[bovermyer]

Not sure why people are down-voting this.

While theocracy is a clear and present danger, "modern" is too broad a label to apply as a counter to it.

The more accurate counter would be policy based on empiricism. This is not predicated on the idea that the progression of time advances all things, but rather a timeless philosophy that has had its peaks and troughs throughout history.

[computerfriend]

It's because it's not accurate. The above comment was framing the argument, not making the argument. There wasn't an implicit value judgement. Someone else is free to argue that an oppressive 7th century religion is better or worse than modern times within that frame. Or argue (like you have done) that it's an inadequate framing.