If you look at the purported dangers of salt or fat there is no consensus of support in scientific literature. So I would ask first: 'Is it possible to have an informed government that actually follows the science?' From what I've seen it's not likely.

The assumption that nature is all there is and that nature has been governed by the same rules at all times and places makes it possible for natural science to be confident that it can explain such things as how life began.

Sound science must be a basis to governing our trade relations around the globe.

As I have tried to show science in producing the airplane and the wireless has created a new international political environment to which governments must adjust their foreign policies.

Modem science then maintains on the one hand that nature both organic and inorganic strives towards a state of order and that man's actions are governed by the same tendency.

The universe is governed by science. But science tells us that we can't solve the equations directly in the abstract.

Every science has for its basis a system of principles as fixed and unalterable as those by which the universe is regulated and governed. Man cannot make principles he can only discover them.

Besides the healthcare bill being unconstitutional and a great expansion of federal government I think if it does not respect people's individual religious views and makes groups or individuals do things that are contrary to their deeply held beliefs there is going to be a visceral negative reaction.

The government would be able to go to court with respect to newspaper articles broadcast pieces and the like that they thought were bad or harmful or even against the government and try to block them.

My government will respect the will of the people.