Wesley J. Smith posted this at Secondhand Smoke, to his credit. Smith got a little hot at the end, but his righteous anger is definitely justified when you consider the outrageous philosophy the administration at Princeton gives support to by their elevation of Peter Singer to an endowed bioethics chair.
Singer is an Australian philosopher who holds views that are, to say the least, appalling. From a 1999 article in the New York Times, Singer said: ”I do not think it is always wrong to kill an innocent human being. Simply killing an infant is never equivalent to killing a person.”
This was nearly 10 years ago, so why the fuss now? Well, because we are constantly facing issues in our society about the weak and defenseless in our society. What was outrageous in 1999 is now a fuzzy memory to some. Worse, people like Singer are now revered professors at treasured institutions, teaching young minds things that were criminal in years past. Those people are leaving those institutions and voting on critical issues. It matters.
Rockstanding 
[…] Why should we care? We should because it was George who was among the scholars, reseachers, scientists and theologians who advised the president when he made his landmark decision to limit embryonic stem cell research to existing lines in 2001. George, who lectures on constitutional interpretation, civil liberties and philosophy of law at Princeton University, is a solid conservative who is pro-life and pro-family. In other words, he is the polar opposite of his Princeton colleague Peter Singer. […]