Few days go by when the topic of abortion doesn't come up online and the conservatives express their great fondness for life. It doesn't matter that life in this case is potential and undeveloped, it only matters that it is life and it has a right to life. Now turn to healthcare for the same child born now to a poor or lower class family, and suddenly the conservative no longer cares that the living child have a right to life, aka excellent healthcare. It's not the conservatives fault the child didn't pick an upper middle class family to be born into after all. In fact, mention universal healthcare, and the conservative bemoans the cost of granting this human necessity to the living child. Once past the vagina the child is on its own in the conservative world. We loved and supported you till now is such a wonderful sentiment. Now consider another anomaly of the conservative moral compass. Remember death panels for grandma, consider the figures below and consider that UHC would help living people. Surely the conservative would beat down the doors to help those in need for they love life. Don't they? Oddly it seems they don't and now the love is over for good. What an odd bunch conservatives are, is it any wonder their representatives for president and in congress are always confused. 'U.S. Ranks Last in Study of Preventable Deaths in Industrialized Countries' "To add fuel to the fire a new study has ranked the US dead last among 19 industrialized nations in numbers preventable deaths due to treatable medical conditions. Such poor performance calls American’s failure to provide adequate health care to all citizens into even sharper focus. Those who deliver health care in America know this reality all too well: clinicians, nurses, and other providers contend with it on a daily basis." U.S. Ranks Last in Study of Preventable Deaths in Industrialized Countries | American Nursing Review. Nursing Journals : American Society of Registered Nurses And the another side of the coin. Death panels. "Before we commit ourselves to extending the lives of persistently unconscious people, maybe we ought to consider the effects that that would have on our already-dysfunctional health care system. Indeed, maybe we ought to start by trying to identify the population who would be most likely to benefit from this change. Unless I'm very much mistaken, I'm thinking that it would be people who are relatively well-off and have good insurance - that is, people who are relatively privileged. If you're uninsured, forget it: no hospital is going to devote an ICU bed to someone who'll stay there indefinitely without ever being able to pay for it. And if you're insured but can't afford to keep mailing checks to your insurer indefinitely, odds are that you'll either decline to start treatment or will terminate it relatively quickly. Why, then, would we change our medical system so that it increasingly favors those who are already best off?" Rust Belt Philosophy: The conservative theory of medicine: help the helped PS My use of the word 'conservative' refers to the particular American blend.