No. Touch screens have come and gone. They have applications in niche environments, but for the most part, gorilla-arm syndrome is a problem that depends on physiology and not a technological issue. Anything requiring more than a highly menu-driven environment can be physically exhausting because it requires unnatural postures and shoulder/elbow/wrist tension. That's why the only major application in touchscreens has been point-of-sales clients; the touchscreen runs almost completely off the menu, until you need to punch in custom pricing on a screen-based numpad.
All that said, penmanship doesn't matter. When it comes to it, legibility is what matters, and when the ergonomics of cursive became irrelevant, so did the script. Unless your work involves transcribing mass tracts of text by hand, then there's simply no reason for it when it degrades legibility for comfort. Given that people can type insanely faster than they handwrite (I've yet to see someone scrawl out a passage at 80wpm, much less 100wpm), this is a fairly redundant exercise. It's simply not practical anymore, and given general literacy rates, if anything had to be hand-printed. Playing the apocalyptic endgame, wouldn't you want your hand-written notes resembling printed books for compatibility's sake, or are you fine with authoring another Voynich manuscript?
Let's face it; cursive was convenient for the transcriber. It's less legibile than blockprint and has fewer applications. It's been an unstated principle since the Gutenberg press. The only real reason for Luddism is obstinacy or ignorance; I can appreciate having the general knowledge still available, but if it isn't practical when better methods exist then there's no reason to keep beating your head into the wall over it.