That's correct. But the point is, Congress was empowered to promote science. Therefore, the other poster's claim that "science is a religion" was not shared by the Founders. Your attempt to read more into my words is an act of deceit, IMO.
You claim that you can't possibly be arguing that Clause 8 grants to Congress virtually unlimited powers to promote science, yet you continue to refer back to the clause with the fascination of a mouse transfixed by a snake.
The other poster claimed "science is a religion" - I.8.8. is my evidence against that assertion. I need to keep referring to it as part of my argument to counter your dishonesty.
Likewise you admit that the Feds have no power to fund or regulate education, yet you suggest that I am ducking the "challenge" of an issue you have already conceded.
Your postings have given me doubts about your truthfulness. I was hoping to see whether you held a principled view of I.8.3. IOW, it was a character test.
The point is, Congress is empowered by the Constitution to issue copyrights and patents. The issue is the protection of property rights, that being how Congress is to “promote” science and the useful arts. Apparently, your hubris won’t permit you to admit that your contrary assertion is contextually absurd. If your misbegotten logic were pursued, we would have to conclude that Congress is forbidden to grant copyrights for the materials of religious authors or associations because that would “promote” religion.
”The other poster claimed "science is a religion" - I.8.8. is my evidence against that assertion.”
Your “evidence” is a joke. The “other poster” made a logical assertion. Let him defend the logic of his assertion, and you criticize the logic of his assertion. Or, there are establishment cases you can cite. Both avenues are arguable, but to cite a constitutional clause protecting the right to private property by enumerating a Congressional power to grant patents and copyrights is so bizarrely irrational that it misses the mark by an intergalactic distance. It would be useless, I suppose, to refer to Jefferson’s observation that we are all imperiled when we try to make of the Constitution a blank slate. Your frenzied sense of invincible virtue would not permit you to see the truth of his point, or to admit to it if you did.
”Your postings have given me doubts about your truthfulness.”
”Treason!” cried the king. “Blasphemy!” shouted the mufti. “Unprincipled Liar!” snarled the Master of the Universe. Does your superiorist attitude go so far that you assume your word is undoubted, and that any dissent can only be explained out of wickedness? Do you think your bullying can impose silence by the sheer force of your personality? Bring paper, pencil, and a timer, if you wish to administer a test. See who answers the bell and acknowledges your authority to give it.