Starting with the first part of the organic [that which permeates every part of the whole] law of the United States:
"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..."
un·al·ien·a·ble [un-eyl-yuh-nuh-buhl, -ey-lee-uh-]Adjective: Unable to be taken away from or given away by the possessor
And spelled out explicitly and imperatively in the Constitution of the United States:
"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."
>Adjective: Unable to be taken away from or given away by the possessor.
So then you would prohibit by law the sort of self-sacrifice you claim is morally superior (giving away one’s life)?
Ironically though, suicide is not a life being given to another, nor taken away (because it is his own life; if it is not, then what you claimed was morally superior self-sacrifice is utterly detestable as it is destroying something that belongs wholly to another)... or do you intend to say that of the inherent God-given attributes that God gives imperfectly?
So, which is it? Is Jesus a liar when He says that there is no greater love than when a man gives his life for his friends?
Would you call an anathema Nathan Hale who said: “I only regret that I have but one life to give for my country.”?
>And spelled out explicitly and imperatively in the Constitution of the United States:
>>”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.”
So then, you would equate the non-exercise of a right with the violation of that right? So when someone does not take the right to not incriminate one’s own self they are violating that right?
Or that when someone does not prosecute another [under civil law] because of near relation [or some other decision] that they are violating the equal protection of laws?