Sen. Casey Votes Right On Stem Cells

Much to his home paper's distress.
Mr. Casey's and Mr. Bush's opposition to embryonic stem-cell research and the position they have taken is apparently faith-based. It is difficult to see, however, how faith-based compassion does not include supporting a critical quest for medical solutions to severe, fatal diseases....We had hoped better of him.

I'd thought worse of him and am pleasantly surprised. Just for the record, where have Bush or Casey argued they were against funding embryonic stem cell because of their faith? And where is the evidence that embryonic stem cells hold any promise at all for providing therapies? It's not in capital investment in embryonic stem cell research relative to adult stem cells (unlike state governments, private investors go where the promise is.) It's not in the number of products and therapies available from embryonic stem cells (zero --no human trials have even been attempted since no one can figure out how to turn off the rapid growth switch in these cells). From adult stem cell therapies we've already

To add another wrinkle, this stem-cell fundamentalism is stifling science. As Wesley J. Smith notes almost all the big stem-cell breakthroughs are taking place in other countries because our own doctors are obsessed with the massively-oversold embryonic stem cell research.

Since the Post-Gazette's editors' position is anti-science and based on no facts --indeed, is a wilful ignoring of the facts-- I conclude its position is faith-based. They read it in their secular bible and no amount of evidence will deter them from their position. Yet surely its faith includes compassion

on this matter of deep importance to Pennsylvanians stricken by these diseases who are helping family members or friends cope with them.
We had hoped better of it.