+The terrible flaw . . . clearly reavealed . . . within the ethical test of original poster’s scenario . . . and the subject Captain’s approach to the problem at hand . . . is that the Captain appears to have had a completely . . . Godless . . . soul without even a . . . whisper . . . of . . . faith or trust in GOD . . .
No prayer:gopray2:fulnes is mentioned anywhere . . . and there isn’t even a . . . [FONT=“Arial Black”]whisper[/FONT] . . . of any Judeo/Christian :bible1: Scriptural formation of his soul’s conscience . . .
The Captain’s approach is rather founded upon “self-sufficiency” and “self-centeredness” . . . and further evidence of the state of his utterly . . . “bankrupt” . . . sad soul . . . is the tyranny of the strong over the weak . . . and the heinous sin . . . of the arbitrarily sacrificing of the weak in order to personally stay alive . . . and the fact that the Captain evidently survived the ordeal and was justly tried for murder in a court of civilized law based on Judeo/Christian civil law . . . is clear evidence of his dreadfully immoral acts . . .
Clearly . . . “self-sacrifice” . . . like unto our LORD’S deep woundedness and profound suffering sacrifice on the Holy Cross for the saving of all our lives was . . . not . . . present in this Captain’s “self-centered” immoral soul . . .
Our Faith and our Church lore . . . abounds . . . in miraculous interventions by our Wonderful God in times of human crisis . . . but the spiritually dead and dreadfully bankrupt soul of this Captain seemed to believe that he was . . . *“on his own entirely” *. . . and his corrupt and immoral actions provide clear proof of same . . .
[INDENT]**Notes from Wikipedia
[size=]"**[/size]Roman Catholic Doctrine
The Catechism of the Catholic Church, asserts that the prohibition of murder stems from man being created in God’s image and recognizes the principles of bloodguilt as being necessary for all time. Life is portrayed as sacred, and no one can claim the right to destroy an innocent human being. The sin of shedding of innocent blood cries out to heaven for vengeance.
Human life is sacred’’ because from its beginning it involves the creative action of **God **and it remains for ever in a special relationship with the Creator, Who is its sole end. God alone is the Lord of life from its beginning until its end: no one can under any circumstance claim for himself the right directly to destroy an innocent human being … The deliberate murder of an innocent person is gravely contrary to the dignity of the human being, to the golden rule, and to the holiness of the Creator. The law forbidding it is universally valid: it obliges each and everyone, always and everywhere… The fifth commandment forbids direct and intentional killing as gravely sinful. The murderer and those who cooperate voluntarily in murder commit a sin that cries out to heaven for vengeance.
Legitimate defense is depicted as justifiable, even if the defender deals his aggressor a lethal blow. However, a man should not use more force than necessary to repel an attack. The legitimate defense of persons and societies should not be considered as an exception to the prohibition of murdering the innocent: the preservation of innocent life is seen as the intended outcome. Injury or death to the aggressor is not the intended outcome, it is the unfortunate consequence of using necessary force to repel an imminent threat.
Legitimate defense can be not only a right but a grave duty for one who is responsible for the lives of others.
The defense of the common good requires that an unjust aggressor be rendered unable to cause harm. For this reason, those who legitimately hold authority also have the right to use arms to repel aggressors against the civil community entrusted to their responsibility.
The Catholic Catechism teaches that legitimate public authority has the right and duty to punish criminals proportionally to the gravity of the offense to safeguard the public good. Nonlethal means are preferred, if these are sufficient to defend and protect people’s safety. However, recourse to the death penalty is not excluded.
Assuming that the guilty party’s identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor. — Catechism of the Catholic Church
51.^ Catechism of the Catholic Church §§2259-2260
52.^ Catechism of the Catholic Church §§2258,2261,2268
53.^ Catechism of the Catholic Church §§2263-2264
54.^ DeGrane, Susan. “Thou shalt not Kill?”, Chicago Reader, September 18, 2015
55.^ Catechism of the Catholic Church §2265
56.^ Catechism of the Catholic Church 2267" [/INDENT]
[RIGHT]. . . all for Jesus