The Title "Freethinker" is Generally A Lie

I have to apologize to everyone, yesterday was a hard at work and I spent most of last night mucking around in the mire that is an atheist dominated comment thread to see if I could come up with any new angle on the delusion that is and pervades atheism.   Not much new, just points to reconsider.

In short, atheists are pretty much the same thing as materialists, some in its old fashioned expression, some under its new names "phyicalism" "naturalism" which are the same thing as the old materialism trying to pretend that physics and logic didn't pretty much blow materialism out of the water about ninety years ago.  They pretend not to have known that or not that their "physicalism" and "naturalism" is identical to old fashioned materialism with a tiny twist in its statement to ignore that it has been refuted.

And they don't seem to understand that materialism means, in the words of one of their man-gods, Carl Sagan, that "The Cosmos is all that is or was or ever will be."   That "Cosmos"  being that material universe, the objects in the universe moving, combining and breaking apart, according to fixed rules of nature.   Though the materialists online seldom can even express that much knowledge of their faith, theirs is a radically monist system, as Sagan put it, it's all there is.  There is nothing outside of that system ruled by causation, in which one thing causes another, according to fixed law.  As mentioned the other day, that such people have gotten away with calling themselves "freethinkers" is them claiming a concept which their faith refutes and branding themselves with it.  Their thoughts are merely The Cosmos sending their materialist brains through their predetermined destiny to produce ideas that the materialist had no role in producing, before those brains die and fall apart into their constituent molecules which may go on to be consumed by a future Pentacostalist snake handler or strychnine drinker or even some more fitting example of degraded humanity like a cabloid TV pundit like Penn Jillette or Ann Coulter.  The very same molecules that produced the thinking of the greatest of scientists can go on to produce the, uh, thinking of  al Qaeda or the producers of Honey Boo Boo.   And the materialist can't explain how those molecules went wrong, in the process.  They can't even explain why one is right and the others are wrong.

To put it plainly, materialism means that any idea is merely the correct working out of physical laws working on whatever material is randomly present at the time the idea was produced.   According to materialism, no idea can be anything but the right result, since the laws of nature are invariably correct.   Which, as I've also pointed out before, idealism, realism, romanticism, Calvinism, Shintoism, Snake handling Pentacostalism, are all the right results of brain chemistry as much so as what goes on in the brains of Sean Carroll, Daniel Dennett, Larry Krauss, etc. There is no materialist explanation of how one idea can be preferable to any other idea, to do that you would have to explain what laws of nature failed in the production of those ideas.  The thinking of Bill Nye has the same value as that of Ken Hamm under a strict interpretation of materialism and, as I pointed out, as a monist system, a uniformly strict interpretation is all that is allowable under the very definition of materialism is all that it permits.

The name "freethinker" can only be applied to materialists through a lie, the claim to that name shows either a complete lack of understanding of materialism by materialists or it show a complete lack of honesty among materialists.  Since morality is, similarly, demoted to a delusion under materialism, they don't believe it's wrong to tell a lie,  a lie is merely what the randomly available molecules produced under the ambient and appropriate laws of nature that produced the lie.  You'd have to show what was wrong with the laws of nature to assert that a lie was wrong,  that is within the materialist system, and the laws of nature can't be wrong under that.   You have to believe in moral absolutes to explain why a lie is wrong and those can only exist outside of that kind of a monist system.

Either the "freethinker" is lying about being a free thinker or they are lying about having thought about it.   As they want to force everyone else into about the most rigid form of thought that dictates to everyone what they can possibly think WHILE EXEMPTING THEIR OWN THOUGHT FROM THEIR OWN SYSTEM, the word "free" would seem to mean some are more free to make up their minds than others, and they are the chosen ones to do that.