In a new paper on SSRN, Ed Fallone explores one of the most contentious policy questions in the field of public bioethics: whether and under what constraints the federal government ought to fund stem cell research.  Ed provides a thorough overview of the history and competing viewpoints in the debate.  He also draws interesting parallels between the current controversy and the debates over funding AIDS research in the 1980s.

Because religious beliefs inform much of the stem-cell debate, Ed’s paper raises difficult and important questions regarding the proper role of religion in shaping federal science policy.  Ed argues that elected officials, not scientists, should ultimately make the decisions.  In order to guide the decisionmaking, he proposes two principles: “1) the federal government should be the preferred source of funding for basic medical research and 2) government funding decisions should not favor one religious perspective over another.”  Although not everyone will agree with the second principle, Ed argues that it is more consistent with the design of our constitutional system.  He writes:

The Madisonian separation of church and state is an integral part of the limited government created under the United States Constitution, and maintaining that separation is an ethical good that our elected officials must weigh along with other ethical goods such as the protection of vulnerable populations and the promotion of justice.