Available Now! (click cover)

America's Counter-Revolution
The Constitution Revisited

From the back cover:

This book challenges the assumption that the Constitution was a landmark in the struggle for liberty. Instead, Sheldon Richman argues, it was the product of a counter-revolution, a setback for the radicalism represented by America’s break with the British empire. Drawing on careful, credible historical scholarship and contemporary political analysis, Richman suggests that this counter-revolution was the work of conservatives who sought a nation of “power, consequence, and grandeur.” America’s Counter-Revolution makes a persuasive case that the Constitution was a victory not for liberty but for the agendas and interests of a militaristic, aristocratic, privilege-seeking ruling class.

Saturday, February 18, 2012

Obamacare, Contraception, and Ayn Rand


It will be little comfort to the advocates of state-mandated “free” contraception that Ayn Rand, who would have abhorred Obamacare and all its mandates, was as staunch an advocate of birth control and women’s right to abortion as one can imagine. Writing about the anti-contraception papal encyclical “Humanae Vitae,” Rand wrote in “Of Living Death” (1968):
ayn-randTry to hold an image of horror spread across space and time—across the entire globe and through all the centuries—the image of parents chained, like beasts of burden, to the physical needs of a growing brood of children—young parents aging prematurely while fighting a losing battle against starvation—the skeletal hordes of unwanted children born without a chance to live—the unwed mothers slaughtered in the unsanitary dens of incompetent abortionists—the silent terror hanging, for every couple, over every moment of love. If one holds this image while hearing that this nightmare is not to be stopped, the first question one will ask is: Why? . . .
 The passive obedience and helpless surrender to the physical functions of one’s body, the necessity to let procreation be the inevitable result of the sexual act, is the natural fate of animals, not of men. In spite of its concern with man’s higher aspirations, with his soul, and with the sanctity of married love—it is to the level of animals that the encyclical seeks to reduce man’s sex life, in fact, in reality, on earth.

5 comments:

Bill the Butcher said...

Just the sight of Ayn Rand's eyes is the greatest contraceptive I can think of. My gonads just shrivelled.

Sheldon Richman said...

Much obliged for that insight.

justintree3 said...

I am in major disagreement here...It's not hard to have sex without resulting in children, even if abortion were illegal. My wife and I have been married for almost 7 years, and we went 4 years before our first child, and had 0 abortions.

An unborn child should have rights, as right from the beginning it is an individual life, even though it is dependent on its mother (scientists are quick enough to admit individual organisms in other aspects that are dependent - such as the man-o-war, so why not in pregnancies?)

How can we possibly begin to calculate the opportunity cost we have endured by not having babies that were previously aborted? What if abortion were around 300 years ago, and George Washington's mother had decided she didn't want kids yet?

shemsky said...

Yeah, without George Washington chopping down that cherry tree we'd all be dead now.

Bill the Butcher said...

"Pro-life" arguments are just so entertaining...