Replies

Just think of all the sciences that might be "ruled out" under a theocratic rule...Sorry, I choose not to live under such a system.

1. Name me a Christian or other Creationist of any consequence who has proposed that we change over to a theocracy.

2. Failing that, Name me a Christian or other Creationist of any consequence who has proposed that we ban the lines of scientific inquiry you've named, or anything related to them. (Note that stuff like banning cloning doesn't count, because that has as little to do with opposing science as deciding not to test hypothermia treatments with Jewish subjects does.)

3. If you can even provide an example that qualifies for item 1 and/or 2, provide evidence that any significant number of Christians, Creationists or voters of any stripe supported them or took them seriously.

Now that we've disposed of the theocracy boogeyman, are you supporting the idea that a main goal of scientists should be to eliminate religion?

1. Name me a Christian or other Creationist of any consequence who has proposed that we change over to a theocracy.
2. Failing that, Name me a Christian or other Creationist of any consequence who has proposed that we ban the lines of scientific inquiry you've named, or anything related to them. (Note that stuff like banning cloning doesn't count, because that has as little to do with opposing science as deciding not to test hypothermia treatments with Jewish subjects does.)

Here is a very good example of religion superseding science. The Creation Research Society has the following on their website:

The Creation Research Society is a professional organization of trained scientists and interested laypersons who are firmly committed to scientific special creation. The Society was organized in 1963 by a committee of ten like-minded scientists, and has grown into an organization with an international membership.

CRS Statement of Belief
All members must subscribe to the following statement of belief:

1. The Bible is the written Word of God, and because it is inspired throughout, all its assertions are historically and scientifically true in the original autographs. To the student of nature this means that the account of origins in Genesis is a factual presentation of simple historical truths.
2. All basic types of living things, including man, were made by direct creative acts of God during the Creation Week described in Genesis. Whatever biological changes have occurred since Creation Week have accomplished only changes within the original created kinds.
3. The great flood described in Genesis, commonly referred to as the Noachian Flood, was an historic event worldwide in its extent and effect.
4. We are an organization of Christian men and women of science who accept Jesus Christ as our Lord and Savior. The account of the special creation of Adam and Eve as one man and one woman and their subsequent fall into sin is the basis for our belief in the necessity of a Savior for all mankind. Therefore, salvation can come only through accepting Jesus Christ as our Savior.

Does this sound like science to you?

What do you think these folks would do if they suddenly achieved political power?

Which sciences suddenly would be "discouraged" or to use a phrase from the article we are discussing, "ruled out?"

I think my point stands.