My mother's doctor is refusing to give her antibiotics," the caller told me in an urgent voice. I asked why. "He says that she's ninety-two and an infection will kill her sooner or later, so it might as well be this infection. As disturbing as this call was, as outrageous the doctor's behavior, I wasn't particularly surprised. I have been receiving such desperate calls with increasing frequency for the last several years.
Nicolas Copernicus (1473-1543), the founder of modern astronomy, was destined to become, through the publication of his heliocentric theory, one of the seminal figures in the history of scientific thought.
If we believe and rightly so that it is wrong to use human embryos for experimental research, then what is it that we believe should be done with these often-unwanted frozen children? What happens to them?
Regrettably, much of the debate on stem cell research has taken place on emotional grounds, pitting the hope of curing heartrending medical conditions against the deeply held moral convictions of many Americans. Such arguments frequently ignore or mischaracterize the scientific facts.
Catholics should not hesitate to get involved in the debate over Darwins theory, especially since they occupy a reasonable middle ground between scientific and biblical fundamentalists.
Leon Kass may be the most morally earnest man I've ever met. His students at the University of Chicago revere him as a teacher who, quite literally, changed their lives.
Do you think that our Earth is an ordinary planet? Do you think that we have a commonplace sun, and live in a run-of-the-mill solar system, in an unremarkable galaxy? If so, think again, advises astrophysicist Guillermo Gonzalez.
To explore the logic and make sense of a ban on stem cell research is my aim here. Since many parties to the debate claim, at least, to agree that the embryo should be treated with respect, it may be fruitful to explore other issues in particular, the nature of moral reasoning and the background beliefs that underlie such reasoning. I propose to take a very long way round. Our understanding of what is at stake can be sharpened if we begin not with stem cell research but with a quite different moral question.
The analysis of creation and the distinctions Thomas Aquinas draws among the domains of metaphysics, the natural sciences, and theology can serve an important role in contemporary discussions of the relationship between creation and evolution.
Aquinas would have no difficulty accepting Big Bang cosmology, even with its recent variations, while also affirming the doctrine of creation out of nothing. He would, of course, distinguish between advances in cosmology and the philosophical and theological reflections on these advances.