Anyway, I was on the way to work, thinking about a conversation that was had in my Anatomy and Physiology class. My teacher seems to be a conservative type. Religious. "Pro-life". You know the deal. She was talking about a friend whose son was born without a left ventricle [a critical part of the heart for those not in the know]. Her friends decided not to do anything about the incomplete heart and let nature take it's course, so to speak. Of course, the baby died within four days.
The same teacher also "knows" someone who had a child with the same problem [sometimes I wonder how this woman knows so many people with strange diseases and birth defects]. This family opted to operate on the child who is now four and will need a heart transplant sometime in the near future. Although, I'm sure said child has loving, and most likely wealthy parents, He or she will have to go through many surgeries throughout his or her short life.
My teacher seemed to think that letting the new born die naturally with no stressful surgeries was a bad choice. Instead of giving the child the best four days possible, she would have rather subjected him to a life of pain and suffering. When a student made a comment about the quality of life the child would have, my teacher replied "Yes, but if there is any chance of life, I would take it".
If I was the baby and it was my choice, I would want to live four happy days in which I was the little miracle rather than live a life strapped to a heart monitor in which I was known as the patient.
Constantly weighted down by the burden of a defective heart. Constantly being watched, by worried parents and doctors alike. Knowing that your life will be significantly shorter than average. Never knowing when you will be able to get a heart for a transplant. Worrying about whether your body will accept the foreign organ. Knowing that someone had to die in order for you to live.
All of these things are burdens that the child would have to bear, assuming that the child makes it through infancy and early childhood. Would you want that? Would you want that for your child? I know that I wouldn't.
All of this led to the questions I am about to ask. Any insight would be wonderful, but I am specifically asking any conservatives who might happen by. I truly do not understand why conservatives hold the views that they do. Maybe if I know the thoughts behind them, I will understand the choices better.
Question One:
On the issue of Gay Marriage.
Do you really oppose the thought of a homosexual couple having the same rights as a heterosexual couple? Or do you dislike gays all together? Is it a matter of unexplained hatred or conflicting moral values? Do you oppose it because of your religious beliefs? If so, why? If it does not directly affect you, then why are you opposed to gay rights?
Question Two:
On the issue of abortion.
When you oppose legal abortion, do you think about the child? Do you consider the quality of life that an unwanted child may have? Do you think about the life that child could destroy and the resentment that could follow? Do you just think about a little pink baby being killed and disposed of? Do you think about the consequences of a "black market abortion"? [An illegal abortion, done in possibly unsanitary conditions under less than desirable circumstances.]
These were the only questions I thought about on the drive to work, so I thought I would save any others for a second installment! Yay!! Haha :]
Well as a note, I would like to say that I am asking these questions purely out of curiosity. I would like to know the thought process behind some conservative views and the questions are in no way meant to be offensive. Thank you in advance for any feedback you may have!
