Ayn Rand/Objectivism Sightings
Free Radical Updates
Local Club Meeting Plans
News & Interesting Links
By Staff Position
|From the Editor:|
Posted by Lindsay Perigo on 9/18/2004, 12:10am
|Boys and Girls,|
Tonight I've posted Chris Sciabarra's final riposte to Regi Firehammer on the matter of Objectivism and homosexuality.
Some weeks ago, some posters to SOLOHQ said too much time and space was being devoted to the subject. I disputed this, arguing that the time and space being devoted to it was about what you'd expect on the web site of an organisation that had pledged itself to dragging Objectivist homophobia out of the closet. Additionally, I pointed out, *what* subjects got discussed and to what extent was entirely over to participants on SOLOHQ, the freest and best Objectivist web site there is, so that if one subject appeared to dominate proceedings, *that* was a reflection of what participants wanted to talk about. Joe then pointed out that in actual fact, the subject had occupied *negligible* space relative to everything else that had been talked about on SOLOHQ.
Now, I myself have had enough, as has Chris, whose SOLO-sponsored monograph, originally published in The Free Radical, sparked the whole debate. One of the reasons *I* have had enough is that I have become convinced that Chris's chief adversary, Mr. Firehammer - to whom I have given unlimited space here & in The Free Radical - has not been proceeding in good faith.
A couple of people whose opinions I respect highly have remonstrated with me privately about my saying this. Well, here's the reason I say it:
Regi pretends that he's not telling homosexuals they should live lives of abstinence and self-denial. While he's pretending that, he's telling homosexuals that the instant they *act* on their homosexual inclination, (which he insists, contrary to all evidence, they have consciously chosen) they become immoral, on a par with thieves, pedophiles & the like.
To wit (not having to go back through the files here but from something Regi said just today):
'My whole argument is that a person's, "orientation," or "inclination," to do or be anything (a thief, a nymphomaniac, a pedophile, a homosexual) is irrelevant. Only what one chooses matters. It is only one's actual actions, in thought and deed that has any part of defining who and what an individual is. A person tempted to steal is not a thief unless he yields to the temptation (his orientation) and actually steals.'
And a person tempted to have sex with someone of his own gender does not place himself on a par with a thief until he actually *does* have sex with someone of his own gender. If that's not the advocacy of abstinence & self-denial I'm buggered (oops) if I know what is!
Now, I confess to finding it difficult to believe that such an "argument" can be proffered in good faith. I note that supremely good people whom I adore such as Derek & Cam have already had a gutsful of Regi's package-dealing. So too, has Chris, whom I also adore, who truly has the proverbial patience of a saint (and gets bollocked by me for being *too* patient!).
So, what I'm asking here is this: Please respect Chris' right to *say* his last word by *not* engaging him in further debate on this subject. He's clearly stated his wish *not* to be further engaged in his article, and it shouldn't be too much to ask that it be respected, especially by the folk who already feel the subject has received too much attention. If you want to argue with *me*, do so on *this* discussion thread.
Now, it's also been said to me privately that I've been vituperative - well, *more* vituperative than usual - toward individual posters of late. Anyone who knows me well knows that I *do* get more cranky & hormonal when a FreeRad birth is due. Over and above that, I would say that the occasions recently where I've had legitimate cause to say to myself, "Galt give me strength!" have been more numerous than usual. Over and above *that*, I'd like to bring some humour into the situation and quote Brahms: "If there's anyone here I haven't insulted, I apologise." Over and above *that*, I would like to commend to your attention the very Free Radical whose imminent arrival I have already mentioned, whose main feature is an interview by rookie SOLOist, the very talented Alec Mouhibian, with Nathaniel Branden. It's a beautiful interview that you won't want to miss. Yes, it will eventually be posted on SOLOHQ, but nothing can recapture the magic of the hard copy. Go to www.freeradical.co.nz and hit "subscribe"! :-)
Oh, and it *also* features a beautiful review by Chris Sciabarra of the latest and best-ever Mario Lanza biography! :-)
Oh, *and* an article by the *very* beautiful Jennifer Iannolo, who also appears naked in the centre-fold.
(You don't believe me? Would I lie to you? Well, there's only one way to find out! :-))