The MacQuern

Hogwash. When you are attacked, you don't stop and assume the classic Rodin pose and decide what an appropriate reponse is, you incapitate the attacker and eliminate the threat. The attacker decides if it is worth dying over. I think my view encompasses yours but I'm addressing the broader question about defence in general, not only the specific situation of defence against a one on one lethal attack. Society agrees that defence against such a lethal attack may itself be lethal. Society would see it as disproportionate to kill someone coming at you with a banana. Society does have rules about self defence.

A response to a threat needs to be proportional. It's not the aggressor defining what is an appropriate response but the larger society. This is all spelt out very clearly in the Python skit 'How to Defend yourself against a Man armed with a Banana'.

Everyone knows the separate but equal approach doesn't lead to equality. Appeals to tradition don't really cut it for me either. Societies progress and expand rights to more people. The old tradition of man/woman marriage is now being realized to be discriminatory. Appealing to tradition to deny the right of marriage makes as much sense using the tradition argument to continue slavery or no voting rights for women.

All the choices are important but I voted for Environment because I see it as the one issue that is getting near the 'can't wait any longer' threshold.