A lot of atheists think it does. However, they're wrong. They've been sold a nonsense story from modern secular historians. Everyone should do themselves a favor and read this book (or try to, I'm not sure if I wasn't in the mood because alot of other stuff was going on, or if it was dry).
The Discoverers - Wikipedia
It's about how the Judeo-Christian world, but more specifically the reformed Jewish and the Christians created much of this modern world. Sorry Muslims, you didn't make all this.
Now, why would we think otherwise? Because we are sold this story about Galileo or Copernicus (these twits are too similar) getting condemned by the church because he tried to sell ppl on heliocentric theory. "See? See? Religion is anti-science!" Uhhh no, I don't see. What I do see is that this guy tried to quibble with the church over their own dogma, then went out of his way to play the martyr for it. It's one thing to quietly assert that perhaps the Earth is round or perhaps it revolves around the sun among the scientific community (which at the time was working with the church because of the scholastic movement), it's quite another to call the church out on it's own theology. Since atheists have no sense of equivalency, I'll try to explain. Rhis would be like C.S. Lewis, if he were around with Dawkins basically coming to his place and publicly shouting "Look! Look! This proves God exists!" with a bunch of atheists around. That's how you publicly shame people. And usually how you die. In fact, the Pope supported Copernicus's astronomical reforms.
Christian History Timeline: Christianity and the Scientific Revolution | Christian History Magazine
This theory that religion somehow opposed science is calked the "warfare theory" and originated in the French Revolution as a way to discredit Catholic Church. Too bad it's nonsense.
The Christian Face of the Scientific Revolution: Christian History Interview - Natural Adversaries?
In fact, the only religions to have nearly our technological strides for their era was Taoism and maybe the Egyptian/Roman religion. China (and Japan) as a result of alchemy, mostly from emperors seeking elixirs of immortality, produced a great number of side advances, like crude seismic devices and gunpowder. The Egyptian/Roman religion like created advances in architecture and the latter had created so. However, there are limits. Taoism for instance believed that an ideal life is less suited for labor-saving devices, and that an ideal state has people live contentedly in villages and never wander to another country ( proof that China has lost the Tao, right now) even though the land is close enough that one can "hear the cock crow". And the two pagan religions for the most part were advancing mainly due to their state rather than because anything was intrinsically geared to the study of science.
Christianity, on the other hand, was involved in a deity that created things, and was curious about the natural world, having none of old Judaism's hangups with "tradition." Lacking a strong teaching about mitzvahs , Christian people instead focused on knowing God and his creation, and there was a strong mentality that people become "co-creators." But while Christianity specifically saw science as a means to understand God better, they have in recent times put the brakes on UNETHICAL science. Cloning people in a laboratory, harvesting little children for organs, making nukes (or worse)? I don't think these are ways we should use science.
For the sake of other readers (it will be like water off a duck's back to you, I realise) I will now give my usual short speech on this tosh of yours:-
