...Because only a loony would...
I can picture the psychological profile now..
Subject thinks invisible man who created the universe is watching him.
Subject believes he is in some way invincible, as he claims he will live on in some form after he dies (that is, after we kill him).
Subject believes winged former humans are interfering in human affairs.
Subject believes there is a book that holds all the answers of life, the universe and everything, but claims it was not written by Douglas Adams.
I'm not quite sure what the right answer is here, I'm just somewhat astounded that they seem concerned with his well being, when he's being charged with doing what to him seemed right (which proves he's insane), and would supposedly give him peace of mind. As a result of following his conscience, or whatever thing you follow to make decisions like that, he faces death.
And, lo, somewhere, Jesus saith: "Wow, deja vu."
I am a staunch cultural relativist, that is, I believe that every culture, no matter how much it differs from the Right Is Might Is White ideal, has its own value for its members. I am not trying to judge this using standards that are inappropriate, I am just confused. I am confused at the rationale, or at least the flexible and perhaps inconsistent application of a moral standard that would be a prerequisite in permitting- nay, promoting- the death of someone who has the audacity to cancel his subscription to the Muslim faith and replace it with Christianity, and yet disallowing that death if the subject has a mental illness.
It's news stories like this that promote misunderstanding and unfounded rumour about the Muslim faith. And maybe, buried underneath the 'human interest', that's the real point.