The defining difference between Liberals and Conservative has often been proposed as the acceptance of science over liberty. One group would include a scientific reason for any proposal. Whether it be Global warming, wearing masks for all time, universal healthcare, wealth inequality, and identity politics, each may well be associated to a statistic, scientific study, authority of record, or cultural norm.
As we enter the holiday season, mandates have been set as to the size and place of our celebrations of love, thanks, appreciation, and fellowship. And these mandates are all made by scientific reasoning.
But where is the liberty of free choice? Why does science seem to overrule our own ability to determine for ourselves a personal response to risk? In 1966, a distinguished Canadian-born anthropologist Anthony Wallace confidently predicted the global demise of religion at the hands of an advancing science: ‘belief in supernatural powers is doomed to die out, all over the world, as a result of the increasing adequacy and diffusion of scientific knowledge. Science over the free exercise of faith was his prophesied result of our culture. Social sciences, either presuming or sometimes predicted all cultures would eventually converge on something roughly approximating secular, Western, liberal democracy.
If prediction is true, I want no part of it. Give me the liberty to make my own decisions. Yes, I will be accountable for my decisions, but I was created in the image of God. And with that image comes the possibility of joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, self-control. And all these things cannot be legislated against or demanded from anyone. Science does not provide any of these things. All science provides is despair, turmoil, cruelty, apathy, greed, and legislation.
Tell me what you think.