Sometimes the culture wars take a break

Washington Post columnist Michael Gerson writes today about Francis Collins, Barack Obama’s pick to run the National Institutes of Health and — gasp! — an evangelical Christian. Gerson’s point is that it is possible to be a scientist and have faith, something that shouldn’t be shocking but maybe is.

I’m confused, however, by this assertion by Gerson:

And Collins’s appointment says something good about the maturity of President Obama. This move has invited criticism from the secular left. It is unlikely to appease religious conservatives who assume cynicism from Obama. But this seems to be a case where the president simply picked the best person for the job.

Wait. What? Where’s this criticism from the secular left coming from?

Sure, Collins quotes an Oxford University scientist saying science and faith aren’t really compatible. But if there is criticism coming from “the secular left,” there’s not much and it’s probably coming from the edges.

Steve Benen is as reliable a source of lefty conventional wisdom as exists these days, and this is what he says:

The country needs to start taking science seriously again — our economy depends on it — and ignorance costs far too much. If Francis Collins can help turn some people around who reject biology for religious reasons, he’s a welcome addition to the discourse.

Right. Try as I might, I can’t really find much evidence of criticism of Collins’ selection on the basis of his religious views. This New York Times article asserts it without really documenting it. But more typical is this Wall Street Journal piece anticipating — again, without documentation — that his appointment “will generate suspicion among secularists.”

In other words, the culture war implications of Collins’ appointment are being mostly mulled — and maybe even applauded — by folks on the right. But is it really a clash in the culture wars if only one side is showing up for battle?