Perverting science for politics

[Beestie]

Everything is not what it would appear to be. A little digging reveals the original list of 17 people (a mix of scientists, medical experts, lawyers, journalists, etc.)

The original 17

And here is the list as it stands today.

A quick comparison of the lists reveals the following two people dropped off the list:

Gilbert Meilaender, Ph.D and his bio: Gilbert Meilaender, Ph.D. Richard & Phyllis Duesenberg Professor of Christian Ethics at Valparaiso University. Professor Meilaender is an editor for the Journal of Religious Ethics and the Religious Studies Review . He takes a special interest in bioethics and is a Fellow of the Hastings Center. His books include Body, Soul, and Bioethics (1995) and Bioethics: A Primer for Christians (1997).

and

Stephen Carter, J.D. William Nelson Cromwell Professor of Law, Yale Law School. Professor Carter teaches constitutional law and law and religion. His recent books include God's Name in Vain (2000), Civility (1998), and Integrity (1996).


A quick Google on each reveals the following:

Dr. Meilaender favors of stem cell research?? This article clearly demonstrates that he does NOT support stem cell research and resents being characterized as unsympathetic to the suffering of those whose suffering, it is alleged, would be relieved by the fruits of such research.

As for Mr. Carter, well, I found this on Slate, (a propoganda arm of the right-wing media outlet MSNBC :-)

on June 20, Carter missed a particularly crucial meeting of the bioethics panel in order to plug his book on NBC's Today show.

Here is the article in its entirety which while not shedding any light on Mr. Carter's position on stem cell research, does shed light on his absence from the panel.

Lastly, here is an article that would seem to indicate that the panel wasn't exactly a partisan group interested in coronating a pre-ordained outcome.

Dr. Foster, reporting back from the first of the council's sessions, nevertheless was "impressed by the intellectual power of the members. I expected that from resumes and reputations, but when you saw it in action you couldn't help but say this is really a smart group of people."

The first two meetings, in January and February in Washington, "were extremely professional and utterly dignified," he reported. "Every position was thoroughly heard, and there was no posturing or grandstanding. It was impressively mature, and there was never an angry rebuttal or argument." He added that "The four scientists interacted well with the non-scientists and vice versa, and I think it fair to say we all learned from each other." Dr. Kass earned Dr. Foster's praise for his demonstrated evenhandedness: "He leaned over backwards to ensure that all members participated and that all sides were heard. I felt a sense of pride in the country that it could be represented in this fashion by such a diverse group."

Given all this, I am forced to call bullshit on the blog"truth." It appears that the absence of the two members from the current make up of the panel was not, in any way that I can verify, related to their positions on stem cell research.