Stem cell editorial used faulty reasoning to make its point
It is not my intent to argue the pro or con side of stem cell development and use in research, but I do object to your fallacious reasoning in your editorial (Sunday, May 13, “Michigan lawmakers have no business meddling in stem cell research”) and the statement that "If there is any serious question in Michigan whether stem cell research is a valuable and morally acceptable means, it was resolved in 2008 when voters approved a constitutional amendment "
I would infer from your reasoning (or lack of same) that anything approved by the voters and enshrined into law, like slavery was, would then be morally acceptable. I hope that you wouldn't find much support for your apparent position that anything approved by the voters is MORALLY ACCEPTABLE. The checks and balances built into our government has been an attempt to shield the citizenry from the tyranny of the majority.
I sincerely hope that your future editorials will be more thoroughly thought out. I can partially understand this lack of basic logic since most graduates of today don't go through the rigors of a Jesuit education that I was fortunate to do.
William H. Burkhardt