And this coming from a guy who is not a teen.

You're blaming us for people who disagree with us not posting here? Since when do we have control over them? The fact is, most people who identify as 'freethinkers'(at least on this forum) are atheists and their views are reflected thus. Nothing is preventing anyone from posting their views here.

[quote=AgnosticAtheist1]You're blaming us for people who disagree with us not posting here? Since when do we have control over them? The fact is, most people who identify as 'freethinkers'(at least on this forum) are atheists and their views are reflected thus. Nothing is preventing anyone from posting their views here.[/quote]

I'm glad you added to your statement that most people who identify as "freethinkers" are atheists with"at least on this forum".
I used to be a member of a faithless/unreligious religion movement called "Universism"{which united freethinkers of all NON-THEIST stripes}-it's main members and contributers as well as it's founders were Deists and Atheists{the founder was a deist}.
Historically, when the term "freethinker" started to come largely into use here in the western world, it's funny because it was most often a term used and put forth by those in the deist movement.

Anyways, you're right nothing is preventing other non-theists and freethinkers{including liberal theists; often identified as "freethinkers" as well} from POSTING here.
My point is that this site seems to be in direct cahoots with Rational responders-whose main goal it seems IS to push Athiesm; also like I said, links here on the site itself{not just forum} and other info are heavily biased towards Atheism. The fact that one of the main links or essyas here is an essay tearing down agnosticism and trying to cal Agnostics in general essentially closet Atheists in denail, ir further proof of my accusation.

In Reason:
Icono

The definition of "freethinker" from thefreedictionary.com:

free·think·er
n.
One who has rejected authority and dogma, especially in religious thinking, in favor of rational inquiry and speculation.

liberal christians as freethinkers? That one gives me a chuckle. No, I'd definitely say that semi-free doesn't qualify as free. If you take any of your beliefs from a 'holy book' that pretty much prevents your thoughts from being entirely free.

[quote=KCahill][quote]Please read my last response above. There IS a subversive Atheist agenda in this sites set-up and links,promotions, and most favoured and promoted essays, etc.[/quote]

That might be because most freethinkers are atheists.[/quote]

Let me quote what Conner posted;

{Quote}The definition of "freethinker" from thefreedictionary.com:

free·think·er
n.
One who has rejected authority and dogma, especially in religious thinking, in favor of rational inquiry and speculation.
{Unquote}

This is the proper definition for "freethinker". Hence, Deists and Agnostics are ALSO "freethinkers"-and there is alot of us{more Agnostics than Deists; and many Deisst are unaware that they are Deists as they've never heard of the term- but many others have and label themselves as such}.
Both reject authority and dogma-in religoous thinking and otherwise; both are based on rational inquiry and speculation, just like Atheism{Deism and Atheism,however,unlile Agnosticism, takes a stronger belief or bias without FULL proof in one direction or the other; but all are "freethought".}

[quote=AgnosticAtheist1]liberal christians as freethinkers? That one gives me a chuckle. No, I'd definitely say that semi-free doesn't qualify as free. If you take any of your beliefs from a 'holy book' that pretty much prevents your thoughts from being entirely free.[/quote]

I think it depends on the "degree" of how liberal they are. Tecnhically, even a semi-liberal Christian is a freethinker in the sense that they do not accept certain doctrines moral or theological SIMPLY base don church tradition or authoriity, we could clal them semi-freethinkers or somewhat heretical and individualistic.
Now, lets take the VERY liberal christians whose beliefs about god or the divine are generally Pantheistic/PanenTheistic or Agnostic{I have a liberal christian friend whom is also into Paganism, and she is actually Agnostic in her beliefs}- these tend to be Christians in the sense that they are find great personal psychological and poetic inspiration in the person[or there are even some that would doubt the literal existence of the man historically but really are inspired by the myth}of Jesus -called Christ; they are like Laveyan/ and modern Satanists in the sense that just as Laveyan/modern Satabists use Satan as a symbolic psychological archetype for poetic inspiration, these liberal Christians utilize Jesus legend or myth{whiechevr it may be} of his teachings and lifestyle like the Laveyans/moderns do with Satan[as viwwe through Promethean lenses}. This is somewhat similar to somepone of a particular political or social frame of though finding great insoiration in a politcal or freethought person; take Marxists for example, viewed as a perceptive socio-political thinker worth emultaing and who's writings or sayings they see as worth building a socio-political philosophy upon. I had a friend whom is a Marxist, he used to consider himself outright 'communist" but saw Communism as to often misreading and corruptiny Marxes ideas; he is Marxist in the sens eof agreeing with Marxes dialectical materialism and the co-operative economics he suppoedly was trying to drive at.

