All Comments for: In Over His Pay Grade | Christianity Today

Free Newsletters:

RSS Feeds |

Audio |

Twitter

Home > 2009 > May

Christianity Today, May, 2009 |

Throwing Inkwells

In Over His Pay Grade

When science is made 'apolitical' and 'unencumbered by religion,' it's usually to hyper-politicize and hyper-sacralize it.

Mollie Ziegler Hemingway | posted 3/23/2009 10:49AM

Only 53 percent of adults know how long it takes the earth to revolve around the sun, a national survey commissioned by the California Academy of Sciences showed. That's sad, if not surprising. But former ...

[Reader Reviews]

Average User Rating:

Rate and Comment on this article

Displaying 1 - 25 of 34 comments.

Page: 1 2

Show All

I am Human

Posted: April 02, 2009 8:52 PM

Here's the deal. The question is simply: What does it mean to be human? As Christians, the starting place is the "imago dei" or that we are created in the image of God. And if we ask what this means, you could get any number of responses. We are creative. We are self-reflective. We can imagine the future. We can disobey our instincts. We can love. And whatever we conclude, we then have to ask: What if we have lost (or not yet developed) those capacities...Is it still meaningful to call us human? When does humanity begin, and when does it end? Does a vegetative mind in a beating heart constitute humanity? Should an embryo be considered "imago dei". If not, then all this is much ado about nothing. If so, then we need a better answer to the first question. You can read my answer here: duodigest.blogspot.com

Jorge

Posted: March 31, 2009 5:06 PM

The article is right in its description of true scientific, ideological and moral views. As somebody involved in the scientific-technological sector, I regret the growing influence of ideology and personal dogmas in representatives of scientific corporations, as well as in politicians. And right to life of human beings is a basic, far reaching issue. There is a sinergy between different human rights violations. It is contradictory to dismiss this serious issue because there are other serious issues.

Dena	Posted: March 30, 2009 6:32 PM


Sounds like Barack and Bill need to re-take high school biology- man, this is pretty stupid and dangerous. Let's praythat these dudes get a clue before they goof something else up. they wouldn't know the truth if it bit them on the nose! hey guys, go to www.embryonicstemcellresearch/ maybe these guys will figure it out after two or three li nes includin g the DEFINITION OF EMBRYONIC!

Martha

Posted: March 29, 2009 9:16 AM

To Tracy - there are too many people side-stepping and soft-shoeing around this issues and labeleing themselves as Christians. According to God's 10 Commandments given to each and every person who is, was and ever will be .... thou SHALT NOT commit murder!!!! Anyone who condones murder is a murder.....plain and simple... and will be judged by God, and if you think this article dealt harshly with these people wait till they appear before God's throne, as we all will..... Anyone who 'stands in the middle' on this issue needs to do some deep soul-searching!!!!! I for one am thankful for persons who will come to the defense of the defenseless babies.

RT	Posted: March 28, 2009 9:13 AM


I believe the last folks to seperate religious morality from scientific progress were the Nazis...right before they went on that world tour. Eugenics anyone?

Tracy

Posted: March 26, 2009 10:47 PM


I have no comments on any of these issues at all. I just want to state, as a Christian I found your title extremely rude, condesending and unnecessary to bring your point across. I think you need to remmeber whose you claim to be and who you claim to serve. Stand out and be different.. No need to be rude to state your opinion or feelings, etc..

James Redford

Posted: March 26, 2009 8:32 PM

God has been proven to exist based upon the most reserved view of the known laws of physics. For much more on that, see Prof. Frank J. Tipler's below paper, which in addition to detailing the correct quantum gravity Theory of Everything (TOE) unifying all the forces in physics, demonstrates that the known laws of physics (i.e., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, general relativity, quantum mechanics, and the Standard Model of particle physics) require that the universe end in the Omega Point (the final cosmological singularity and state of infinite informational capacity identified as being God): F. J. Tipler, "The structure of the world from pure numbers," Reports on Progress in Physics, Vol. 68, No. 4 (April 2005), pp. 897-964. http://math.tulane.edu/~tipler/theoryofeverything.pdf Reports on Progress in Physics is the leading journal of the Institute of Physics, Britain's main professional body for physicists.

a Christian and a scientist

Posted: March 25, 2009 5:24 PM


I suppose the author couldn't address the issue at hand without an insulting title about Obama's qualifications?

homebuilding

Posted: March 24, 2009 5:32 PM

Oh, the persecution of so-called christians! So the press didn't treat Bush 43 fairly....did they treat our Christian President Jimmy Carter fairly when he gave us a 43 year headstart on energy conservation and the means to head off our constant state of oil wars...all done in the context of promoting human rights around the world? (Do christians continue to criticize and demean him just because RushBo says you should?) Totally aside from sexual escapades or misstatements regarding mammalian fertilization, I'd like other Christians to join me in pushing for basic medical care for ALL CITIZENS ! ! (No, I'll never buy the argument that even more profits in the pockets of drug companies and insurance providers is required to make us whole!)

