A better expansion idea than “Light Crusade”

Lore Story Forum
593

You have stated that you’ve 11 threads with a focus on Light-related characters or story since you started making threads in March of this year. That means you’ve been creating at least one thread making the same bad arguments an average of every 24 or so days.

You’re actually overdue for a new one.

When Illidan violated Akuma’s bodily autonomy, we got with Akuma and took Illidan down. Then Xe’ra had us get Illidan back, just for her to try and violate his bodily autonomy and get taken down herself. Is there a problem with that?

The devs have already stated that Xe’ra’s goals are bad for Azeroth. They introduced her as a a nauru that does bad things. You got the link. and there’s a version of her leading a genocide right now. I even gave you the link to the interview where they said that.

Illidan meets your criteria for “the Man”. You said so yourself.

Also…

You actually did question the motives of all the people who liked my post. And you were referring to the post that had 12 upvotes, not 5 as you falsely claim.

The only pattern here is that you’re not telling the truth about things you’ve said and done. Or arguing against me for weeks on end about various topics only to admit that I was actually right the whole time.

And you have endorsed Blind obedience. In your last response to me, you tried to argue that Velen had “lost Faith in the Light” and even provided a link to try and prove it, only the link doesn’t say Velen lost faith in the Light. It says that he’s no longer someone who would be blindly faithful- if he had ever been to begin with. Did you think nobody would actually listen to your source?
https://www.wowhead.com/news/lore-reveals-from-the-bellular-chains-of-domination-interview-nerzhuls-story-321100
You’re equating not having blind faith with not having faith at all and framing that as Blizzard being bad writers that make any criticism of the Light as a blanket attack on religion and authority. Why isn’t Velen having faith, but not blind faith enough?

The term righteous anger is “getting angry at the things considered not of God and/or of one’s morality”. It is often used by people to temporarily get people riled up about one thing, only to be overlooked in other instances. Or suppressed when being mad about that thing is no longer convenient. You already acknowledged all the previous times I was using a term correctly, and you incorrectly argued with me about it for days. Why are you doing this again?

And how is “”the why and how of retcons" regarding other elements of the Light not a topic of this thread, when you keep claiming retcons as the reason why/how a Light Crusade expansion would be bad? If you don’t think elements of the Light based on retcons are bad because they’re retcons, then stop making the argument that elements of the Light based in retcons are bad because they’re retcons.

I don’t think the differences in the details between the creation of the Aqir and the creation of Dwarves, Gnomes and Humans disqualify them all from being Void entities. Their creation process was different from that of the Old Gods, and those are Void entities, right? And their creation process was different from that of the Void Lords and those are Void entities, right? The details of the process all differ, but they were all created by the influence of the Void. They’re all Void entities.

I’m being consistent. You are not.

Lilian Voss isn’t leading the Forsaken. It’s Calia that’s actually representing the Forsaken at meetings of faction leaders. I’m struggling to remember if we even seen Lilian Voss doing anything in the game Shadowlands launched.

I say both genocide and cultural genocide. And just so we’re clear, you’re asking me if we see Mag’har getting Lightbound to know they’re actually getting Lightbound- something that you should know the answer to if you’ve actually seen the scenario? Right? Because seeing Mag’har orc Orc models labeled ``Lightbound” and being told they’re being converted is not enough evidence for you to believe something like that is happening. Do I have that right?

If you enjoy Death Knights for their horrific situation and rise above what the Lich King forced on them such as a literal hunger for pain; why can’t you enjoy Turalyon or Yrel being manipulated by Xe’ra into a horrific situation and the idea of them eventually being able to rise above what she’s forced on them? Like her plot to forcefully convert people, commit genocide, and lead a grand crsade of the Light across multiple worlds?

Your in game content and official published material, such as an in-game quote from Scarlet Onslaught founder and leader Brigitte Abbendis renouncing the Scarlet Crusade and “proof” that the Scarlet Crusade was wiped out is countered by the fact that the Scarlet Onslaught dresses as, acts as, and believes as do the rest of the Scarlets (including Crusaders). And there are literally still Scarlets (including Crusaders) walking around in the game.