If Liberal Christians of some degrees cannot be considered 'freethinlkers', than Athiests and Agnostics{and others} whom view Thomas Jefferson as a great freethinker{as he was; and most do see him as such}would not be a "freethinker", because Jefferson was a Deistic{and I believe "Unitarian"} Liberla Christian with some Agnostic qualities; he's even famous for disregarding the O.T. and miracles and revelation and so on and choppin up his Bible and creating the infamous "Jefferson Bible"{comprised basiclaly of Jesus philosophy and lifestyle}- Jefferson, widely recognized as a freethinker by todays freethinkers was a pre-cursor to modern liberal Christian thought.

Oddly enough, I;ve noticed that Liberal Christians tend to understand the Bible and the religion much clearer than fundies do; fundies take everything at face value; Liberals recognize the complexities of not JUST chapter/verse contexts, but also historical/etymological and semantical and linguistic and cultural{amongst others} contexts and that many things in the Bible were potetry and parable essentially; this is where the find their inspiration, and just ebcause many of us Non-theists and more material pbssed and hard sciences obsessed don't recgnize the value of social sciences to the same degre eor psycholigicla sciences{which includes things such as Jungs archetype and other poetic psychological things we as humans are naturally drawn to} as muchas they nor do we know and study all these contexts to the same depth as they do{and nor should we neccaserily be expected to; because then we'd have to do the same with every so-called inspirational religious text, and whom has time and energy for this? very few people-unless that is where their own personal interest lies; and this is where the Liberal Christians interests lie; so long as they recognize the importance of secularist,rationalist, and hard science theories and facts and ethics as well- AND ALL OF THEM DO, why not just let the buggers be? Better they reform human thought about such books and traditions into a more modern psycholigcal inspiration context of non-literality thaan demand they simply denounce it's validity to them? Hardcore atheist types tend to be uptoian thinkers in their wish to rid the world of such things; but many of us non-theists are also REALISTS and realize that this just aint gonna happen whetherw e want it to or not, but the boks and rleigions getting liberalized and re-intrpeteted through modern methods and lenses- that can and will happen- so long as we do not condemn them in their subversive efforts to rid the world of dangerous fundamentalism via the clever means of putting out the meme of liberalizing aeons old religious traditions- some fundamentalisst will be recahed this way-lessening in a utilitarian sense- the harm to the world, but hardcore Atheism tyring to make it all about Athiesm as the sole bearer of reason vs. the world at large as the bearers of unreason- this sort of thing will likely just lead to further oppression,persecutions,strife,war and death; it is in a sense-counter productive extremism.}\
I actually can't believe I'm saying this because until recently I was hardcore Anti-theistic{yes, I was an Anti-Theistic Deist, and I was not and am not the only one} whom opposed all form od faith{allthough not all forms of religion nessacerily; though most-yes}and spouted the same ideology as Harris and Dawkins and Anti-theisst ands strong Athiests,etc, though I was Deist in my intelleectual position; but now I have realized that HOLY CRAP! I was not beeing realistic nor was I seeing the various shades of grey, I wa slooking through the same dualistic leses as fundy monotheists and Fundy/Militant Athiests and Anti-theists. Wow, I've just hit a new level on the scale of enlightenment! Interesting.

Anyways, enough playing devils advocate now, and onto the next point.

[quote=AgnosticAtheist1]I just realized you completely avoided the teen question.[/quote]

No, I did'nt, I addressed it about 8 posts up, just below American Atheists one line post pointing it out to me.

In reason:
Icono