Support First Things by turning your adblocker off or by making a  donation. Thanks!

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 .

Dear Reader,

Your charitable support for First Things is urgently needed before July 1.

First Things is a proudly reader-supported enterprise. The gifts of readers like you— often of $50, $100, or $250—make articles like the one you just read possible.

This Spring Campaign—one of our two annual reader giving drives—comes at a pivotal season for America and the church. With your support, many more people will turn to First Things for thoughtful religious perspectives on pressing issues of politics, culture, and public life.

All thanks to you. Will you answer the call?

Make My Gift

Comments are visible to subscribers only. Log in or subscribe to join the conversation.



Filter First Thoughts Posts

Related Articles