Why aren’t we arguing over stem cells anymore?


I’m sure if I did a deep enough Google search, I’d  find some reference to stem cells coming up during the recent campaign, but I honestly can’t recall any candidate raising the issue. The blogs were silent. A campaign in which every conceivable social edge issue was deployed observed almost complete radio silence on the issue that just a few years ago riled the political world.

And it has been that science that effectively ended the political debate over stem cells. In other words, the moral objections were not “antiscience” at all. To the contrary, they may the be the spur that has lead to recent breakthroughs.

This was, of course, the argument all along: the promise of stem cells was not restricted to embryonic stem cells. Alternative therapies using adult stem cells could obviate the need to destroy embryos, while still advancing the cause of science.

View the original article here: Why We’re Not Arguing About Stem Cells Anymore