Free Thought Isn't Free

I have at times, argued quite extensively with atheists on AC, primarily Jeff Musall and Jack Oceano. During these arguments, I have often heard them and other atheists use the words "free thought" and "freethinker" in association with their beliefs. The definition of a freethinker is someone who forms an opinion about religion, morals, etc. independently. Nowhere in this definition does it imply that a freethinker shuns religion. The definition that the aforementioned writers seem to be going by is "one who is an atheist".

Let's examine just what it means to form an opinion "independently" shall we? The first problem that you run into is that no one ever forms a completely independent opinion. There is always someone that you look up to or an event or experience that shapes the way in which one views the world. Since this statement, therefore, cannot be taken as an absolute, we must begin not by looking at what freethinking is but rather at what it definitely is not. Freethinking is not when someone else tells you what to believe and you listen to them without question. Freethinking is not when you are never exposed to other beliefs. Freethinking is not when you are being influenced by the surrounding culture to take on a system of beliefs without a second thought.

During childhood, it is almost certain that one is not a freethinker--although just when childhood ends is up for debate. During a person's youth, the will probably think of themselves as an absolute rebel, individual, or freethinker. this person will usually be wrong and more often than not, this person is simply going with the flow and doing whatever is in style.(This is where I find out just how civilized my critics are; I have just exposed myself to a massive cheap-shot, will you take it?) During adulthood, a person will probably be more of an individual but they will still probably be heavily influenced by their upbringing and the culture around them. The people who really are freethinkers are the ones who will sit down and just think about the world and right and wrong and pretty much anything else. While I cannot claim to have studied psychology, based on my observations of human nature, this kind of behavior probably sets in during the teenage years. Naturally, there is a large gray area between the serious freethinkers and the cultural lemmings, but for the sake of this discussion, I will be focusing on freethinkers as a select group.

So is it true that this select group is comprised specifically of atheists? Historically speaking, you have C.S. Lewis, an atheist-turned-Christian, Albert Einstein, who eventually concluded that because the universe had an intelligent Creator, and Martin Luther King Jr.. I myself constantly reexamine my own views, which is what led me to my current beliefs. The truth is that just because a person is exposed to a certain belief system and is encouraged to abide by that belief system does not mean they are not thinking for themselves. Thinking for yourself is about being aware of what you are told and weighing its value. Furthermore, it is not irrational to assume that God can do everything that the Bible describes because if one accepts the idea that there is more to the universe than we currently know, then this person must also realize that if someone made that universe, they would be the ones who made the rules that we study. Following this line of thought, this being may also exist outside of our rules and may even be able to bend and break the rules they created here.

Despite the loathing that many atheists seem to feel toward faith and "indoctrination", atheism also displays these exact traits in how it keeps and gains members. Today, many atheists are constantly trying to shut down those who speak and act in favor of Christ. These atheists are the minority, of course, but even if they weren't there, our culture is already encouraging atheism. Christians are often labeled as "Jesus freaks" (a label, I might add, that myself and many others boast of, just as I speak boastfully of the insult "history geek") Christians are not always held in the highest esteem although our numbers are large enough that the mass media usually avoids stepping on our toes. Christians are seen as backwards and ignorant not because we actually deserve these labels, but because most Christian scientists have views that differ from the rest of the scientific community. Youths are particularly vulnerable to atheistic influences as rebellion against the old order of things seems to be in style now. There is one senior at my school who owns and carries around a satanic bible.

As for faith, atheism is just as much about belief as theism. There is no proof that God exists and there is no way to get any. For all their talk of logic, I have to encounter a single atheist who could prove through reason that God's existence is somehow improbable. Furthermore, history is full of accounts that speak in favor of God's existence. Constantine, Joan d' Arc, the War of 1812, the Battle of Monongahela, and the very fact that the Jews have survived as both a race and a culture for this long is evidence of God's existence. When faced with historical events, firsthand accounts, the inerrant nature of the Bible as a historical source, and logical arguments such as those presented by C.S. Lewis, why don't atheists stop and reevaluate their position? Because of faith, and no this is not faith in science, it is faith in science's limitations.

As long as our society continues to use the term "freethinker" exclusively in association with atheism, it is simply another tool for indoctrination. It is another form of pressure for those who have their doubts about atheism and a form of discrimination for those who deny it outright. As long as the term "free thought" is completely exclusively to non-atheists, it is not in any way free.