[ndigila]

The following post is based on my observation and interactions. As a result it may appear to be an over-generalization.

Time and time again, people have attributed my belief in God to some sort of mental slavery. I've even been told once on this forum that it's impossible to be a Christian without being a mental slave. These people claim that freedom from religion allows someone to fully utilize his critical thinking skills. So the question is, is this critical thinking ability being used?

Drunkenness: Can anybody justify the act of getting drunk, apart from the fact that it feels good? And does this good feeling outweigh the negatives that drunkenness has on your body?

The following are the main arguments I've heard defending homosexuality.
1. Homosexuals are born homosexuals
2. Consenting adults can do whatever they want in their privacy
Can someone tell me why these arguments are valid?

The following are the main arguments for abortion.
1. The baby is not human yet.
2. A woman has a right to do whatever she wants with her body
Are these as a result of critical thinking or are they emotional subjective arguments?

Why is it that majority of free thinkers, despite their diversity, share similar opinions about these issues? Why do many free thinkers don't have a problem with fornication in a country in which AIDS is a national disaster? Are these people really free?

[Jibril Cessay]

Religion doesn't give anyone the chance to be a free thinker. Religion is not very rational especially when it come to deciding whether a deed should be done to save money or assuage a pain.

Did u hear the case a month ago of an 11 year diabetic girl who died from Diabetic shock? Her parents were fervent Christians. Instead of reviving their daughter with sugar water or orange juice, they insisted on praying for their daughter. ANy rational being would have revived their child but someone took PRAY UNTIL SOMETHING HAPPENS a step further, causing the death of their loved one.

ABC News: Parents' Faith Fails to Save Diabetic Girl

As for homosexuality, let people be. There are different kinds of love and we should not be the judges of what is right between people who share a special chemistry.

[grip_daddy]

How does acquired knowledge contribute to free thinking? For example, how does an ignorant unschooled non-religious fella exercise his free thinking capabilities?

Is rationalization of concepts therefore not controlled by the acquired knowledge? Religious or otherwise?

[truuth]

In this world there's only you. You have to find a place where you fit despite the (what I call the noise) of the world. It doesn’t matter what the world thinks of anything, ie homosexuality or abortion or life in general. What I think matters is what and how you think and feel about this. And the knowledge that your thoughts of this, are as significant as anybody elses.We don’t find solutions in others we only find different perspectives in life that allow us to grow beyond our own thinking. So what if they all think that you are in Christian slavery. That’s somebody else’s opinion, which does not describe you. You are a separate entity who is capable of a separate view of life. You discuss, you argue ,you get mad, you screw up but the bottom line is you are YOU.

[Type R]

For many centuries, religion terrorised Man mentally, intellectually. Even the whole idea that the earth revolved around the sun was once seen as apostasy, and one could be executed or excommunicated.

Once upon a time, everything and anything that was done by anyone had to be ad majorem dei gloriam -- for the greater glory of God. Scientists and philosophers were seen to be undermining God by providing worldly solutions, worldly explanations. Many tried to accommodate religion.

Free thinking was borne of the spirit that "I will follow the logical path wherever it leads me. If it leads to God, so be it. If it leads to my kitchen for a hamburger, so be it." The idea being, the thinker is not trying to prove any pre-conceived dogma, he is just following the scent of reason...

[grip_daddy]

Free thinking was borne of the spirit that "I will follow the logical path wherever it leads me. If it leads to God, so be it. If it leads to my kitchen for a hamburger, so be it."

Why would atheists insist therefore that religious thinkers are not free thinkers? I am a religious thinker out of rational thoughts...is it a slavery still?

[Type R]

Originally Posted by grip_daddy

Why would atheists insist therefore that religious thinkers are not free thinkers? I am a religious thinker out of rational thoughts...is it a slavery still?

An atheist by definition is not a free thinker, he has drawn his conclusion i.e. that there is no god.

An agnostic -- ie "I don't know whether god(s) exists or not" -- is the actual free thinker.

You must not be bound by any preconceived notions whether religious or secular. You must be free to draw any conclusion whatsoever. If one day, a massive superhuman footprint is found excavated by archaeologists in the Sahara, and someone says, "That's a bigger human than any dinosaur, it must have been God walking here" ... well then, if that's rational, so be it. A free thinker cannot block himself from any eventualities.

To answer your question, the moment you decide "I am religious" then you have closed the door. The door can't be open and closed at the same time. Make up your mind.

[al-zalzalah]

Originally Posted by ndigila

Why is it that majority of free thinkers, despite their diversity, share similar opinions about these issues? Why do many free thinkers don't have a problem with fornication in a country in which AIDS is a national disaster? Are these people really free?

freethinkers are not free, but not for the reasons that you give.
freethinkers think within limits, but those limits are mainly set further apart than those of us religious peoples.

it's kind of like a kid in a playpen. a freethinker has a bigger playpen in which to piga somersaults and build sandcastles, others have smaller playpens.

[grip_daddy]

Originally Posted by Type R

An agnostic -- ie "I don't know whether god(s) exists or not" -- is the actual free thinker.
.

I think that sounds so rational. But what are the agnostic positions about questions raised by Ndigila? Questions such as abortion, homosexuality, etc. What rationality do they employ in defending any position they take? Wouldn't taking one approach limit the possibility of seeing it from the other side of the coin?

[Type R]

Originally Posted by grip_daddy

I think that sounds so rational. ... Questions such as abortion, homosexuality, etc. What rationality do they employ in defending any position they take? Wouldn't taking one approach limit the possibility of seeing it from the other side of the coin?

Ndigila's problem is that of morality without God. I have indicated before that morality - ie a social standard of behaviour - does not need religion. Animals are pretty moral within their own groupings - lephants, lions, etc, they take care of their families and do not abuse children, elderly.

"God" was appended to morality and made to seem as its essence. Morality preceded the concept of "god". Man has to live in society, and there must be rules.

"Morality" is a fiction, it should be "moralities" ... plural!!! For example, in Maasailand, a young man can just plant a spear in front of his brother's hut and ravish his sister-in-law. Imagine trying that out in Buru Buru, or Los Angeles!!!

Originally Posted by grip_daddy

... But what are the agnostic positions about questions raised by Ndigila? ...

"There is no right or wrong; only thinking makes it so." - William Shakespeare

"To god all things are right and good, only to man some things are and some things are not." - Heraclitus