[Dianna]

Well, the problem is when some people say that the law says “thus-and-such”, which results in taking away life (not talking about criminal convictions for murdering someone, now...), instead of protecting life at all costs — then something is very seriously wrong with the law, or how people have made the law, or people’s interpretation of the law.

I don't want YOU deciding when to protect MY life. The issues are too gray for law to address. That is why it is left to husbands/or parents, so that they can act in accordance with their familial beliefs and what they know of what the incapacitated spouse or child would want.

[Star Traveler]

Well, I don’t propose that anyone “decide when” to protect your life or anyone else’s. Not at all. There’s no “when” to it. It’s simply — protect life at all times at all costs. Nothing to decide...

Regards,
Star Traveler

P.S. — And, of course, if you have read some of what I’ve written, you’ll see that I am not talking about a “life for a life” in the case when someone murders someone else and their life is required or in the case when self-defense is required because of an imminent threat to one’s life (and that applies “nationally” too). In those cases, it’s one life for another life, and not merely protecting a life in absolute terms. I have to put that qualifier in there, because it’s also the same type of qualifier that the Bible has on life, too.