“The closest relative of the chimp is the human. Not orangs, but people. Us. Chimps and humans are nearer kin than are chimps and gorillas or any other kinds of apes not of the same species.” -Carl Sagan
The problem with “free thinking” is that it is neither free, nor thinking.
“Free thinkers” are bound by their faith in naturalism: the view of the world that takes account only of natural elements and forces, excluding the supernatural or spiritual. They are not free to imagine things. They are bound to a world of the five senses. To them the mind is but a machine and man is but a clothed ape. (Or in Carl Sagan’s case, a clothed chimp.) His thoughts, therefore, cannot be exciting or innovative. The product of his way of thinking would leave no room for someone to even be cognizant that he can think.
These “free thinkers,” bound in their prison, demand we be bound as well. They do not let us have the freedom of thought to imagine a wonderful world. This prohibition on thought then leads to the prohibition on speech. No wonder it is the “free thinkers” of America that are trying to do away with Christmas and any public recognition of God.
When you start with the religion of naturalism, you lose a sense of wonder in the universe. When you lose that sense of wonder, you lose a sense of purpose in life. Lives without purpose are hopeless and miserable.
The train of thought of “Free thinkers” leads to the death of reason. Their thoughts start with naturalism, lead to a godless cosmos, and end with no reason to even think.
G.K. Chesterton stated in Orthodoxy that “The man who begins to think without proper first principles goes mad.” “Free thinkers” are simply not free to think. They simply go mad.*
*By going “mad” I do not mean they are incapable of using their mental faculties. The inability to use ones mental faculties to interact with reality is simply the final stage of madness. But, looking at websites like this, it becomes plain to see the madness process at work. “Free thinkers” believe they do not believe in beliefs. Their madness even compels them to write articles with the belief that we will be able to understand the words they use to compel us not to believe in beliefs. Which begs the question: Why should we believe them?