Saturday, October 16, 2010

Is "freethinker" used as a "reserved word"?

     There is a blogger who names himself after a certain black sword. He seems to object to my belief that christians are not free thinkers. He appears to be under the mistaken impression that I consider "freethought" to be a reserved word that some people are not allowed to use. I do not so think.
     When I say that I don't think that christians can be freethinkers, it is simply a statement of fact. In fact, I will go further and say that christians do not consider freethought desirable. The only reason a christian would even want to call himself a freethinker is because the term has developed a positive connotation in today's society. The idea of "freethought" is simply that no thoughts are forbidden. As near as I can tell, christians do not agree with that. Instead, they believe their god polices thoughts and is right to do so. Certainly there are various people (and groups of people) that police thoughts. And there are many people who call themselves "freethinkers" who are nothing of the kind. Well, the word may have picked up some unnecessary emotional baggage. But the fact is that some people are using the word because they think it sounds good.

     Oh, yes, his most recent post, as I type this, reminds me of the line "don't like abortion? don't have one." It impresses me just as much -- which is not at all. I have no great love for either political party. But, let's face it, the Republicans are not the believers in small government that they pretend to be. Nor, as Stormbringer likes to pretend, do they hold their tongues when there is public advocacy for something they don't like. When there is a rally for something they oppose, they do not just "change the channel." Nor would I expect them to do so. If you do not speak out to oppose what you consider a bad idea, it is more likely to take root.

No comments: