RE: Separation of Science and State
November 18, 2020 at 1:26 pm
(This post was last modified: November 18, 2020 at 1:44 pm by The Grand Nudger.)
It's not on account of not being able to criminalize thoughts. Thinking this is an example of the same ignorance that leaves us incapable of describing why a scientific religion is subject -and- leaves you incapable of describing why science should be.
Besides, we're told that hatecrime is only a step away from thoughtcrime. That making it criminal to say, for example, the hateful things you truly believe not only injures your right to speech, but criminalizes your state of being de jure or de facto.
There are no such protections for science. If you cannot do the research, you cannot do the science. If the science is illegal, or if it's distribution is illegal, you cannot talk about it. If you believe it, and the state is set against it, they have criminalized your state of being. Here, at least, there's parity. One place where believing in things for religious reasons and believing in things for scientific reasons actually is qualitatively equivalent.
One is specifically protected, the other is not. Religious beliefs sourced exclusively from science, however, would be. If what you're hoping to suggest, in questioning whether science entirely aside from religion should be subject to separation like religion - is to afford it greater protection and greater privilege and declare it a right - by all means, have at it. I'm pointing out that it aint in there.
More food for thought - I think that we can find and point out strange incongruencies in this, no matter what our position on a given issue may be, because the people who wrote our rights wrote about what they knew. They were familiar with religious oppression but they weren't familiar with the sci fi conundrums that modern daily life brings up. I think that laws written with that set of concerns in mind will be challenged by some future religion (just as religion has challenged them in the past) - our track record here isn't hopeful. We fail time and time again, here - and precisely because it surrounds a thing or things that unite us morally - for better and for worse.
Besides, we're told that hatecrime is only a step away from thoughtcrime. That making it criminal to say, for example, the hateful things you truly believe not only injures your right to speech, but criminalizes your state of being de jure or de facto.
There are no such protections for science. If you cannot do the research, you cannot do the science. If the science is illegal, or if it's distribution is illegal, you cannot talk about it. If you believe it, and the state is set against it, they have criminalized your state of being. Here, at least, there's parity. One place where believing in things for religious reasons and believing in things for scientific reasons actually is qualitatively equivalent.
One is specifically protected, the other is not. Religious beliefs sourced exclusively from science, however, would be. If what you're hoping to suggest, in questioning whether science entirely aside from religion should be subject to separation like religion - is to afford it greater protection and greater privilege and declare it a right - by all means, have at it. I'm pointing out that it aint in there.
More food for thought - I think that we can find and point out strange incongruencies in this, no matter what our position on a given issue may be, because the people who wrote our rights wrote about what they knew. They were familiar with religious oppression but they weren't familiar with the sci fi conundrums that modern daily life brings up. I think that laws written with that set of concerns in mind will be challenged by some future religion (just as religion has challenged them in the past) - our track record here isn't hopeful. We fail time and time again, here - and precisely because it surrounds a thing or things that unite us morally - for better and for worse.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
