I don't know what you're reading about stem cell research, but the UNFORTUNATE truth is that embryonic stem cells are far more likely to yield results than adult stem cells. The general rule is that a cell can become any other type of lower-order cell, which is how stem cells work at healing otherwise-permanent injuries, because they're at the top. But embryonic stem cells are higher order than adult stem cells... after all - at some point all adult stem cells WERE embryonic stem cells. However, the trend is one-way - adult stem cells cannot become embryonic stem cells, therefore, any cell structures, nerve bundles, and organs that develop in-utero and do not heal may not be fixable by adult stem cells, but all of them can theoretically be fixable by embryonic stem cells. This is why stem cell research started embryonic, and only started to look into adult when the backlash started from the moral implications.
Please correct notify the source of your information that they are incorrect. People can't make proper decisions if they have bad information. Even if that information is against your moral principles, lies to further our goals is worse. It's much better that we tell the truth and trust people to make the proper decisions on their own... trust in democratic values.
Aaron - you seem to believe that a constitution "replete with references to God" is irreconcilable with secularism. You seem to forget that the founding fathers were DEISTS, especially JEFFERSON whom you even quoted here. They too were staunch secularists, and your argument that Ron Paul is not a secularist is refuted by your own quote. Church "in public life" does not in any way imply state-controlled religion, nor religious influences in the state. It doesn't even imply the endorsement of religion. It merely means that one is allowed to identify with a religion, even if they are in public life, such as a politician.
Furthermore, a Google search of the quotes you supposedly cited only comes up with this page, meaning that they are either misquotes, or made up. Yet a broader Google search on Ron Paul and Separation of Church and State does provide quotes OPPOSITE of what you're suggesting.
"The Founding Fathers envisioned a robustly Christian yet religiously tolerant America" - Ron Paul
"When fascism comes to this country it will be wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross." - Ron Paul
As for your quotes, if you actually read the article that they come from, you're taking the quotes entirely out of context. The article is extremely moderate.
Furthermore... here's some quotes from Founding Fathers...
"Revelation assures us that 'righteousness exalteth a nation." - S. Adams
"Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labour to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens." G. Washington
"Can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are a gift of God?" - T. Jefferson
"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." - J. Adams
So in recap, Ron Paul was right. The Founders were religious, but many were Deists. They were also all secularists, who wanted no federal endorsements of religion - Ron Paul is the same. He's also correct that the founder's writings are full of references to God. But once again: secularism doesn't mean lack of religion, it means lack of religion ENDORSED by the state.
"Considering that Ron Paul is a social conservative (who can't tell the Constitution from the Bible)"
I haven't heard something this stupid and ridiculous in a long time. I watch all of Ron Paul's speeches, and I think I've only heard him say "God" once. He is a religious man, but he is a STAUNCH SECULARIST. Plz do your homework