robroy

Posted: March 24, 2009 4:54 PM

The issue is whether public national money should go for embryonic stem cell research for new embryoo lines. The reality is that millions of dollars of private money (and some states, too) have gone into it. The fact is that for all that research to date, embryonic stem cells have done miserably. They are rejection problems. They are unstable, either dying out or worse yet forming aggressive tumors. Only an idiot would put embryonic stem cells into their brain stem area because even small tumors there lead to ugly deaths. In contrast, somatic stem cells - those stem cells derived from fat or skin or bone marrow cells or from uterine cord blood have shown not only great promise but actual rubber meets the road progress. It is not surprising that private money is drying up for embryonic stem cells and somatic stem cell research is burgeoning. Go to the Christian Medical and Dental Association website and click on issues link for more info: www.cmda.org .

Craig Prest

Posted: March 24, 2009 3:39 PM

I guess we could also comment discuss the facts dealing with how most all political parties have the same guiding plan when you go higher up outside the 'party lines' and your are exercising a dynamic that is limited. But...this article seemed to deal with "science" having some kind of "moral" accountability. So, I would say "yes they should!" In my personal experience 40 years ago as a run away in the 60's I witnessed many bizzare things such as collaboration among "brilliant people" doing experiments in USA & Europe such as mixing & exchanging body parts of everykind of species imaginable, groups in Haight-Ashbury gathering secretly with Manson family members as a social experiment, private, now non-classified government projects of diff. kinds = show need for standards and moral accountability. The "End justifies the means" people (all parties) will go on, even leadus while we will have tried to retain a memory of sanity...My peace is that The Lord will have the final Word.

Abe	Posted: March 24, 2009 9:41 AM

This is just a bunch of straw man arguments totally irrelevant to the issue at hand. For example, the author notes that Clinton once confused the definition of “embryo” on TV—and then concludes his entire administration was as scientifically illiterate as Bush’s. Seriously? And what does this have to do with Obama's policy anyway? Then she mentions Ehrlich's prediction of mass starvation, decades ago. So because one scientist once got something wrong, we should never trust science in general? Yes, scientific hypotheses are not infallible--DUH. In fact, forming theories and then falsifying them is the WHOLE POINT of science, not an example of its inadequacy. Finally, the author discusses neuroscience and materialism, making the same two logical errors: 1. Equating cherry-picked anecdotes with the whole field of science, and 2. Using this unrelated issue to condemn Obama’s stem cell policy. This is the kind of sloppy rhetoric I expect from the AFA or James Dobson, not Christianity Today.

Mark	Posted: March 24, 2009 9:25 AM

This article brings up points the "thinkers" often seem not to think about. Science does not determine its own morality. Science itself is amoral (i.e., outside morality) in the sense that it is simply a system of understanding the physical universe, which is, in the minds of open-minded people, only one manifestation of reality amidst other possiblities. The egomania of some who seem to think that science is the end-all be-all is reminiscent of the arrogance of those throughout the Bible who wanted to be like God (but whose closet desire, perhaps even unknown to them, was to actually be God). Scientists are often not the best judges of whether or not what they're doing is moral since they may be influenced by the desire for grant money or fame. It is truly a shame that this issue gets politicized to the extent that it does, but that seems to be the order of the day.

Peter

Posted: March 24, 2009 8:48 AM


This is not a republican vs. democratic issue as Sean Baines would like to think. It is simply a question of right and wrong. I would like to think that the same article would be written whether a republican or a democrat held office.

SnickerHaHa

Posted: March 24, 2009 8:43 AM

Why is everyone picking on Clinton? So he doesn't dot all the i's or cross all the t's. He's a politician, not a scientist. And yet, I know of no republican that doesn't use the terms "sunrise" or "sunset" even though we all know that's not the case. Oh, that's right. Republicans still upset that Galileo proved that the sun, not the earth, is at the centre of the universe and that the sun doesn't rise or set. Snap! I guess that takes care of the Joshua myth.

Chris Demerais

Posted: March 24, 2009 8:36 AM

In response to Sean Baines, someone does not have to be willing to care for all those children in order to be against the taking of their life, thats like me asking you if you are against cancer and then saying to you that you can't be against cancer until your willing to find a cure for all the other diseases in the world. The question is not "if we are willing to care for them" the question is "what is the unborn?" Do you Sean, believe that unwanted children that are already in the world should be allowed to stay in the world? if so are you willing to care for all of them?

