Dear Fundamentalist Politicians:

I want to help you. The term “embryonic stem cell research” is so clinical, nonjudgmental and precise — it just doesn’t work for you. For heaven’s sake, you can’t rally public opinion against something when you call it “embryonic stem cell research.”

Look, you guys are good at this. You came up with the brilliant “death tax” to replace the horribly accurate “estate tax.” Why? Because the great majority of your base doesn’t have million-dollar estates — but all of them will die. And while your base probably doesn’t care too much if Uncle Sam takes a small chunk of Paris Hilton’s future inheritance, they certainly don’t like the idea of taxing someone just because they died. So even though “estate tax” is the more accurate term, “death tax” works. You’re slowly but effectively convincing a lot of lower- and middle-income people to support one of the most regressive tax cuts imaginable.

“Pro-life” is genius as well. The reality, of course, is that you are “anti-abortion,” or more specifically, “anti-abortion rights.” But being anti-rights is a tough sell in America; in fact, being “anti” anything just sounds so — so negative. So you convinced the media and the world to call you “pro-life,” even though this is a rather vague term. It could just as easily be the label given to death penalty opponents, or anti-war protestors, for example. But you nabbed it first; great job!

Now, to your current rhetorical dilemma. You people have been trying out this talking point about how embryonic stem cell research is the “trading of one life for another.” It’s a nice idea — but too many words. It’s also too complicated and morally ambiguous; your side is not good at ambiguous.

You need a label, a scary one. This ad in Missouri is a step in the right direction.

Since I try never to criticize without suggesting, here are my thoughts for possible terms to replace “embryonic stem cell research”:

1. “first step to cloning”

Clones scare people; you saw Star Wars Episode II, right?

2. “human egg violation”

You have to use “violation” instead of words like “destruction,” since the embryos come from fertility clinics and will be destroyed anyway. Destroyed, but not violated.

3. “using babies for parts”

This may be the way to go. If anyone quibbles over the accuracy of the wording, you can just call them liberal pansies. That almost always works.

Good luck!

Sincerely,

Scott