Science and Morality

The government hasn't interceded in privately funded research. There is no legal ban on stem-cell research, just a ban on federally funded ventures to create new lines-by destroying new embryos. Nor did I advocate such a law. I did say that government is often involved in science deeply at times, which is true. I sure didn't advocate any "Nazi" science, in fact, I don't even really know what you mean by that. My argument was that Western governments are often more restrained and deliberate, which allows them to administer benevolent oversight overy many scientific endeavors. Germany in the 1940s was not a Western nation in the traditional sense, and was not founded on a deep sense of propriety or morality. I did not suggest that the continuation of government regulations continue based upon mere platitudes. My basic point was that unrestrained science contains numerous dangers as well as prospects, and I am skeptical about the ability of the scienctific community to either restrain or regulate itself. This is not based upon inherent immorality of the scientific community, but rather the fact that centuries of scienctific development have not developed a lasting morality that transcends the particular time frame of the scientist. (Excepting Newton, of course.) Theology and reason have done that. Modernity has produced a clash between these two camps, which is why I support a more restrained approach to matters like these.