Despite a disgusting, deceitful and cruel campaign run by MiCAUSE, the group funded by the Michigan Catholic Conference and Right to Life, the people of Michigan stood together and endorsed embryonic stem cell research.

MiCAUSE spokesman David Doyle wrote a Detroit Free Press editorial about how he was against the pursuit of lifesaving cures even though he has a chronic medical condition. Despite this, the people of Michigan stood up and said this research is valuable, and it must be allowed and encouraged.

This experience should give Catholics in Michigan reason to pause and consider exactly why they give money to their churches. When the churchgoing family whose house is being foreclosed gave the few dollars they could to the church collection basket, did they do so to fund a sensational campaign to discourage lifesaving medical research? Or did they do it because they believed that the money would go to good causes in their community? What are the church’s real priorities?

I wonder what it felt like to be a diabetic in a Catholic church in the past few months. I cannot imagine how it felt to walk past the church one has belonged to his or her whole life and seen neon green and black signs screaming that the research that could cure your disease and lengthen your life “Goes 2 Far.”

Now that the victory party and the sighs and tears of relief have come and gone, it is time to reconcile with those who stood against this lifesaving research. Despite what the opponents of stem cell research said during this campaign, when the cure for diabetes is found, they will be lining up with the rest of us to receive it. When new treatments for those who have suffered spinal cord injuries are developed, the opponents of stem cell research also will be in line to receive them.

The differences between those who supported and those who opposed this proposal are no longer relevant, as all of Michigan benefits from the passage of Proposal 2. Rather than be viewed as a scientific backwater, Michigan will now be able to competitively attract biotech and medical research businesses to our state, at a time when it is in desperate need of economic diversification and opportunity.

For people who could one day benefit from the cures and treatments developed through stem cell research, the passage of Proposal 2 means they no longer need to fear that they will not be able to receive these therapies because of some old, misguided law. Instead, they can feel confident that their right to a cure is respected and protected by their state government.

Proposal 2’s passage is a victory for everyone in Michigan, but I also wish to take a moment to acknowledge the personal victory that it feels like for me. I was diagnosed with type 1 diabetes 15 years ago when I was 10 years old. I could not have imagined back then that I would ever have to argue for researchers to have the legal right to pursue the cure to my disease.

I also could not have imagined my efforts to advocate for the funding of diabetes research, for which I received much praise from adults of all political persuasions when I was younger, would be bitterly battled by an entire religious institution.

I never imagined that I would learn as much as I have about medicine and science, topics that in my years of education failed to interest or excite me, in pursuit of a cure to diabetes. With the passage of Proposal 2, we are one step closer to that cure.

Michigan’s best minds can now focus on doing what they do best and research new treatments and cures for some of the world’s worst ailments. As for me, I am happy to put this battle behind me and turn my attention to writing about the many other things that interest me in this world.

Ryan Dinkgrave is a State News columnist and a public relations graduate student. Reach him at dinkgrave@gmail.com.