The New York Times reports that some raised the issue that he is religious and very public with it:
There are two basic objections to Dr. Collins. The first is his very public embrace of religion. He wrote a book called “The Language of God,” and he has given many talks and interviews in which he described his conversion to Christianity as a 27-year-old medical student. Religion and genetic research have long had a fraught relationship, and some in the field complain about what they see as Dr. Collins’s evangelism.
Do those complaining think that his "evangelism" will affect his ability to do a good job at NIH? Because if not, I fail to see how this is a relevant criticism. Is non-supernaturalism being proposed as a criterion for holding a high level science policy position? That would be still more problematic, especially in light of very valid attacks on ...
