Ah, but they cannot "decide" not to protect innocent life. It's not optional. That's what this is all about.
"No person shall be deprived of life without due process of law.""No State shall deprive any person of life without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
Once you use the word "decide" when discussing unalienable rights, at least in any context that suggests that men have any choice in the matter, you have negated the most important principles upon which our form of government and our claim to liberty rest. You have, in fact assured the final destruction of this free republic, should such ideas about human choice prevail. No building can stand indefinitely if it has been shorn of its chief cornerstone.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men..."
And who or what body is it that your quotes are referencing? Who or what is carrying out the act of “due process of law” or “equal protection of the laws?”
You just gave one example of an exception: “without due process of law.”
The States define and determine things such as self-defense.
How about the Texas law that allows a homeowner to shoot someone who is in the act of stealing or invading his property?