"Shrink," not "think." But, yes, very pertinent today.

@@felcaronshe was wrong about the accomplishments of Reagan. But don’t happen for a few more years. Died before she got to see the fall of Soviet Union and Germany and a booming economy.

Sharp wit

@haroldstewart8580; Harold Stewart, how can You be disappointed with these ideas, concepts, views, perspectives, perceptions, philosophies specifically within Abortion, Family which is clearly within her false basis of "science", Creation, The Creator within her acceptance, following Aristotle, refusal, denial of The Creator, possible acceptance of Metaphysical, the proofs against Aristotle, Plato, Socretes, previous, post deniers, including every man made religion, along with their False Gods. Ayn Rand seems clearly only aware of the "Chrixstian"-Orthodox-Catholic, some Protestant ideas, concepts, Falsehood, Doctrine, Distortion, Authoritarian inDOCtrination, Propaganda since within Rome as a poor extension of the. Greek Philosophers etc, Ayn explicitly denies, refuses , perhaps unaware of the proofs against Aristotle Philosophy, though the basics within proper human thought, logic, reason, reasoning was revealed to him this his students which expanded worldwide more so since the period post Authoritarian control by the Roman-Catholic-Chrixstian Church, Religion, Doctrince, then during the more modern era with development of the Philosophy of Science and Mathematics mostly initially via Issac Newton who opposed the "Church:. Clearly within her explicit statements about claimed "Theory of Evolution", which is actually Darwin's proposal, with massive speculation, presumptions, assumptions, lack of any proof, causation, mechanism, thus never reaches even a Postulation, certainly no Hypothesis, Thesis, Theory [the ultimate within Science Philosophy]. Ayn clearly states, admits she lacks knowledge of, with, within Biology, thus also clearly implicitly lack proper knowledge, acceptance within Science Philosophy which has the same principles within all Philosophy which not only requires proper thinking, logic, reason, reasoning, development, causation, mechanism, proof. Note also, clearly Ayn Rand focuses upon the Industrialists/ISM, which is simply from 19th Century and certainly was, is, remains directed, dictated, controlled by the "Elite" which also contrived, devised, promoted, instituted, established Socialist/ISM, then Communist/ISM, Captialist/ISM, then Marxist/ISM, Lenin/ist/ISM, Mao/ist/ISM, Fascist/ISM, Corporate/ist/ISM, etc, for use within their Authoritarian/ist/ISM control along with political, politics, banking, finance, economics, etc. Also Aybn Rand clearly lacks the Philosophies of Locke, Rousseu, which the opposition to GB-England King George, Founders of the USA, US Conbstitution. Ayn clearly has much within similar resulting ideas about Government, not as Goverernance, Authoritarian, controlling. However, her lacking within their full Philosophies, views, concepts, principles, limited Laws within the US Constitution. Thus she promotes just the proliferation of ideas, concepts, as primary without suggesting, advising, promoting any legal means, channels, due process, legal redress [1A] along with eliminating all illegal, unlawful, Unconstitutional US Congress Legislation, Executive Orders, faulty Federal & Supreme Court decisions including Roe v Wade. Clearly her denial, refusal of, with, within, about abortion is within her personal opposition of the "Chixstian" philosophy, ideology, mythology thus "Moral Majority", all organized religions [which are certainly false], along with her ignorance of the proofs agains Aristotle, thus her views of Metaphysical, which refuse, deny The Creator. They actually limit their human thinking, logic, reason, reasoning, intellect, to oppose Our Creator. Thus, Family is not a priority, since she clearly lacks these necessary aspects which are a vital continuation of Humans, along with any responsibilities, appreciation, obligations toward the parents that provided everything to the child[ren]. This is clearly a logical fallacy, nonsense which is similar with the same fallacy with The Creator. All The Best, Sincerely

Your presented idea that Ayn Rand presented about abortion is correct in basic results; it certainly lacks proper information, reality, thinking, logic, reason, reasoning [she explicitly stated her lack within Biology, claimed Darwin's proposal as "Theory of Evolution" (certainly lacking all necessary elements within evidence, causation, mechanism, proof to reach Postulation, certainly Hypothesis, Thesis, Theory (the ultimate level)). Thus, she had no valid basis for her claims, ideas, views, philosophies within the realm including all aspects within actual Science. Your last assumption, is mearely Your personal conjecture, speculation, presumptions, perhaps projection. With such an intelligent, thinking, logical, reason, reasoning, that Ayn Rand expresses including within relationships, "Love" [along with her "most valued" other, husband (that passed by 1980)], without any children, thus, she would be expected to have chosen some forms of birth control, along with her very well, highly selective process with any personal and physical involvement. It does seem clearly obvious that Ayn Rand is, was, misinformed, misled, misguided within the areas mentioned to have including those views within her mindset. Similarly, with all individual, people, humans, congregations which accept, follow the false religions which are all man made, devised, contrived, distortions, just as Aristotle, Plato, Socretes, Greek, Roman, Hindu, including all forms of Pagan religions, Gods, ideas, concepts, ideology, mythology, etc.; they all oppose, refuse, deny Our Creator since their faulty, fallout development during early human existance, though the original created human, the children's still existed. All The Best, Sincerely

A toddler is biologically independent. A toddler could survive alone. It's just extremely unlikely. By contrast, a fetus or an embryo is by definition a parasite on the mother (I don't mean that as an insult).

@@YorickReturns what about kids that for whatever medical reason are totally dependent upon their parents and it are guaranteed not to survive on their own?

@@konradzawadzki2616 There is no such guarantee (there is just a very high probability). The child is still biologically independent, unlike an embryo or a fetus.

@@YorickReturns well, there is a tiny chance that a meteor will destroy all life on earth before I end this sentence : ) and all deliberations lose any meaning

@@konradzawadzki2616 Well, sure, but what's your point? The fact is, there is a fundamental difference between a toddler, who is biologically independent by definition, and a fetus or an embryo, which is biologically dependent on the mother.

Well now,in 2023 it's the age of sub-mediocrity. Sub-sub-mediocrity. In philosophy, there is nothing. In art, anything goes. In sports, anything goes. In music, anything goes so long as it does not sound anything like music at all. In literature, anything goes so long as it is unintelligible to the point where, a child who is just beginning to learn to read, wouldn't understand in a million years. In fashion, anything goes, as long as it looks like it was made by a drunken clown, addicted to crack and heroin. In movies and television, anything goes as long as its boring, pointless, lacking a plot, or just bizarre and grotesque. In politics, there's Biden and Harris.