No, it champions selfishness as a virtue. Hard work that doesn’t result in great wealth is not valued.
And don’t forget that hypocritical bitch decided to use Medicare rather than her own resources for her lung cancer.
She saw the prospect of being poor and dependent on others and couldn’t face it despite dishing it out.
I’m pretty sure it is. It may not have been in the past, but it is today.
Laws change, if she can’t change with them, maybe she shouldn’t have sworn to uphold the law and should find a new line of work.
Well, that’s not really true. Rand was much more about the fetishization of pursuing excellence than wealth per se. That’s why her heroes have a kind of fuck-the-world mentality when success would mean going against their ideals. There’s a great deal to criticize in Rand’s brand of philosophy, don’t get me wrong, but it’s important to understand that using the terminology of ‘selfishness’ was trolling and that she really employed an idiosyncratic definition thereof.
Can we stick to the topic, guys?
It is now.
But they didn’t, and she does.
Your anti-gay bigotry keeps you trying to find a way to justify her, but it still isn’t working.
Well, heaven forbid page 12 of a pit thread veer briefly off course. This is serious business we’re discussing here.
I see that you champion ignorance. You are simply wrong. You know squat about her philosophy. You couldn’t be more wrong. One of the heroes in her novels was a short-order cook. Another chose to be a laborer in a stone quarry.
Ask yourself why you didn’t quote the complete sentence I wrote. :rolleyes:
See my previous post, dumbbell.
Sorry if you think pointing out a simple fact of law and reality bounces around in your empty head and turns into justification and bigotry.
You are grandly, profoundly, ostentatiously stupid.
“The little dog barks, but the caravan rolls on.”
It was, to quote a wise man, “irrelevant”. :rolleyes:
Do we have to? The other issues seem pretty cut-and-dried.
Why is Kim Davis acting that way? Because she’s a stupid bitch.
Why is D’Anconia acting that way? Because he’s a stupid bitch.
Compared to those issues, an analysis of the works of Ayn Rand seems positively weighty.
Use your brain cell to ponder the following and it’s relation to what I wrote and your response. If your head winds up exploding, think of the peace you will finally have.
An elephant is not big the way a mountain is big.
The night is not dark the way a black hole is dark.
Embezzlement is not bad the way rape is bad.
ElvisL1ves is not stupid the way a rock is stupid. The rock has an excuse.
Well, they’re not cut and dried yet. IIRC, Davis is due in court today at 10 to explain herself.
Or just to be told to cut the shit. I doubt the judge has any interest in her excuses.
If religious conviction trumps the laws of the land what’s stopping Rastafarian’s from lighting up joints at bus stops? Or Morman’s taking three wives? Or Muslim’s following Sharia?
Did these people not even think this crap through at all?
Saying it was Christian men that signed the constitution making this a Christian nation is complete nonsense, I think. Many were slave owners too, doesn’t mean that slavery is endorsed or permitted.
And these people count themselves deeply patriotic!
One wonders, can these people think at all?
This seems like the segregation end game all over again. The law changes, parts of the South defy the law. And they squirm, and weasel around every possible delay and denial, every excuse and equivocation manifests.
And then, in the end reality prevails.
I don’t know anything about Judge Bunning in particular, but in my experience federal judges tend to be pretty cranky about outright defiance. (My experience includes Judge Sam Kent, though, who was . . . kind of an outlier on that.) It’s clear from her statements that she will never comply with any court order from any court on this, so why not simply have her jailed until she issues licenses or resigns?
Because the plaintiffs have asked that she not be jailed. Fines should work just fine.
She knew when she took office in January that it was a real possibility, and she wrote letters to legislators in February asking for a law to protect her from having to sign off on those evil gay marriages.
She should receive the customary sentence for contempt of court in these circumstances. She should not receive less just because interested private citizens request it. Nor should she be given more just to prove a point.
I don’t want her to wind up being a martyr here. The legislature needs to call a special session and relieve her of her duties.
They don’t. At all. If you read the documentary Going Clear about Scientology, it’s clear that when Scientology rose, people (some) started realizing the problems with giving religion so much deference and leeway in our society. Scientology was smart and clever and used all the loopholes Christianity has been using in our society for so long to get away with what it was doing. And no matter how hard they tried to stop them, they couldn’t without also curbing Christianity in the same way.
People like this want Christianity to be the rule of law but know it will not pass. So they pass generic rules protecting all kinds of religion. Which, as you say, opens the door for…all kinds of religions.
And please! Stop putting apostrophes on everything. Apostrophe does not mean “oncoming s”. “Muslims” doesn’t need an apostrophe unless you are talking about one Muslim who owns something. Same with Mormons, Rastafarians, and anything else!