Churches and Sunday schools" should be helped to "uproot, and thus destroy the most prosperous parasite that spreads throughout the world, the tree of the knowledge of good and evil." – G. Brock Chisholm -Cofounder of the World Federation for Mental Health.
You could ask me, how is it that this forceful phrase of such a dark character has something to do with freedom of thought? Perhaps some suspicion can be glimpsed of its relationship with religious freedom, but its relationship with freedom of thought appears more distant, for which I will try to convey the link between both freedoms with such a nefarious and presumptuous phrase.
I take it for granted that we understand that the human being is not a descendant of the monkey, since from the end of the last century it has been proven that Darwin's hypothesis is very far from explaining how we come from the monkey to the human being.
However, it is inevitable and obvious to observe, that the differences prevent the assimilation of animals with human beings. After all, life got here as a function of cooperation and not competition, and there is no evolutionary possibility that a primary monkey would develop in the short time (geological) of 7 million years to become a modern human. On the other hand, the Cro Magnon Man with 200,000 years of existence, extinguished the Neanderthal that had already reached its 7 millionth birthday.
And one would also have to criticize the creativity of some mesonychia – an extinct order of ungulate placental mammals, with a carnivorous diet, closely related to artiodactyls and cetaceans – that at one time during about 10 million years ago decided to take a bath and just like that, was transformed into a whale. That was about 50 million years ago.
It can be seen that these "scientific" thoughts are absolutely loaded with beliefs that, when it comes to religion, are furiously labeled as primitive. On the contrary, if I am pompously dictated by "authorities" (or more diplomatically, scientists), they become established as irrefutable truths.
Freedom of religion includes the freedom to "not believe." And on the reality level, I approve of this concept. However, at the level of authenticity, deeper than reality and what sustains it, we find a decision, not covered by anything other than the self-determinism given by freedom of thought. I believe or I do not believe. I postulate my reality from the point of view of my freedom. In short, we all make use of believing what seems good to us.
Have you seen any monkey or elephant or giraffe believe anything? Has anyone ever seen something like this? He does not believe the one who wants, but the one who has the ability to decide something independently of what is right or wrong. This is a quality of the person and not of an animal body. It is an innate quality of the being that a human being inhabits, since it is in the only one that this condition can be observed. Therefore, the condition of freedom is not a condition of the little animal, but of the being, and it is inevitably located before it decides to believe or not to believe. Thus, the decision not to believe emanates from the "basic essence," whatever it may be. Believing or not believing is subsequent to the consciousness of freedom, and this condition or state of being is on a supra-material level.
"Freedom of thought is a precondition for believing or not believing and that condition is spiritual in nature"
Consequently, the possibility of not believing is of a spiritual nature and that is the realm of religions, and not one of scientific logic. The fact that someone does not believe in this assertion is a right of his freedom, which in principle I defend.
Now, if freedom is the basic condition of a BEING, what does it mean that someone wants to abolish our freedom of decision between good and evil? It is simply that he wants to reduce us to the condition of mere animals. You know that animals are very useful to carry weights, serve as food, and in the best of cases, to go to war.
What I cannot defend is a freedom that tends to reduce people's freedom, by equating them with basic biological mechanisms. The proposition of "uprooting ... the knowledge of good and evil" is nothing more than an insidious and ill-intentioned will tending to transform the human being into a utilitarian, servile and domesticable beast.
The activity of control by some over others seems to be justified in that some are "better" than others, or more capable. All this, currently, is reconstructed from the end of the 18th century with the appearance of the concepts that suppress the spiritual condition of the human being.
There has always been evidence of methodologies to produce submission of many to the designs and convenience of some. The late S18 renamed it with the abolition of the existence of the human soul and the definition of the human as a stimulus-response system, which must be limited in its animal instincts normally through punishment.
Already in the 20th century, the idea is the modification of thought through chemistry, introducing into human metabolism substances that do not exist in its nature. Thus, that original freedom is subjected to the action of a combined mineral that foreignizes the human being from its essence. It anesthetizes him. It submits him to self-forgetfulness and transforms him into a zombie, a variant of the "living dead," into "the living almost dead."
If anyone looks dispassionately at what has been said so far, investigates or delves a little bit about some data that has been leaked, he will see that they are simple observations, which are not simply untrue.
“The freedom of an individual depends on the freedom of that individual to alter his considerations of space, energy, time and ways of life, and the roles that he plays in it. If he cannot change his mind about these, then he is immobilized and enslaved between barriers like the physical universe and between barriers that he has created himself. Thus, Man is enslaved by barriers that he himself has created ” – L. RON Hubbard, The Creation of Human Ability
Don't let anyone destroy your consideration of what is right and what is wrong. That would be one more step in the personal and general downward spiral of the entire human race. On the contrary, if you elevate your self-determinism, free from the considerations of others and responsible for their consequences, you will elevate your condition and that of all humanity to where the stars are the limit.
President Church of Scientology of Argentina