people disagree with me. But to say I'm anti-capitalist because I don't agree with her is an ignorant statement. Let's get this straight, I love having money. It makes my life easier. I believe that if someone has an idea and a passion to go out and take the risk to make money for themsleves that they should be respected for that and should be able to persue that without government intervention. Pretty much all christians are against abortion. They are not all against capitalism, in fact very few of them are. Hello..you've never seen a christian book store? You think they give those books away for free? The pastor at my church owns his own business and is literally a millionaire. Does that sound anti-capitalist? My personal beliefs have nothing do with my economic beliefs. And this individual has no right to say otherwise, nor do I. But since the guantlets are down, let's do this.
This is going to be one of the few points of contention that I disagree with Ayn Rand about. But it's one I disagree with very, very strongly. So you Ayn Rand "pimpers" out there are probably going to be unhappy with me. Tough ;-)
My personal beliefs are obviously tied into my faith. So to take out of the argument so this doesn't become a theological debate, let's just make this about personal responsibility. I want to take a look at a few of Ayn Rand's quotes that this individual has kindly put up on her website.
"One method of destroying a concept is by diluting its meaning. Observe that by ascribing rights to the unborn, i.e., the nonliving, the anti-abortionists obliterate the rights of the living: the right of young people to set the course of their own lives."
— Ayn Rand ["A Last Survey — Part I", The Ayn Rand Letter Vol. IV, No. 2, 1975.]
I don't understand how protecting the fetus obliterates the rights of others, unless you're speaking of the mother. I'll get to that next.
A man who takes it upon himself to prescribe how others should dispose of their own lives - and who seeks to condemn them by law, i.e., by force, to the drudgery of an unchosen, lifelong servitude (which, more often than not, is beyond their economic means or capacity) - such a man has no right to pose as a defender of rights. A man with so little concern or respect for the rights of the individual, cannot and will not be a champion of freedom or of capitalism. (For a full discussion of the issue of birth control, see my article "Of Living Death.")"
— Ayn Rand
and this...
"Responsible parenthood involves decades devoted to the child's proper nurture. To sentence a woman to bear a child against her will is an unspeakable violation of her rights: her right to liberty (to the functions of her body), her right to the pursuit of happiness, and, sometimes, her right to life itself, even as a serf. Such a sentence represents the sacrifice of the actual to the potential, of a real human being to a piece of protoplasm, which has no life in the human sense of the term. It is sheer perversion of language for people who demand this sacrifice to call themselves 'right-to-lifers.' "
— Leonard Peikoff (Objectivism, in the Chapter on Government)
This to me, is actually one of my strongest arguments against abortion. Sorry guys, but these quotes, (yes even Ayn Rand's) sound the senseless bleading heart crap that comes from the mouths of the luny left. Wa-wa-freakin' wa. Boo-hoo having this baby will ruin my life. Get over it. You had sex knowing full well what the consequences might be and CHOSE to do it anyway. Now deal with the result of your actions. By this argument you can say that convicted killers felons should be let free because being in prison infringes on their personal rights. It's a bunch of liberal crap. Sorry guys, I know some of you will hate me for this, but that's what it is. When every one of us has sex, we are aware that there may be consequences for that action. If you persue that action, or any action for that matter, not prepared to deal with those consequences then I'm sorry but you are just being irresponsible. And then to say it's anti-capitalist..on what grounds? Because there's a demand for abortion? Hell there's a demand for hired killers out there too, but that doesn't make it right. By allowing anyone to have an abortion for any reason is nothing more than absolving people of personal responsibility. Another point to bring up would be the rights of the father. But I won't because after all everyone knows damned good and well that in this country in any parental conflice the father has virtually no rights anyway, so why bother. I'm sorry if this tirade seems longwinded, but that woman saying that I'm anti-capitalist because I don't believe in abortion really pissed me off. We can argue morality all day, but the simple fact is that there is NO morality involved in capitalism. In capitalism there is no right or wrong, there is only freedom of business. The right for a person or company to make money by suplying goods or services without outside (government) intervention. It's that simple. To bring morality into capitalism or vice-versa in my opinion is one of the most anti-capitalist acts you can commit.
Yes, I'm pro-capitalist and anti-abortion (I don't like the term pro-life, it's misleading). Fait aside, here's why:
1) as mentioned above it absolves said person of their personal responsibility
2) excludes potential father from any say what-so-ever
I want to say also, that to call a fetus a parisite is completely abhorrent IMO. This is a future human being that we are talking about. Not some tick to be pulled off your dog. Yes it is true that it cannot survive without the mother. But I've got news for you, anybody with kids will tell you that by that definition the kids are "parisites" until they are old enough to kick their arses out of the house. At what point IS the mother responsible for the baby? After all, a six-week old baby cannot survive without somebody to take care of it. Hell, my four year old couldn't survive without somebody to take care of him. Does that mean I can indiscriminantly "abort" him to remove the responsibility? In any other case, Ayn Rand would argue that something created by man is something to be respected. Why is an unborn child any different? I would in fact say that an unborn child should be even more respected because not only is it created by man (and woman) but is in fact a future man (woman) and is the future architect of this world. The bottom line is you don't want the responsibility then don't open your freakin' legs (or "dip the pickle").
Besides, there are way to many hippies in the world and we need to create more non-hippy people to counteract this.
Discalimer: My spell checker is apparently not working so I take no responsibility for any misspelled words in this post.
