I would argue that, in some cases, morality and research are inseparable. How much more rapidly could our understanding of human development advance if we had no qualms about little things, such as manipulating the genes of a fetus? Mice, while a good analogue for humans, are far from perfect. Why don't we have test humans, instead of test mice? Surely, if morality doesn't matter, than research should trump in such a case.
I believe you see my point. This specific example is possibly a case of hyperbole, but the same principle applies to so many other things. Sometimes, no matter how much you would rather remove "morality" from science, it just can't happen. Scientists must make decisions concerning ethics. The Stanford prison experiment is a good example of where research trumped ethics. A huge amount on human psychology was discovered, but was the experiment ethical? Science cannot amputate itself from morality.