> The flaw in your position is that the position necessitates the devaluing of life. That does seem like the beginning of a slippery slope. Life is precious. I

> The flaw in your position is that the position necessitates the devaluing of life. That does seem like the beginning of a slippery slope. Life is precious. Its a fair point. My ask is does a society that allows for-profit health insurance companies to lobby our leaders, deny coverage in a game style system, directly depriving thousands of people of life... not also devalue life? Personally I'm not actually a big moral crusader, but I do find ecosystems respond with a certain conservation of energy. When one person becomes in charge of such a large cog in a system that steadily devalues life, when they have implicitly promoted such a time of contempt, it seems immensely predictable that they themselves perish in that same ecosystem.