"While advances in scientific research have led to some new and exciting treatments that have enlarged and enhanced the quality and length of human life, we must not lose sight as to what we are trying to accomplish"
About this Quote
Progress, here, arrives with a warning label. Nathan Deal frames scientific advances as undeniably seductive - “new and exciting treatments” that “enlarged and enhanced” life - then pivots to a politician’s favorite move: broad praise followed by a moral brake. The sentence is built like a ribbon-cutting speech with a hidden steering wheel. It reassures listeners that he’s pro-innovation while positioning himself as the adult in the room who will decide which innovations count as acceptable.
The vague “we must not lose sight” does heavy lifting. Deal never names what might be lost, because specificity would force him to take sides in the culture-war terrain that often shadows biomedical progress: end-of-life decisions, embryonic research, gene editing, costs and access, the meaning of “quality” versus mere longevity. By keeping “what we are trying to accomplish” undefined, he invites every constituency to project its own mission onto “we” - fiscal conservatives can hear efficiency, religious voters can hear sanctity, health-policy technocrats can hear outcomes.
Contextually, this is the language of governance in the age of miracle medicine: leaders must celebrate science without ceding ethical authority to scientists, markets, or patient demand. The intent is less philosophical than managerial. Deal is marking a boundary around progress: yes to longer lives, but only if the story remains anchored to shared civic purpose - and, implicitly, to the moral frameworks politicians claim to represent. It’s a soft call for oversight, wrapped in optimism, designed to sound unifying while reserving the right to say no later.
The vague “we must not lose sight” does heavy lifting. Deal never names what might be lost, because specificity would force him to take sides in the culture-war terrain that often shadows biomedical progress: end-of-life decisions, embryonic research, gene editing, costs and access, the meaning of “quality” versus mere longevity. By keeping “what we are trying to accomplish” undefined, he invites every constituency to project its own mission onto “we” - fiscal conservatives can hear efficiency, religious voters can hear sanctity, health-policy technocrats can hear outcomes.
Contextually, this is the language of governance in the age of miracle medicine: leaders must celebrate science without ceding ethical authority to scientists, markets, or patient demand. The intent is less philosophical than managerial. Deal is marking a boundary around progress: yes to longer lives, but only if the story remains anchored to shared civic purpose - and, implicitly, to the moral frameworks politicians claim to represent. It’s a soft call for oversight, wrapped in optimism, designed to sound unifying while reserving the right to say no later.
Quote Details
| Topic | Science |
|---|
More Quotes by Nathan
Add to List
