:o)
Even law recognizes a "necessity defense" when there is something important at stake. E.g you could break into somebody else's locked house that was on fire, without their permission, to rescue a person, a pet or even a valuable piece of art.
You would not be arrested for "breaking and entering" or "trespassing" under such conditions. And even if you were, you could successfully argue in court that a "reasonable person" would not call your action unlawful.
Similarly with the red light: if it's 3:00 a.m., there's no traffic, and you're trying to get your wife who's in labor to the maternty hospital, you'd likely not be arrested, nor would a jury convict you.
Ice Queen Sebelius, on her own unfettered authority as HHS Secretary, demanding that religious people violate their moral code on a life-or-death matter?
I would have no qualms whatsoever about resisting this so-called law, which is actually a piece of contemptible tyranny.
This is basic natural law. Certain laws are higher than other laws. It is lawful to break the lesser law to protect the higher law, which is what we see in all your examples. :)
Fair enough.