> Their opposition is an existential one. To abandon their position would be to condemn millions more to die.

I know this is how they like to frame it but we don’t see them feeling the same existential angst about things like wearing a mask to prevent the spread of a viral disease around people who might be immune compromised and die as a result. Then it becomes “the government has no right over my body”.

It is exhausting how contradictory conservative positions are.

Left wing has contradictory positions as well, in fact most people do, especially when their position is being defined by those that oppose their position.

Could you give some examples?

Liberals freaked out over a bunch of old people dying during the pandemic, but are yelling “celebrate your abortion” when nearly a million humans are killed in the US annually in abortions. That seems like a pretty big contradiction.

So, 911 was just a bunch of people as well? Because that’s less than the amount of people who died every single day at the height of COVID.

9/11 was deliberate killing.

The same way not wearing a fking mask/vaccinating oneself is, when we live in a society with many people whose immune system is weakened.

Doing something that statistically increases risk to others is not deliberate killing. See: every philosophy book.

Shooting someone statistically increases their risk of death. Where is the cutoff line?

Caring for poor but not building houses for them (eg. SF). In similar vein, caring for environment but then use environment protection laws to prevent any housing, thus forcing hours of commute (and hence environment destruction) on the society.

Poverty trap and idiotic structuring of welfare programs, such that obtaining a job would result in massive marginal tax hike and thus disincentivizes poors to get a job and climb economic ladder.

Caring for minorities and diversity but ignoring Asians from that analysis (or worse, treating Asians as Whites / White-adjacents).

There is no contradiction here. Both liberals and conservatives recognize that direct action that kills someone is worse than failing to take a precaution that results in a statistically increased risk to others. Speeding is less bad than drunk driving, which is less bad than intentional running someone over with a car. It’s entirely consistent for conservatives to say that the government should be able to ban you from killing a fetus, while also saying that the government shouldn’t be able to make you take a precaution to reduce a contagious disease.

The difference between liberals and conservatives turns on how they view the morality of the direct and deliberate act of killing a fetus. Conservatives think it’s closer to killing a person, while liberals think it’s closer to killing a bug. Neither position is inconsistent.

> post conception contraceptive

Unless someone invented a time machine and didn't tell me, there's no such thing as a post conception contraceptive.

Strangely enough they don’t give a damn about any human not in a womb, like hunger, universal healthcare, helping those in need, school shooter victims, etc.

It’s only murder when its someone else’s body and decision.

> they don’t give a damn about any human not in a womb, like hunger, universal healthcare, helping those in need, school shooter victims, etc.

As an independent who has voted for D positions more often than for R's, I say that's a false characterization. A lot of conservative positions give a damn about say, hunger or healthcare. They just don't give a damn about the policies proposed by the left.

Often times, I agree with them when I peer under the hood. Classic example is climate change and green new deal, which had a bunch of stuff totally unrelated and unneeded for climate change. Same with poverty trap[0] - a lot of conservatives argue that our welfare programs are actually hurting the poor and there are good logical arguments backing them. Another example, look at housing affordability - conservative approach (Texas) beats progressive approach (California) by miles.

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Negro_Family:_The_Case_For...

Texas has a lot more available housing because Texas is full of people who are looking to get rich off of land investments made by their ancestors.

Very few conservatives give a damn about hunger or healthcare. Their solutions are almost invariably non-governmental entities tied to coercive religious indoctrination. Anyone can go on youtube and pull up hundreds of instances of conservative lawmakers arguing against school breakfast and lunch programs for poor children, as if "personal responsibility" has fuck-all to do with the ability of a CHILD to concentrate in class on an empty stomach. Hell, Milton Friedman believed that public schools should be abolished as an indirect method to resegregate the school system.

No, in fact, right wingers are pretty consistently unwilling to actually treat women who have abortions as murderers. They don't support the death penalty for them, they consistently agree that it doesn't count if the pregnancy is a result of rape or incest, and (male or female) they consistently participate in it themselves. Say what you want about right wingers: if they actually were all so morally bankrupt that they would commit murder at the rates they commit abortion, we'd have fallen into civil war long ago.