Honestly, if Jim Caviezal didn't play Jesus, would anyone care what he thinks?

Pro-life. Pro-choice. The whole debate is a mess, and now it seems the new battleground is reaching into the field of medical research. Missouri will be voting on a state amendment issue to ensure stem cell research can legally continue here. Sounds easy enough, especially when you see that the proposed amendment explicitly states that "no person may clone or attempt to clone a human being." However, opponents argue that the technology the amendment legalizes, somatic cell nuclear transfer, actually is a form of cloning as you could essentially create an embryo by taking DNA from a human cell and transferring it to a human egg.

This has become the central political issue here in Missouri, so much so that the U.S. Senate race between Republican incumbent Jim Talent and his Democratic challenger Claire McCaskill may actually hinge on which side of the stem cell debate voters are on. And since it seems Senate control may be up for grabs this November, both political parties have thrown all sorts of money into this Missouri race. This isn't exactly a predictable partisan ideological difference, though. In fact, prominent Republicans such as former U.S. Senator and U.N. Ambassador John Danforth have been featured on ads in support of the amendment.

As I see it, this becomes the same old butting of heads as the abortion debate, with neither side even considering the other has good intentions. Unfortunately, the more I read about the ongoing discourse, the more I think the pro-life group has it wrong, at least as it applies to this proposal. Inherent in the majority of the criticism to this amendment is a belief that medical researchers are only trying to position themselves to profit from the patents and funding that would come from ongoing stem cell research. Opponents seem to think that the success of actually finding live-saving cures is a long shot at best, and tries to put stem cell researchers into some class of evildoers trying to take advantage of the ignorance of the general public.

Adding to the confusion (and another celebrity ad by Sheryl Crow) is the Michael J. Fox ad in support of Claire McCaskill that's been making headlines in the national press lately. One could argue whether it's appropriate for a non-Missourian to be influencing state politics, but you can't deny he has a debilitating disease that might benefit from advances found using stem cells. But rather than arguing the merits of stem cell research, the most someone like Rush Limbaugh can come up with is to say that Fox was essentially cheating by either coming off his medication or exaggerating his symptoms while taping the ad. And now prominent Missouri athletes and even Jesus himself, Jim Caviezal, have come together to tape an ad in response to the Fox ad who, again, seem to ignore the altruistic goals of stem cell researchers and give the public an impression that proponents of the amendment have more sinister goals in mind and are misleading voters. It's a bit sad that most people will probably vote on this issue based on these competing ads alone without really understanding what's going on.

Maybe this is my own naivety coming into play again. Perhaps scientists are all just a bunch of money grubbing bastards pulling the wool over our eyes and selling us a magical elixir that has no hope of curing anyone. But it seems that the anti-amendment crowd will need to come up with a more intelligent argument than these flippant accusations.