The March for Science on April 22 may or may not accomplish the goals set out by its organizers. But it has required many people who work in a variety of scientific fields — as well as Americans who are passionate about science — to grapple with the proper role of science in our civic life.

The discussion was evident in thousands of responses submitted to NYTimes.com ahead of the march, both from those who will attend and those who are sitting it out. Nationwide, colleagues and friends are debating the meaning of President Trump’s election, and whether now is an appropriate moment for people in the sciences to speak out collectively.

Here is a summary of some themes that emerged in the responses and in follow-up interviews.

(Read more about the organizers of the March for Science here.)

Rising to a Political Moment

The March for Science organizers have stressed that their movement intends to be nonpartisan. But many of the responses made clear that people who are planning to march are motivated by the election of Mr. Trump and what they see as his administration’s approach to science, from his proposed budget that cuts funding for the Environmental Protection Agency and the National Institutes of Health, to the president’s climate change views and statements on the safety of vaccines.