According to Peter Wilderotter of the Christopher and Dana Reeve Foundation , “[Lifting the stem cell ban] will free researchers to explore this promising area of science and remove politics from science”.

Now there’s some rosy thinking. It would seem a bit of a stretch that lifting this ban will magically remove the teeth from the moral opposition; those that are very nervous, indeed outraged, about the prospect of increased use of human embryos for any manner of scientific and medical research. Thankfully, President Obama has a far more realistic perspective on this matter:

“But in recent years, when it comes to stem cell research, rather than furthering discovery, our government has forced what I believe is a false choice between sound science and moral values. In this case, I believe the two are not inconsistent. As a person of faith, I believe we are called to care for each other and work to ease human suffering. I believe we have been given the capacity and will to pursue this research – and the humanity and conscience to do so responsibly.

It is a difficult and delicate balance. Many thoughtful and decent people are conflicted about, or strongly oppose, this research. I understand their concerns, and we must respect their point of view.

But after much discussion, debate and reflection, the proper course has become clear. The majority of Americans – from across the political spectrum, and of all backgrounds and beliefs – have come to a consensus that we should pursue this research. That the potential it offers is great, and with proper guidelines and strict oversight, the perils can be avoided."

I wrote not long ago that I believed this new administration “got it”, that is, they seemed to understand, or at least be willing to listen to, the science community. Science, for all its potential benefits, is a complex thing that very often times cannot be reduced to the simple binary of good and evil. The above excerpt of his remarks on the order to lift the ban on federal funding for stem cell research in the U.S. reveals an appreciation for this complexity.

This is the point at which we have to ask ourselves about the benefits and risks of what we do. We kill for food, and this is not seen as an evil in the greater part of society because it nourishes our bodies. We send troops into battle to kill and be killed for purposes both ideological and strategic. We use the lives of animals and plants and cells in medical research to understand illnesses that cause great suffering for the afflicted and their loved ones. All of these activities involve the destruction of life. None among them should ever be trivialized.

And yet it seems that many religious conservatives tend to view scientists as godless villains that are waiting, with test-tube in hand, to unleash the next great threat to our culture, our economy, our world.

This perception is a tragedy.

Does evil exist in science? It most certainly does. However I am willing to wager that the overwhelming majority of us have, in the course of our careers, struggled with decisions regarding the sanctity of life. We do everything that we can to hold ourselves and our colleagues to the highest of ethical standards. I know not one individual who enjoys the process of killing laboratory animals. In my own thesis work, I steadfastly avoided working with animals because I simply could not stomach it.

And so I am one of those that is conflicted about the use of human embryos for the derivation of stem cells. But let me be clear: I understand the irreplaceable value of such work. What is more, I support the efforts of those who will be moving forward with hugely increased access as a result of this executive order. I support them, only because if they are like any of the colleagues I have known, they are at some level conflicted too. Indeed, I imagine that some of President Obama’s science advisers gave voice to this very thing.

It is this conflict, this awareness, that can and should speak far louder about the great worth of life than any priest or pundit.

(Update, 9:15pm Eastern – Much of the sentiment of this post is reflected in a recent piece by William Saletan from Slate.)