Reasons’s Light describes itself as “an Objectivist/Reasonist organization dedicated to spreading the light of reason.” Although I have no idea what “Reasonism” is supposed to be, I do take exception to their most recent poll:

The question is: “Were the violent acts committed by islamic [sic] fundamentalists, over the recent cartoon deptiction [sic] of the prophet Muhammed with a bomb for a turbin [sic], called for?” The possible answers are: (1) “Yes, the people had a right to react violently to their religion being disrespected,” (2) “No, the people should have chosen the path of non-violent protest,” and (3) “Undecided.”

I certainly can’t agree with any of those three options, since I don’t think that even non-violent protest (in the sense of marching in the streets) was justified by the publication of the cartoons. Anything more than a very mild letter to the editor would have been too much. After all, non-Muslims have no obligation to refrain from the supposed blasphemy of depicting Mohammed. Moreover, non-Muslims have been provided with ample reason to associate Islam with terrorism and violence in recent decades.

As seen countless times before, even self-described Objectivists are not immune from the siren song of false alternatives, nor from the snare of equating the political with the moral — nor even from the perils of bad spelling!