Life, Death, and the Liberal Mindset
Preserving liberal friendships...It's the things you choose not to say.
Several years ago, I was having a conversation with a liberal aquaintance about taxation, and the fact that the top twenty percent of the earners pay eighty percent of the federal taxes. His refreshingly unapologetic response was, "Good!" (I love a courageous liberal). He then went on to talk about people who cannot afford some life saving medical treatment or procedure. I knew that he had a daughter that had cancer and was struggling to survive in treatment. Now my natural conservative response would have been something to the effect that life is unfair and ,unfortunately, people die all of the time. That fact somehow escapes all liberals, who believe that if you just spend enough money, everyone will be healthy and live forever. Instead, I kept my big mouth shut and thus preserved our friendship...the things you don't say.
This morning I was telling a friend about being another conservative blog and the conversation immediatedly turned to liberal vs. conservative. She voluteered that she had voted for Kerry and how she had convinced her husband to do the same. She went on to say why, without any prodding from me. She was against the war and since she had an eighteen year old son, she "would move to Canada" rather than let him go to war (did somebody institute a draft without telling me?). She further affirmed her liberal credentials by mentioning stem-cell research (excuse me, but president Bush only restricted federally funded stem-cell research, not privately funded research) and abortion rights as reasons for not supporting President Bush.
When she mentioned being pro-choice, I said something like "ahh, then we differ on that." Her immediate response was to ask, "What do you do with all of the unwanted children if you ban abortion?" "Who will take care of them, provide health-care for them, etc.?" You know, the usual string of questions you get from a liberal when discussing abortion. I responded that the parents in question should be required to care for the child. Her response: "What if they don't want it?"
Our conversation was interrupted, but I was able to ask her one question more, and her answer was very telling. I asked, "Is inconvenience sufficient reason for taking a life?" Her response was, "Yes if it has to do with my body." This should not have shocked me as she had already identified herself as a liberal, but shocked I was none the less. Fortunately we were forced to end the conversation there.
I know this lady very well, and she is a compassionate, caring, quite spiritual, soul. I guess that is why I was so shocked by her reply. I have come to expect this sentiment from the pro-abortion left, but it was the speed and callousness of her reply that sent me reeling. I can only assume that her left-wing agenda was so threatened by my question that her response was a knee-jerk from the primative side of her brain.
I was, of course, referring to the monetary inconvenience of caring for an "unwanted child," not the personal inconvenience of bearing a child, but that was not what she heard. I have observed that one common trait of the pro-abortion left, beyond defensiveness, is selfishness in the extreme. "My body, my choice (and incidently, F___ the kid and father). The concepts of personal responsibility and obligation are alien to the liberal mindset. I think maybe they react like the RCA dog when they hear those words, you know, kind of twisting their heads in wonder. I have the same reaction every time I hear a liberal say things like inconvenience being a sufficient reason for taking a life. I am absolutely incapable of understanding that line of reasoning.
Because our conversation was interrupted, I was able to consider what she had said, and my response. After rejecting several cutting rejoinders, I chose silence...the things you don't say.
Several years ago, I was having a conversation with a liberal aquaintance about taxation, and the fact that the top twenty percent of the earners pay eighty percent of the federal taxes. His refreshingly unapologetic response was, "Good!" (I love a courageous liberal). He then went on to talk about people who cannot afford some life saving medical treatment or procedure. I knew that he had a daughter that had cancer and was struggling to survive in treatment. Now my natural conservative response would have been something to the effect that life is unfair and ,unfortunately, people die all of the time. That fact somehow escapes all liberals, who believe that if you just spend enough money, everyone will be healthy and live forever. Instead, I kept my big mouth shut and thus preserved our friendship...the things you don't say.
This morning I was telling a friend about being another conservative blog and the conversation immediatedly turned to liberal vs. conservative. She voluteered that she had voted for Kerry and how she had convinced her husband to do the same. She went on to say why, without any prodding from me. She was against the war and since she had an eighteen year old son, she "would move to Canada" rather than let him go to war (did somebody institute a draft without telling me?). She further affirmed her liberal credentials by mentioning stem-cell research (excuse me, but president Bush only restricted federally funded stem-cell research, not privately funded research) and abortion rights as reasons for not supporting President Bush.
When she mentioned being pro-choice, I said something like "ahh, then we differ on that." Her immediate response was to ask, "What do you do with all of the unwanted children if you ban abortion?" "Who will take care of them, provide health-care for them, etc.?" You know, the usual string of questions you get from a liberal when discussing abortion. I responded that the parents in question should be required to care for the child. Her response: "What if they don't want it?"
Our conversation was interrupted, but I was able to ask her one question more, and her answer was very telling. I asked, "Is inconvenience sufficient reason for taking a life?" Her response was, "Yes if it has to do with my body." This should not have shocked me as she had already identified herself as a liberal, but shocked I was none the less. Fortunately we were forced to end the conversation there.
I know this lady very well, and she is a compassionate, caring, quite spiritual, soul. I guess that is why I was so shocked by her reply. I have come to expect this sentiment from the pro-abortion left, but it was the speed and callousness of her reply that sent me reeling. I can only assume that her left-wing agenda was so threatened by my question that her response was a knee-jerk from the primative side of her brain.
I was, of course, referring to the monetary inconvenience of caring for an "unwanted child," not the personal inconvenience of bearing a child, but that was not what she heard. I have observed that one common trait of the pro-abortion left, beyond defensiveness, is selfishness in the extreme. "My body, my choice (and incidently, F___ the kid and father). The concepts of personal responsibility and obligation are alien to the liberal mindset. I think maybe they react like the RCA dog when they hear those words, you know, kind of twisting their heads in wonder. I have the same reaction every time I hear a liberal say things like inconvenience being a sufficient reason for taking a life. I am absolutely incapable of understanding that line of reasoning.
Because our conversation was interrupted, I was able to consider what she had said, and my response. After rejecting several cutting rejoinders, I chose silence...the things you don't say.
<< Home