Update: Just wanted to mention that this post is not meant in any way to knock Ayn Rand or the ARI. It is simply one disagreement with a part of her philosophy. This is actually a good thing, how happy would she be if she realized anyone were blindly following everything she said? She'd rolll over in her grave I tell you. I know, I asked her. Yes I did, I contacted her on the other side with my awsome intellectual prowess. Yes I did! Liar.
This is going to be one of the few points of contention that I disagree with Ayn Rand about. But it's one I disagree with very, very strongly. So you Ayn Rand "pimpers" out there are probably going to be unhappy with me. Tough ;-)
My personal beliefs are obviously tied into my faith. So to take out of the argument so this doesn't become a theological debate, let's just make this about personal responsibility. I want to take a look at a few of Ayn Rand's quotes that this individual has kindly put up on her website.
"One method of destroying a concept is by diluting its meaning. Observe that by ascribing rights to the unborn, i.e., the nonliving, the anti-abortionists obliterate the rights of the living: the right of young people to set the course of their own lives."
— Ayn Rand ["A Last Survey — Part I", The Ayn Rand Letter Vol. IV, No. 2, 1975.]
I don't understand how protecting the fetus obliterates the rights of others, unless you're speaking of the mother. I'll get to that next.
A man who takes it upon himself to prescribe how others should dispose of their own lives - and who seeks to condemn them by law, i.e., by force, to the drudgery of an unchosen, lifelong servitude (which, more often than not, is beyond their economic means or capacity) - such a man has no right to pose as a defender of rights. A man with so little concern or respect for the rights of the individual, cannot and will not be a champion of freedom or of capitalism. (For a full discussion of the issue of birth control, see my article "Of Living Death.")"
— Ayn Rand
and this...
"Responsible parenthood involves decades devoted to the child's proper nurture. To sentence a woman to bear a child against her will is an unspeakable violation of her rights: her right to liberty (to the functions of her body), her right to the pursuit of happiness, and, sometimes, her right to life itself, even as a serf. Such a sentence represents the sacrifice of the actual to the potential, of a real human being to a piece of protoplasm, which has no life in the human sense of the term. It is sheer perversion of language for people who demand this sacrifice to call themselves 'right-to-lifers.' "
— Leonard Peikoff (Objectivism, in the Chapter on Government)
This to me, is actually one of my strongest arguments against abortion. Sorry guys, but these quotes, (yes even Ayn Rand's) sound the senseless bleading heart crap that comes from the mouths of the luny left. Wa-wa-freakin' wa. Boo-hoo having this baby will ruin my life. Get over it. You had sex knowing full well what the consequences might be and CHOSE to do it anyway. Now deal with the result of your actions. By this argument you can say that convicted killers felons should be let free because being in prison infringes on their personal rights. It's a bunch of liberal crap. Sorry guys, I know some of you will hate me for this, but that's what it is. When every one of us has sex, we are aware that there may be consequences for that action. If you persue that action, or any action for that matter, not prepared to deal with those consequences then I'm sorry but you are just being irresponsible. And then to say it's anti-capitalist..on what grounds? Because there's a demand for abortion? Hell there's a demand for hired killers out there too, but that doesn't make it right. By allowing anyone to have an abortion for any reason is nothing more than absolving people of personal responsibility. Another point to bring up would be the rights of the father. But I won't because after all everyone knows damned good and well that in this country in any parental conflice the father has virtually no rights anyway, so why bother. I'm sorry if this tirade seems longwinded, but that woman saying that I'm anti-capitalist because I don't believe in abortion really pissed me off. We can argue morality all day, but the simple fact is that there is NO morality involved in capitalism. In capitalism there is no right or wrong, there is only freedom of business. The right for a person or company to make money by suplying goods or services without outside (government) intervention. It's that simple. To bring morality into capitalism or vice-versa in my opinion is one of the most anti-capitalist acts you can commit.
Yes, I'm pro-capitalist and anti-abortion (I don't like the term pro-life, it's misleading). Fait aside, here's why:
1) as mentioned above it absolves said person of their personal responsibility
2) excludes potential father from any say what-so-ever
I want to say also, that to call a fetus a parisite is completely abhorrent IMO. This is a future human being that we are talking about. Not some tick to be pulled off your dog. Yes it is true that it cannot survive without the mother. But I've got news for you, anybody with kids will tell you that by that definition the kids are "parisites" until they are old enough to kick their arses out of the house. At what point IS the mother responsible for the baby? After all, a six-week old baby cannot survive without somebody to take care of it. Hell, my four year old couldn't survive without somebody to take care of him. Does that mean I can indiscriminantly "abort" him to remove the responsibility? In any other case, Ayn Rand would argue that something created by man is something to be respected. Why is an unborn child any different? I would in fact say that an unborn child should be even more respected because not only is it created by man (and woman) but is in fact a future man (woman) and is the future architect of this world. The bottom line is you don't want the responsibility then don't open your freakin' legs (or "dip the pickle").
Besides, there are way to many hippies in the world and we need to create more non-hippy people to counteract this.
Discalimer: My spell checker is apparently not working so I take no responsibility for any misspelled words in this post.
Update: Just wanted to mention that this post is not meant in any way to knock Ayn Rand or the ARI. It is simply one disagreement with a part of her philosophy. This is actually a good thing, how happy would she be if she realized anyone were blindly following everything she said? She'd rolll over in her grave I tell you. I know, I asked her. Yes I did, I contacted her on the other side with my awsome intellectual prowess. Yes I did! Liar.
posted by Unknown at
9:09 PM
<< Home