In today’s On the Square , Wesley J. Smith wants you to know that he is not anti-science, despite what his critics might claim . Quite the contrary, in fact. He’s pro-science, but also pro-ethics:
Debate adversaries are called “anti-science” most commonly during intense disagreements about the proper ethical parameters to establish over controversial areas of scientific inquiry. For example, the embryonic stem cell research (ESCR) debate isn’t primarily about stem cell science. Rather, the controversy surrounds the ethical propriety of destroying human embryos as if they were no more important than a corn crop. Throw the potential for developing non-contentious stem cell alternatives into the discussion—such as adult stem cells—and you have a real policy donnybrook.
Read the rest here . If you’re already reading Smith’s blog over at National Review Online and would like to read some other intelligent writing on science and ethics, I suggest checking out The New Atlantis (here’s a symposium on embryos and another issue dedicated to stem cell research .)
And if you, like me, are not quite Irish enough to know the word “donnybrook,” Merriam-Webster is here to help .
You have a decision to make: double or nothing.
For this week only, a generous supporter has offered to fully match all new and increased donations to First Things up to $60,000.
In other words, your gift of $50 unlocks $100 for First Things, your gift of $100 unlocks $200, and so on, up to a total of $120,000. But if you don’t give, nothing.
So what will it be, dear reader: double, or nothing?
Make your year-end gift go twice as far for First Things by giving now.