I’m not twisting your words to make you look close minded. I’m just pointing out that what you’re saying is wrong. And pointing out all the bad arguments and contradictory logic your faulty premise is based on yourself. Because you’re not basing your conclusions in actual facts or lore that don’t actually stand up to any real scrutiny.

……………………….

And No, begging your employer for mercy when they haven’t even told you what they’re going to do and then following their instructions is not defying them. Just like if you were to beg someone to have mercy on you and then do exactly as they dictate, it would not be an act of defiance. ““Virtues count for nothing if you stray from the path the Light has chosen for you.” Was Xe’ra speaking in part to Turalyon. Not vice versa.

And the folks at WoWhead would know this if they’d actually read and cited the actual book instead of a quest that doesn’t actually portray the situation, but is merely related to it.

You argue that religiously-motivated villains are overused these days. But the reality is that religious motivated characters or even just religious characters that don’t end up as villains are used even more often.

Take for example, your link…

https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SinisterMinister

Itself references a single trope and compares it to two tropes related to heroic portrayals: badass preacher and good shepard. There’s so many versions of good priests, they get divided into their own tropes differentiating action oriented ones from less action oriented ones, which altogether outnumber the bad ones.

https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/GoodShepherd
https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BadassPreacher

And that’s not counting the countless portrayals that aren’t heroic/villainous at all, and are just characters who’re guided by their religious values, but it doesn’t make them heroes or villains. You know, just the normal religious people who’re too numerous and mundane to even bother counting.

https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ScaryDogmaticAliens

Similarly, your second example isn’t even about religion specifically at all. It shows that fanatical aliens can be religious, or political, imperialist or something else entirely. It also makes special note under the section of aliens as religious analogue that of all the various kinds, religious fanatic aliens are the kind most likely to end up getting a more positive portrayal by the end of the story.

So yeah, fanatical religious aliens are a thing, but non-religious fanatical aliens are even more of a thing. And religious aliens are more likely than others to get a positive portrayal at some point.

10 Likes
594

Your subjective values judgement about my arguments aside, @Tammy, several of them have had different facts. Also, are you saying me making a thread asking about Light vs Void prophecies is in the same category as arguing against “Light Crusade”? Are you saying that arguing against making Velen an apostate in one thread is the same argument as arguing against making Turalyon a villain in another?

The problem is Illidan was brought back, whitewashed and given a happy ending despite his actions. Meanwhile Xe’ra was jobbed – for Illidan, at that - and an AU version is set for the villain bat despite hers.

The devs never said Xe’ra’s goals were bad for Azeroth, they said they wouldn’t necessarily be good for everyone, there’s a difference. They also never told us what Xe’ra wants, what happens if she gets her way, or why she wants it. I also explained when and why Illidan later ceased to meet that criteria for “The Man”, why do you ignore that part?

I said most, not all, about your upvotes; you’re being disingenuous. Also, when did I supposedly admit you’re supposedly right? And what were you supposedly right about?

Your leap of logic about blind obedience almost sounds plausible, but isn’t. For one, when did I say Velen had lost faith? I actually said it looks like he’s being set up for that, and argued why I think the story shouldn’t go that way. Also, the interview said Velen was skeptical about the Light. You can be a believer without having blind obedience, despite what some people say, but the trend I observed was troubling.

Just because some people misapply the righteous anger doesn’t make your claim about it correct. Why do you try to insist it is?

The original topic of this thread is better ideas than “Light Crusade”. Other elements of the Light aren’t always relevant to that point. Those other elements you claim aren’t relevant to that initial point, why bring them up?

Of course those differences about the Aqir and Dwarfs/Gnomes/Humans don’t count to you when you’re cherry-picking. Especially when you claim my arguments aren’t based on lore… except for all the lore they’re based on like my rebuttal about the Xe’ra quest chain “In the House of Light and Shadow”, and in-game quotes and events.

After checking the game, it’s true Voss does not lead the Forsaken, but neither does Calia. Voss, not Calia, was at the meeting where the Horde Council is formed, as seen here.

https://wowpedia.fandom.com/wiki/Lilian_Voss#Visions_of_N.27Zoth

She even has a conversation with Geya’rah afterwards. Calia is, at most, is an advisor to Voss. The Forsaken has a council of their own to rule their people, like a smaller scale version of the new Horde council.

