Arguing over embryonic stem cell research seems to be all the rage these days. In a piece in the Washington Times, Ed Feulner of the Heritage Foundation argues against government funding for the research. Regardless of one’s position on the ethics of issue, Mr. Feulner does raise an interesting point. If the stem cells show so much promise, why would they need to rely on government funding? Shouldn’t private investors be lining up to provide support if the research are likely to cure all the ills that supporters claim it can? I don’t know enough about the science behind it say know whether embryonic stem cells won’t lead to cures in the future, but it doesn’t make me feel more confident about the prospects when such a big deal is made over government financing.
Read the whole thing.