Amanda Marcotte argues that for conservatives, freedom and life are opposing values (via Respectful of Otters). Here’s the crux of it:

I have also noticed that two values that BushCo likes to fling around are “life” and “freedom”, but I have also noticed that the two are opposite values in their rhetoric. You can have freedom or life, but not both. They are pretty consistent in this viewpoint, and if they evoke freedom, you can be sure they are covering up for someone’s death, and if they evoke “life”, you can be sure they are trying to take away your freedoms.

It’s a seductive argument, but is it a valid one? I’m not sure yet, and the fact that it is so seductive makes me a bit wary.