So about that "narrow" ruling

[Ultonius]

I'm not sure...they actually don't frown on the use of technology, they're just forbidden to own it. They can (and do) use cell phones, cars, and computers when they need to...so that's kind of an implied acceptance of the stuff.

Doesn't mean they encourage the pursuit of scientific knowledge.

Edit - nevermind, you're right. I had to sit and think about it for a moment. If you want to work with science and technology, you have to leave the church.

I think it depends upon how you define 'science and technology'. All but perhaps a few very conservative Amish groups use diesel or petrol engines for various purposes, and more progressive groups use them to power electrical generators, and/or for quite sophisticated pneumatic and hydraulic machinery. The progressive groups also often use inverters to provide power to 110-volt devices from 12-volt batteries. Working with these technologies presumably gives them at least a basic and empirical understanding of how electricity and fluids like air and hydraulic fluid behave.

[Borgholio]

There is no reason for a professor to profess his belief to the class though.

Why should he not? In fact, I could argue that saying to the class, "It's ok to believe in God and still be a successful scientist. You don't have to give up your faith to advance the state of human knowledge." is a REALLY good thing in this day in age, when you have fundies going so far as to think evolution is fake and vaccines do more harm than good.

How would you feel if a science teach professed in front of his class that he believes that real psychics exist?

Depends on the class. If it was a class based on human neuroscience, I'd think that the discussion of "mental powers" deserves at least some classroom time since the human brain still remains a bit of a mystery to us. If it was a class on solar evolution or a nuclear engineering class, I'd question what relevance his statement had to the topic at hand.

[Borgholio]

I think it depends upon how you define 'science and technology'. All but perhaps a few very conservative Amish groups use diesel or petrol engines for various purposes, and more progressive groups use them to power electrical generators, and/or for quite sophisticated pneumatic and hydraulic machinery. The progressive groups also often use inverters to provide power to 110-volt devices from 12-volt batteries. Working with these technologies presumably gives them at least a basic and empirical understanding of how electricity and fluids like air and hydraulic fluid behave.

Yeah it's a bit of a grey area in that regard. I interpreted Zod's comment to mean that while the religion of the Amish doesn't forbid the use of technology, you don't find the Amish adhering to their faith while working at a medical research lab or as an aerospace engineer. They use what we have but they don't try to further the knowledge themselves.

[General Zod]

Why should he not? In fact, I could argue that saying to the class, "It's ok to believe in God and still be a successful scientist. You don't have to give up your faith to advance the state of human knowledge." is a REALLY good thing in this day in age, when you have fundies going so far as to think evolution is fake and vaccines do more harm than good.

Whenever teachers brought up their religion or political beliefs in a completely irrelevant class I couldn't help but cringe a little. Even if they were beliefs I technically agreed with it.

Yeah it's a bit of a grey area in that regard. I interpreted Zod's comment to mean that while the religion of the Amish doesn't forbid the use of technology, you don't find the Amish adhering to their faith while working at a medical research lab or as an aerospace engineer. They use what we have but they don't try to further the knowledge themselves.

That's pretty much what I meant. The Amish don't mind making use of something that's there but they aren't going to make it a point to start encouraging their fellow Amish to study it or advance it at all.

[xthetenth]

If I remember right they consider whether new technologies will or will not improve their community and spiritual life. There's not much real drive to innovate because there's a sense of contentment. The people who are there want that life.

[Ultonius]

If I remember right they consider whether new technologies will or will not improve their community and spiritual life. There's not much real drive to innovate because there's a sense of contentment. The people who are there want that life.

That's true to a degree, though within the limitations set by their church's Ordnung, there is scope for innovation by creative minds. Donald Kraybill and Steven Nolt, in their article 'The Rise of Microenterprises', in 'The Amish Struggle with Modernity', edited by Kraybill and Marc Olshan, write of the Lancaster county Amish settlement that

Without higher education Amish teens cannot aspire to becoming surgeons, professors, pilots, lawyers, or play hundreds of other occupational roles that demand professional training. This means that the brightest and best, the cream of the crop as the Amish would say, will likely enter business as it is the only viable alternative to farming. There are of course talented farmers in Amish circles, but with opportunities for farming shrinking, many of those looking for a challenge often find it in business. To put it another way, those in mainstream society who end up in professions will, in Amish society, likely try their hand at business. Business involvements provide a window of opportunity for those who are otherwise blocked from mainstream occupations by the constraints of Amish culture.

To keep this post at least partially related to the OP , I'll note that even if the ruling had gone against Hobby Lobby et al, most Amish businesses would have been unaffected, since only businesses with fifty or more full-time employees are required to provide health insurance to them and it's rare for an Amish business to employ more than a dozen or so.