In summary: Apparently Rick thinks that scientists aren't moral and need to be "checked"He didn't say scientists are not moral. He said they are amoral. That is (my opinion) a valid criticism. It is a valid criticism of many human constructs. Businesses are, or can be, amoral; sometimes business can be downright immoral. So can science. The Tuskegee syphilis study was pretty repugnant.This inherent amorality of human constructs is why we need to regulate them. Businesses need to be constrained in what they can and cannot do. So does medical research, weapons research, and just about any other scientific research that unconstrained could adversely
I began this thread on January 5 of this year. I've learned some stuff about Santorum that I didn't know then. Thanks to all posters. Apparently, Santorum has pulled out of the race. So, there doesn't seem to be any further need to discuss his qualifications for the office of the presidency of the US.
As far as I'm concerned, a Mentor can now close the thread. If not, and if anybody else has something to say about Santorum, then ok. But I'm done with this. Thanks, and let's all hope for a better US and some solutions to present problems.