That's not my standard, it's Coyoteman's. I asked you the same question I asked him about it (to the letter) because you were advancing the same position as him, though admittedly without the raging paranoia. Here's his list of banned disciplines from the thread I referenced earlier:
With the exception of radiometric dating, everything on that list is a very broad discipline, some of them (such as astronomy) so broad you couldn't get any broader. He says they'll be banned and that it's plain to see from the current positions of leaders in Christian circles. What say you?
Coyoteman's exact words were:
Just think of all the sciences that might be "ruled out" under a theocratic rule:
And I agree.
I'm sure, for example, that archaeology, astronomy, biology, genetics, geology, paleontology, and radiometric dating weren't very popular under the Taliban.
Take any holy book from The Big Three literally and you've got a helluva problem.
What scientific disciplines has the 700 club tried to eliminate?
While they haven't attempted to 'eliminate' any specific discipline, they - let's go with an example everyone can recognize - want to force Creationism (oops, "Intelligent Design") into public schools and/or restrict the teaching of evolution.
Further: I was using the 700 Club's ratings as an example of how popular the anti-science segment of the US population is.
I don't watch, so I may have missed the "call your Congressman and ban metallurgy" campaign.
You should. It's great entertainment.
Your ethical problems DO NOT dictate what a scientist can do. This is an example of theocracy. If you don't like that research, don't engage in it.
Let's see if that holds up, shall we?
Scientist A, Scientist B, Scientist C, and Scientist D are violating the rights of other people.
Scientist E... that's a harder case. Animals rights are a problem.
It is a valid point. How in the world can you claim that Galileo has no relevance to today when you just brought up stem cell research? Woo!
The objection raised to embryonic stem cell research is that it kills a human life.
Oy. Not touching that one.
Either you're arguing that an experiment that kills humans is fine or you're setting up a straw man here, claiming that Christians oppose science when no such thing is true.
Dover, man. That's all I've got to say.
You mean they flourished under Lenin, Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao, Kim Jung Il?
While they haven't attempted to 'eliminate' any specific discipline, they - let's go with an example everyone can recognize - want to force Creationism (oops, "Intelligent Design") into public schools and/or restrict the teaching of evolution.
So by your own admission, they haven't tried to impose that dominionist theocracy on everyone. Creation was taught in schools for centuries with no deleterious impact on education. Christian schools which do teach both, outperform public schools. Homeschoolers, who are often very conservative Christians, teach both as well and they do even better than the private schools in educating and graduating their students. There is no precedent set that indicates that teaching creation/ID is going to result in more poorly educated students in the sciences. The statistics do not bear it out.
Further: I was using the 700 Club's ratings as an example of how popular the anti-science segment of the US population is.
Why do you assume that the viewership of the 700 club is inherently *anti-science*? (And evos are complaining about made up labels?) Sources?
Mr.S The objection raised to embryonic stem cell research is that it kills a human life.
CE: Oy. Not touching that one.
Don't you believe that a human embryo is a human being?