More from the Internets…
March 15th, 2009
It made me giggle when I stumbled across this article in the Wall Street Journal, beating down the New York Times; mostly this phenomenon is related to my glee when anyone pokes fun at the New York Times and their editors:
“Science Trumps Ideology, Except When It Doesn’t
On Tuesday the Times surprised no one by editorializing in favor of President Obama’s order liberalizing the regulations for federal funding of embryonic stem-cell research:
Mr. Obama also pledged on Monday to base his administration’s policy decisions on sound science, undistorted by politics or ideology. He ordered his science office to develop a plan for all government agencies to achieve that goal. Such a pledge should be unnecessary. Unfortunately, for eight years, former President George W. Bush did just the opposite. He chose scientific advisory committees based on ideology rather than expertise. His political appointees aggressively ignored, distorted or suppressed scientific findings to promote a political agenda or curry favor with big business.
The characterization of the stem-cell restrictions as a bow to “ideology” over science is inaccurate. The objections to the use of embryonic stem cells - agree with them or not - are ethical, not ideological, in character.
In any case, today, in an editorial on Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, the Times shows just how seriously it takes the commitment to science over ideology. The Times urges Salazar “not to forget the wolf”:
The Interior Department’s scientists say that wolf populations are healthy enough, and state protections strong enough, to take the animal off the endangered species list in Montana and Idaho. We do not share their confidence in the states. De-listing allows for some hunting, and hunters in both places are itching to start firing away. Mr. Salazar should be ready to restore protections the instant the long-term survival of the species seems at risk.
The Times view, then, is that science should trump ideology when the Times disagrees with the ideology, but ideology should trump science when the Times agrees with the ideology.”
- Wall Street Journal Online, March 12th, 2009
Entry Filed under: general
6 Comments Add your own
1. Brandon | March 15th, 2009 at 10:39 pm
This is exactly how I operate with ideology and science. Though, I frame it a bit differently.
I say that Theology trumps Science when I agree with said Theology.
When I don’t, Science wins.
2. sclough | March 16th, 2009 at 7:09 pm
It is heartbreaking that there seems to be no one in the popular media to call out the President on some of his more recent statements with regard to abortion and stem cells. He simple says that he appreciates the arguments and is sensitive to the debate, but that “ideology” cannot trump “science” or “women’s rights.”
In other words, no one else’s ideology can trump his ideology. What about the fact that science is making far more progress with stem cells of other kinds? It’s one thing to argue for Obama’s ideology, but it’s another thing for all these people to celebrate him as if he has “freed us from ideology.” I’m troubled at the current capacity of the average American to think.
3. Washington | March 30th, 2009 at 1:37 am
Science isn’t free from ideology… as a scientist I can assure you of that… so choose your bias and be happy.
4. Zack Hensley | April 1st, 2009 at 8:29 am
glad to see your blogging again. no matter the ideology.
sweet!
5. Scott | June 17th, 2009 at 7:06 pm
“More from the Internets…
March 15th, 2009
It made me giggle…”
Are you sure you want this to be the last thing people see of your blogging career?
6. David | June 18th, 2009 at 8:56 am
You know - that is the word of the Lord.
Leave a Comment
Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed