If you had any respect for science, you wouldn't oppose this research.
It is perfectly possible to have a great deal of "respect" for science and, yet, still have ethical qualms about research that crosses (or approaches) certain lines.
Of course. Another example would be animal testing. It revolutionized medical and science research. Before that, we had to dig up bodies in the middle of the night and cut them up. We've always done the "unethical" way of research and we're probably all here because of it.
I would rather not list here even a small section of the horrors caused by unethical medical and scientific practices over the years, although I'm more than prepared to do so. If you don't think that ethics matter, you have no business ever being in any position in which you might seriously influence the life of another.
The lack of even a basic level of mealy-mouthed toleration on this issue is disturbing... although, I guess, it's a reflection on what western (and especially American) political discourse has turned into in recent decades.
Perhaps, but the detractors in this state basically state a bold faced lie as the reason they are opposed to the research. You would think based off the reasoning that we would all these dead babies when in fact we are generally talking about cells which are about to be thrown into the garbage.