Here's an analogy from another area in which the normal rule -
one person may not alter or injure another's body without permission - is
relaxed: self-defense.
Say Vic is doing something that Don perceives as blasphemous,
but that might also be dangerous to Don
I'm not sure who the we is in Eugene's hypothesis, but nobody is
proposing to add anything to defenses, since it's the existence of the *
offense* that is under discussion. Nobody contests that the crime of
murder, or attempted murder, exists with a rather precise definition. There
is as yet no
...@lists.ucla.edumailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu
[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Vance R. Koven
Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2012 11:05 AM
To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: Re: Medical reasons for action vs. religious reasons for action
I'm
