Imagine then my consternation at a recent dinner party when I was seated next to a lady who wanted everybody else to know that she was very “pro-life” and even bragged that she had yellow license plates that read “choose life.” She was being very, very supportive of Republican Governor McDonnell for the new law that all women seeking an abortion must receive a briefing on the obvious horror of that procedure. My dinner partner opined “I think women deserve to know the facts.”
Avoiding the discussion as always, I just ordered another drink.
Yesterday, I listened to a webinar on the economic and financial planning considerations of ObamaCare. There was an interesting discussion around the biggest “waste” in Medicare, which is spending huge sums of money on dying patients. The speaker, who is both a physician and a financial planner, pointed out that the original version required that doctors inform the dying patients about the high cost of making extraordinary efforts to keep them alive — when there was no hope anyway. Predictably, the other political party promptly labeled such efforts as “death panels,” and that quickly killed the debate.
I wonder if my dinner partner would have opined “I think dying patients deserve to know the facts?”
Don’t terminal patients deserve facts as much as women seeking abortions?
If the objective is to make abortion more difficult as well as to fight unpopular legislation, such as ObamaCare, then philosophical consistency is not necessary . . . or, is it?
So, which is worse: An abortion or borrowing $100 thousand from the Chinese to keep grandma alive another month, which the next generation has to re-pay?
Before you answer that, better order another round of drinks for us all . . .