Le weekend

It rained this weekend here in Dallas. Which was momentous for us, not only because we're bone-dry here, but because it broke the 19-day streak of temps over 100 degrees. I hate summer. Hate. It. Winter can't get here fast enough.

The weekend was also refreshing because I finally got the Mars Hill Audio podcast to download to my iPod via iTunes. My financial planner must hate that Ken Myers. Every time I listen to anything from Mars Hill, I want to go out and buy the books discussed there. The podcast is mostly a promotion for the latest version of the Mars Hill Audio Journal, and indeed the current one sounds fascinating, which is standard for Mars Hill. I hope that Myers' plans to distribute the Audio Journal via MP3 download will multiply his audience vastly; this is absolutely first-rate cultural programming, every bit as sophisticated as the very best that public radio has to offer, and as far as I am aware without peer among Christian broadcast media (if "broadcast" is word). Anyway, the podcast is basically just an appetite-whetter, but it does include a standard-length interview with Nigel Cameron, a theologian and bioethicist, that makes the podcast well worth listening to.

Cameron made a number of good points with regard to the stem-cell research controversy, but one that stuck with me is his frustration with how the entire public debate is framed in conventional "pro-life" terms. The way we talk about embryonic stem-cell research (ESCR) is stacked in favor of the scientists, because it assumes that the ethical objections to it are only the result of religious conviction. Therefore you have on one side (the story goes) religious people who want to stop scientific progress versus open-minded scientists who only want to help humanity. No wonder the restrictionists keep losing.

Cameron points out, though, that some very important ethical issues are being conveniently swept out of the way in this simplistic and inaccurate rendering. Funny how most European countries -- where religious conservatism has no political or cultural influence -- restrict ESCR, with Germany and Austria outright banning it. Why do you suppose that is? Answer: Germany and Austria understand intimately what society can do to the weak if human life is seen as something that can be eliminated by science for the perceived good of the strong.

As Cameron asks in the podcast, what limits would the science-without-limits crowd put on research? After all, Dr. Mengele was a research scientist. The question itself exposes the shoddy thinking at the heart of the Faith vs. Reason false dichotomy in the ESCR debate. If people want to argue that those who believe in banning or restricting ESCR are wrong, that's one thing; but to claim that this is a battle between the forces of rational Enlightenment and religious Endarkenment is not only unfair, it's dangerous.