Okay. What you are arguing is that the right to life should be paramount to another person's right to liberty. The reality is that your belief is not accepted as general proposition, perhaps not even by yourself.

For example, most people feel that the soldiers in the Continental Army who fought the British were patriotic. Most people feel the it was alright for Union soldiers to kill confederate soldiers in order to free the slaves. These are examples of killing for liberty. We honor dying for liberty even more dearly--i.e., "they made the greatest sacrifice for our freedom."

You are trying to create an example where it is permissible to infringe on liberty in order to save a life. A host saves the parasite's life, yet the parasite is inimical to the host's liberty. You cannot separate my example of parasitism from that of socialized medicine by anything other than degree. Moreover, your conception of what rights individuals should have obviates the justification for the armed rebellion which created this country, and the force used to free the enslaved.