Dave	Posted: March 24, 2009 7:56 AM

I don't believe the argument is when the soul enters the fertilized egg. Rather, it is that these are human beings. They are, therefore they are beings. they are the products of human procreation therefore they are human. they are human beings. The moral question is whether it is right to destroy small human beings to alleviate the suffering of large human beings. Where does this end? One British scientist is already proposing using fetal organs for transplantation. Are we to raise children targeted for research and harvest?

Peter

Posted: March 24, 2009 7:55 AM


Religion tries to trump science????I think the road runs the other way LOL

Sean Baines

Posted: March 24, 2009 6:54 AM

Again, you pick and choose issues you like and dislike. You liked Bush so the things he stood for ,you like and since you don,t like Obama , you don.t like what he does. Typical of a Republican. Come on Nation Obama won and if he goes over the line God will take care of him.You are against abortion but refuse to look after these children after they are born. You Republicans have done more than anybody to put this Nation in dept over our head than any Democrat ( Reagan and Bush) and yet you call Democrats big spenders, Like I have said many times . You all are very religious but nit Christian.

N Johnson

Posted: March 24, 2009 6:20 AM

If fertilized embryos a few days after conception have souls and human rights, killing innocent embryos is intolerable. But do most opponents of stem cell research really believe this? Stem cells used in medical research generally come from fertility clinics, which produce more embryos than they can use. This isn't an accident. There are hundreds of thousand of embryo produced which are frozen or discarded. Why is the crusade again stem cell research and not against fertility clinics, which are by this logic death camps which also hold souls in some frozen purgatory? There is little effort to try to stop this or "adopt" these "souls" doomed to die. It is also estimated that in natural reproduction up to 50% of all fertilized eggs die and are lost (aborted) spontaneously. Are these all human souls? The scriptures value life and speak of God forming us in our mother's womb, but there is nothing addressing life beginning at conception. It wouldn't have made sense at the time.

Gregory Peterson

Posted: March 24, 2009 2:46 AM

The petulant, whiny hostility and self pity in this piece hardly becomes the magazine, though I've read it before in it's many attacks on Dr. Martin Luther King Jr, when he was alive...for starters. Hasn't this magazine ever learned anything? The writer doesn't know how science works. Hemingway cherry picks and distorting short pieces from the popular press to feed her sense of persecution, and to puff herself up as being the moral superior of my friends, relatives and colleagues in science. They know what morality is...and morality is something I seldom see in CT. I've read most every issue ever published. This is an excellent example. Who is a "materialist" anymore? With quantum mechanics, materialism hasn't made much sense, to me anyway. Scientists work fruitful theory, probabilities and margins of error. Hemingway is just indulging in shameless group slander, as materialism is associated with Marxism...and she must know it.

Christian Lawyer

Posted: March 23, 2009 10:23 PM

This diatribe against "Big Science," by the same author who wrote the incredibly condescending and misleading piece portraying a few over-the-line anti-Prop 8 protesters as emblematic of the entire gay marriage movement without, of course, noting extremists on her side, is just bizarre. It bears no factual relationship to what Pres. Obama actually did. He brought together religious leaders precisely because, as he said, there is a moral issue to consider. He asked world-renowned scientists and bioethicists at the Nat'l Institutes of Health to take first crack at drafting new guidelines which would permit, under certain circumstances, use of human embryos for research. The Pres. will review and possibly revise the draft. The author is entitled to oppose that, but broad support exists among many people of deeply held faith. Sure, science can go astray, but many scientists and bio-ethicists are people of faith. This is not abandonment of moral inquiry. It's facing the issue honestly.

jim a

Posted: March 23, 2009 9:50 PM

I hope you Obamabots who used to lurk here and promote your messiah are fully ashamed of yourselves. Jim Wallis and his communist liberation cronies who are clueless about the Truth of Christ managed to get elected the most demonically influenced president in American history. I still pray for him, but if BHO does not want Christ, then he has made his choice. He is not and never was a Christian. I pray he becomes one soon before the wrath of God is even more fully poured out on America.

Deborah Solomon

Posted: March 23, 2009 8:27 PM

March 23, 09 There are certain statements that people make that looking back they wish they were have chosen their words more wisely. I have certainly been in that place myself. There are multiplied millions of people in this nation that believe life begins at conception. That is because left to develop that group of cells will multiply and grow into a human being made in the image of God. There are many of us that believe in inspiring a respect for God given human life.

Andy Catsimanes

Posted: March 23, 2009 6:56 PM


It's a sad but natural development that the Bush administrations subordination of science to right-wing ideology will be "corrected" by those on the left who seek to elevate science as being beyond all value.

Page: 1 2

E-mail this page

Write CT

Print this article

Post a comment