Why is the Conservative Right so set against abortion?

I've never been able to figure out why the Conservative Right is so set against abortion. We're talking about a group that complains about the high birth rates of certain groups of people and then tries to limit an option that, by and large, only lowers the birthrates of these groups. That seems kind of self-defeating.

Plus there's the fact that it costs elections. There are plenty of middle of the road people that would accept Tea Party views of economic policy if they didn't feel they had to accept the Fundamentalist views on morality that go along with it. Tea Party people, I know you're about the economics, but until you realize that you've allowed people of Fundamentalist morality to become associated with you in the public mind and fix that, you're dead in the water.

Of course, abortion wouldn't be as much of an issue if the government would fully subsidize contraception. Imagine, contraception for free, on demand, and not just condoms, I'm talking everything, including surgeries. Yes, it costs money, but a lot less then welfare checks for the resultant children would and the cost of abortion clinics. Of course the Conservative Right wouldn't go for it. Only abstinence is viable. Isn't that pushing your morality on other people? Isn't that what they keep claiming the Progressives are doing?

Cattle

"No one loves cattle as much as Burger King." - Antagonist from Dr. Who television series

For some reason, when I heard that line, I couldn't help thinking about all the concern that politicians express towards their constituents. It doesn't seem to matter whether it's a liberal democrat expressing concern for the Obama phone lady, or a conservative republican expressing concern for Jebus and guns, the same level of concern is apparent. I don't mind the politicians acting like this. It's what they do. My complaint is that the cattle are so damned loyal to the farmer.

The politics of Star Trek

I was having a conversation with a liberal and fellow Star Trek fan the other day. The point of their argument was that the Federation had a great political system, no money, everyone trying to achieve their full potential, and a social safety net for everyone. Since I enjoy pointing out gaps in logic I responded that there were no, or at least very few, people of Wal Mart in the Star Trek universe. Did they put them in reeducation camps, or kill them all during the Eugenics Wars? Where are they?

Personally, I like the political structure of the Federation. As conservative as I am, I'd gladly side with their socialistic approach, if I knew that the vast majority of people were working and contributing towards the same societal goals as myself. But then there are those people of Wal Mart. A Star Trek type of society cannot exist while there are so many parasites within it. It can never be anything more than a third world country.

Here we have the difference between liberals and myself, even though our ideals are basically the same. Liberals tend to believe that education and money can fix the people of Wal Mart. Fifty years of social experimentation have proven that idea wrong. The people of Wal Mart, for the most part, are what they are. Until the problem of what to do with them can be addressed, I prefer my societies a bit more Darwinian.