re: #155 ElCapitanAmerica

Because one has the distinct aspect that you have to actively kill that life, not let it die by inaction.

Why is this a big ethical deal for you? If there was a guy sitting in front of you, in the same room as you, and all that needed to happen was for you to donate your blood to keep him alive, do you think you should be forced to donate blood?

What is this huge gap between action and inaction for you ethically? What changes about the ethical calculus?