Actually, Grimmsistr, I partially agree with you.
He shouldn’t be left to rage. I suppose I worded it in a strange way. For example, when Regina was out for Snow’s blood, Snow was gaurded heavily, meaning that Regina could not kill her. However, when Snow confronted Regina, it was always made clear that Regina’s misery and anger was a normal reaction, before she was told that killing Snow was wrong (by other people). That is what I mean. Intercept his plans as he tries them, (This should include Belle taking a firm stand with him) while also giving him a moment to simply exist without having what he shouldn’t be doing foisted upon him.
But this is where our opinions branch off.
Especially coming from Regina, telling him this right off is not a form of love. I have seen morality used as a defensive mechanism. It’s not comforting. It’s not something to say to someone in that situation in the way that it’s said to him. It’s hypocritical and insensitive.
For example:
If someone is religious, and their mother is killed in a church. The last thing they want to hear from the athiest to their left after that is “Only terrible ungodly people would be angry right now”. (No, I’m not anti-religion. I am religious, just giving an example)
That is just not the way to speak to anyone in that situation. Especially the way it was worded by Regina (who would rip Zelena’s face off if she killed Henry), it was very patronizing and obnoxious from the viewpoint of someone who had just lost half of everything.