Your in-game content is countered by the fact that we get more information from the Mag’har than Yrel’s group and several elements such as Grom’s atonement are unaddressed. The answer is no, there is no forced conversions or Lightforging in that scenario… but I didn’t say so because I didn’t think you’d believe my answer given your clear contempt for anything I say on this topic.

I can enjoy the Death Knights because they were introduced as they are, not clumsily villain-batted further down the road, aren’t a product of ham-fisted retcons nor leave a pile of unanswered questions.

Because seeing the Scarlet Onslaught models labelled “Scarlet Onslaught”, seeing their leader verbally renounce the Scarlet Crusade before abandoning the people and their goal, and the aforementioned differences that counter your “counters” is not enough evidence to believe they’re a separate group. Do I have that right?

Xe’ra was replying to Lothraxion but also speaking to the others during their confrontation regarding Alleria. Full exchange between Turalyon, Lothraxion and Xe’ra;

“A great and terrible presence filled the hall. Turalyon felt holy wrath coalescing around Alleria. He stepped next to her. “Xe’ra, please, show mercy,” he said.
I warned her what would happen if she tolerated the Shadow. And now she would defile this place.
Lothraxion knelt before the whirling power of the Mother of Light. "Hear my words. Lady Alleria Windrunner came back to save us, knowing that she would not be accepted here. Courage, honor, selflessness… these virtues still reside in her heart."
Virtues count for nothing if you stray from the path the Light has chosen for you.
And yet, despite her anger, Xe’ra hesitated.

Turalyon opened his mind to her, letting her see his doubts, anguish, and resolve. "I beg you, Xe’ra, do not harm her."
Xe’ra’s merciless regard examined his soul, and then turned back to the woman he loved.

A Thousand Years of War (from pages 42-23)

After one minute and five short sentences from Turalyon and Lothraxion combined, Xe’ra compromises; typical fanatics, so quick to compromise, amirite?

Why do you keep ignoring the fact that the story outright says Xe’ra clearly hesitated after Turalyon’s and Lothraxion’s statements? What do you think Turalyon should have done? If one of your family members was imprisoned and you disagreed with their imprisonment, would you personally storm the prison and break them out of jail?

My point about character types is that religiously motivated villains has become overused, not that other types of religious characters don’t exist or are greatly outnumbered.

Why did you ignore the fact that I counted the examples of “Good Shepard” and “Sinister Minister”? As shown, the Sinister Ministers outnumber the Good Shepherds almost 2-to-1 in fiction.

Why did you ignore the fact that those other priest tropes aren’t specifically about good priests, just other types of priest characters (such as the “Warrior Monk”)? The reality is that some of the examples in “Badass Preacher” are villains, and the majority of them qualify for either the “Good Shepard” or “Sinister Minister” tropes.

Why did you ignore the fact that I stated to check religious examples of the “Scary Dogmatic Aliens” and “The Fundamentalist” tropes? I knew that there were non-religious examples of those tropes, and thought my words inferred that.

You also didn’t answer these questions;

  • Which fictional characters do you consider morally good? Would you say they’re infallible?
595

Your “A Better Expansion than the Light Crusade” is nothing but you repeating your bad arguments about why you don’t want a Light Crusade expansion. You devote exactly one sentence to what you consider a better expansion idea: a Light/Void show down, but provide no real information about how such an expansion would actually play out. Just another one of your almost monthly threads decrying anything that paints Xe’ra, Yrel, Turalyon or various elements of the Light negatively.

My observation that your opinions are bad and unconvincing isn’t just me. You admit that you’ve been making the same general arguments an average of ever 30 days or so because people aren’t accepting them, plenty of other people are disagreeing with you, and you try to dismiss any disagreement as having something personally against you. And you erroneously cast suspicions on everyone else. You’ve been quoted doing this. No need to lie about it.

Your idea that Velen will become an apostate or lose his faith is entirely because you heard an argument that said he doesn’t have blind faith. There’s no reason why the statement that Velen doesn’t have blind faith should make you jump to the idea that the Prophet/Leader of the Draenei will suddenly lose any and all faith unless you’re conflating the two.

