An explanation exists. I was recently plagued by the fact that many liberals, in addition to torturing their namesake all the time, did so unforgivably when they defended President Obama's steadfast opposition to Illinois' version of the Born Alive Infant Protection Act. For those not familiar with this piece of legislation, it simply protected babies who were born alive -- living and breathing independently -- despite the "mother's" unsuccessful attempt to abort them. How this champions the "liberty" of the weakest among us -- as a liberal's namesake demands they do -- is beyond my comprehension. But amidst my profound disappointment with my fellow countrymen, I mentally stumbled onto what I believe to be, even if not a justification, at least an explanation for what has transpired.
It has become increasingly apparent that many if not most liberals are more susceptible to abandoning their values when they must do so to support their favorite politician. This is unfortunately becoming common no matter how immoral and illogical that politician's positions may be. However, at least from my vantage point, when a right-leaning conservative is caught betraying reason, those on the right lead the charge admonishing him. See, e.g., John McCain during the 2008 primaries. At the very least, we rarely find a conservative defending a right-leaning politician with arguments that not only set a double standard but torture both logic and fact in the most extreme ways.
Take the case at hand. Some argued, including President Obama, that he only led the opposition to this Act because the legislation had no provision protecting the life of the mother. How does this pass for honest and reasoned thought? Correct me if I am mistaken, but have we come to a point that we no longer have enough healthcare professionals to care for both a baby on one table and the mother on another? Must we doom these babies to death, screaming for their life while neglected in a waste closet? Is saving both no longer an option? I doubt this to be the case.
So why do many liberals assault and abandon this basic value of human life? The answer, I think, can be gleaned from the place politics frequently enjoys in the life of a liberal, as opposed to a conservative. For the latter, morality and values are not just political statements but religious ones as well. In fact, for most conservatives, religion has a far greater place in their life than politics could ever hope to occupy. Therefore, even if a beloved politician fails to live up to a conservative’s moral standard, we have no real incentive to keep him around. And if the moral violation is serious enough, the source of a conservative’s morality, religion, in fact demands that we discard that politician for a better model.
Liberals do not enjoy this luxury. Many liberals rely on politics to provide them with meaning that they would otherwise be without. In far too many ways, politics has effectively become their religion. That being the case, the party comes first and once-held moral convictions are increasingly left to the wayside. If their politician loses, therefore, they lack a similarly deep religious belief on which to fall back. So they defend without fact-finding; they defend without logical thought; they defend without their soul. And countless babies have died as a result.