You’re seriously here arguing that Xe’ra needs to be brought back, whitewashed and given a happy ending for her ctions. And you seem to think that giving Yrel a “legitimate reason to commit genocide” will somehow reflect better on her characterization and the Light. You have zero room to complain about it happening to Illidan, who you already admitted qualifies as “the Man” as well.

And now you’re seriously suggesting that the developers explaining that what Xe’ra wants isn’t good for Azeroth and that the Light can be oppressive, doesn’t mean it’s bad.
https://www.youtube.com/watchv=8PBzHRc4FZY&t=1663s&ab_channel=lordmons&loop=0

I insist that you misapply the term righteous anger because I am using it correctly correctly. I’ve been correct every single time you’ve tried to question my use of various terms. You’ve been wrong every time. You’ve also misapplied other words before.

I’m not cherry-picking by lumping the Void Lords, Old Gods, Aqir and Dwarfs/Gnomes/Humans together because according to Lore, they’re all possible through the Void. Lumping things together is the opposite of cherry picking. You’re cherry picking by suggesting that certain entities do and don’t count- and you’re contradicting yourself even when I gave you the luxury of making up your own definition.

The Scarlet Onslaught models labelled “Scarlet Onslaught”, seeing their leader verbally renounce the Scarlet Crusade before abandoning the people and their goal, and the aforementioned differences are contradicted by thing that exist in game like actual in game models that show the Onslaught dressing like, acting like, and not actually doing anything different from the Crusade. Also, the still existing Crusade models and other Scarlet groups directly contradict the claim that that the Scarlets are completely wiped.

Similarly, there is nothing in game that actually contradicts Grey’ah’s description of events or the things we see happening on screen. You can’t show anything that actually contradicts. Your only complaint is that Blizzard didn’t show enough of it, therefore you deny what we do see/hear even happened at all and/or want Blizzard to retcon it.

The in-game quotes of “In the House of Light and Shadow” don’t quote the events. If you’ll go back and read it, all Turalyon does is beg for mercy. Begging for mercy in the face of an unknown punishment and then going along with the punishment anyway is not defiance. Xe’ra makes no compromise because nobody knew what Xe’ra was ever going to do to begin with.

…

A rather personal question there.

If one of my family members was imprisoned under an unjust law and I disagreed with it, I would give a more impassioned defense than simply begging for mercy. I’d then protest the decision, state that I disagree with it, and help my family member as we try to appeal the decision. Depending on my capabilities and the circumstance, yes, I would willing to helping commit illegal acts to aid them in their imprisonment, up to and including escape. It’d be the least I can do if I’m going to go around claiming I was defiant or managed to change peoples’ minds.

Are you saying you would simply allow your loved ones to be unjustly locked up without offering more than a plea of mercy pre-sentencing, then turn around and tell people that you trusted the judge’s decision and then try to claim you stood up to the judge and defied them/changed their mind?

Don’t let your desire to obey authority/religion leave you and your loved ones open to abuse. At least do more than beg for mercy.
…
If you have a problem with things that are overused, you should embrace religiously motivated villains. My point about character types is that religiously motivated non-villains villains are even more overused .

For example, the singular “Sinister Minister” trope is only the majority if you ignore all the many tropes associated with non-villainous religious characters. Many of the characters qualify for multiple tropes, but there’s still ultimately way more non-villainous religious characters than villainous ones.

Similarly, your focus on scary dogmatic aliens ignores all the different ways that “Extremism/Dogmatism” is bad without actually being a take down on religion. I also highlighted the fact that compared to all kinds of other extremist aliens, religious extremist aliens are the ones most likely to get a positive portrayal. Afterall, you’re trying to use the idea that Blizzard telling an “Extremism is bad” story to suggest they’ll actually end up universally condemning religion in general and the Light in particular. This trope shows that it’s less likely to occur if the extremists are religious.

Heck, until the largescale abandonment of the Comics Code Authority and Hayes Code in the US, there were decades in which you couldn’t release popular media that criticized Christian clergy in the US.

…

The idea that someone can be declared “morally good” therefore anything they might do, no matter how terrible, must also be “morally good” by default is often used by people who engage in black and white thinking to justify all kinds of horrible and evil acts. So I define characters not by “what they are” but by what they actually do in the story. You know, like how you keep insisting Blizzard give a “justified reasons for genocide” because you want to try and preserve a positive moral portrayal of Light based characters even as they commit horrific acts. Or the idea that the Void must be portrayed in a morally negative light means it can’t make non-villainous entities.

So a couple of characters I consider to be excellent examples when it comes to consistently morally good acts in their respective narratives would include: Tanjiro from Demonslayer, Po from Kung Fu Panda, Leslie Knope of Parks and Recreation, Anduin from Warcraft, and Padme Amidala of Star Wars. None of them infallible, though.

7 Likes
596

Thank you for explaining what you meant by morally good characters. Now would you say those characters you listed are infallible? I don’t think they are, and that’s what I’d expected of the Naaru - good, but not infallible. In light of that, here’s the short version of my Light/Void showdown expansion idea (note this is fanfic and theorycrafting);

  • Yogg-Saron returns in a Sha-like form and starts spreading his influence in Northrend and beyond (through things including Saronite).
  • Some Naaru come to Azeroth and seeing the dire state of the planet with all the dark magic damage and decide to go scorched earth. They bring in Yrel and co. for that, with Lightforging being like a protective seal and killing those who refuse.
  • The goal is to fight off Yrel’s group, convince the Naaru ala Algaon that they don’t need to go scorched earth or holy war.
  • 10.0’s final raid has AU Garrosh as the final boss (still a better person than MU Garrosh)
  • Afterwards, Yrel goes on the offensive (she an AU Garrosh had a thing). Also, the Yogg-Saron Sha are spreading, mobilizing the Mantid and seeking to bring Nerubians back into the fold, and attempt to assassinate Velen. A Light Lord appears, as does a Void lord.
  • 10.1’s final raid has a living Nerubian possessed by Yogg-Saron sha as the final boss. Possible Nerubian redemption, maybe even Lightforged nerubians.
  • We think the Void’s manipulating people against the Light… but it turns out all they did was tell a few lies and the sudden wave of opposition to the Light came from grudge and paranoia. But this only learned after the raid in Patch 10.2 where we face off against Yrel or the Naaru she serves. This also cripples the aforementioned Light Lord.
  • In 10.3, we pick up the pieces and take the fight to one of the Void Lords with Elune’s help - she’s a First One in this idea, resolving the eons-old Light vs Void conflict briefly or permanently.
  • End of expansion and pre-patch for next one.

You refuse to admit that arguing against Velen becoming an apostate is not the same as arguing against Turalyon being villain-batted. Explain how they’re the same argument? How is comparing prophecies from the Light and the Void arguing that the AU Draenei have legitimate grievances against the Mag’har?

So much for your “repeating bad arguments” accusation. The only one repeating here is you repeating debunked accusations.

No, you’re just assuming I want Xe’ra back and whitewashed with a happy ending; have a ruthless Naaru if you want, I just say she never should’ve been killed off or villain-batted. By the way, the youtube link didn’t work, could you give an alternate source.

How have I supposedly misapplied the term righteous anger? And, again, what makes righteous anger righteous? I conceded your correction about the term “brotherhood”.

You’re cherry-picking in the parts of the lore to try and make your false equivalence argument for the Aqir vs the Dwarfs/Gnomes/Humans. The Dwarfs/Gnomes/Humans wouldn’t have existed without the Titans and Titanforged, but the Aqir did.

In addition to the points I’ve already explained, the Scarlet Onslaught have Shadow Priests and Death Knights in their ranks, the latter in particular the number one sin as far as the Scarlet Crusade was concerned. Those models you cite are a case of gameplay and story segregation – like how we can still run the Scarlet Monastery dungeon and kill Whitemane despite her being canonically a Death Knight and turned away from the Scarlet Cruasade; that, or the devs were lazy.

I have more complaints about Geyra’rah than what you said, and you know it. I didn’t want those Light based characters in question to commit those acts. But since they have, I say, among other reasons too, if we can whitewash Sylvanas and Illidan, we can whitewash Yrel and co. too (especially since that can be done without retcons, unlike the aforementioned edgelords). The in-game quotes from that quest reference the events in the book, and I’ve quoted the book. If you’re in denial about that, that’s on you.

What if said family member of yours were working with agents from another country that was openly at war against your own? Would you do all that to free them then?

Are they being unjustly locked up when the incarceration is happening for lies and treason, as in knowingly working with an avowed enemy during a war and lying about it?

I don’t have a desire to blindly obey authority any more than you have a desire for lawlessness. But at least don’t let your contrarianism make you turn a blind eye to wrong doing from your loved ones. At least call them out if they do something like murder or something lesser like drug dealing.

The Sinister Minister is the counterpart of the Good Shepard trope you cited. Don’t try to move the goalposts. Can you even give examples of these “many tropes” associated with non-villainous religious characters?

The Church is not above criticism due to us - people, we (including myself) still sin. Your argument also has a few big problems;

  • The Hays Code was abolished 53 years ago; 1968 to be precise.
  • The Comics Code was first amended to allow negative depictions of authorities 50 years ago, in 1971.
  • The Hays Code and the Comics Code Authority only ever applied within the U.S. (and plenty of criticism happened outside)

Now the pendulum swings too far the other way, as if it’s heading towards “if Christianity is depicted, it must be criticized at least at some point in the story, and shall never be presented in such a way as to create respect for the institution”. Media also often singles out Christianity, as seen in these lists of examples (even non-Christians like Rowan Atkinson and Richard Dawkins have called that double standard out. Yes, that Richard Dawkins; when a man who literally built a career and a social movement around attacking religion says a religion is being treated unfairly, you know things have gone too far);

https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/AcceptableReligiousTargets

https://allthetropes.org/wiki/Acceptable_Religious_Targets

597

The Naaru Prime if Villain-batted will be no different from the Pharisees and Sadducees alas. Of course Paul was redeemed…

1 Like
598

You obviously didn’t read those links you shared because they both in fact point out all the reasons why Catholicism is considered an acceptable religious target due to its long history of hypocrisy.

It even points out how historically Christianity tried to subdue cultures and that’s exactly what Yrel and co are trying to do on AU Dreanor.

They even quote Monty Python, one of the best comedic criticisms of Catholicism is the hypocrisy of Catholic vs Protestant views on birth control in The Meaning of Life, as Denona pointed out either here or in another thread the same thing. Your links don’t support your argument, they actually support the argument of your opponents.

Catholicism is an acceptible target when it’s pointing out the hypocrisy in the actions or values of the church. In this regard people are point out that it’s okay if the Light as an extension of Abrahamic religion is villian batted because the Lightbound are actually hypocritical to the tenants of the Light which promotes peace, forgiveness etc, not assimilation through force.

5 Likes
599

I think you’re the one who didn’t read everything in those links, because they both acknowledge legitimate criticisms and call out the double standards (such as stating hypocrisy is also found outside the Catholic Church, Christianity or religious groups, and acknowledging that Christianity is getting singled out more than the other groups).

I contend they should not have not gone that route with the “Lightbound”. In fact, if anything, the Lightbound are like the Byzantine Empire Christians from the Byzantine/Seljuk Wars who initially did it to defend themselves from the unprovoked attacks by Seljuk Empire Muslims.

While you have a point, there is a difference. The Pharisees and Sadducees who opposed Jesus had selfishly turned against the God they should have served. Xe’ra is being portrayed as a sincere believer, but a ruthless fanatical one with a questionable cause.

600

I dunno. I watch TV shows, read books and see movies. I think Islam gets singled out plenty. Maybe not for hypocricy specifically, but for just about everything else, with fewer representations of “good Muslims” than you get of “good Christians”.

This whole debate going on really just looks, from a neutral outside perspective, like you’re upset that a fantasy quasi-religious force of the universe touches too close to home for you and you’re projecting your issues with media depictions of your personal belief system on to a game’s belief system that gives you magic super-powers.

I’m not saying that is the case, just that it really looks to be the case.

5 Likes
601

There are for sure vestiges of the Abrahamic Faiths in how the Light is depicted, dating all the way back into the RTS era where they went on about angels and humans followed a singular god. I mean, its been called Holy magic and is festooned with cross iconography in the game, for goodness sake.

However, they are moving past that. The Light is taking a place as a morally ambivalent cosmic force, which is for the good of the game in the long run.

Void = Evil and Light = good is very old school reductionist thinking that limits storytelling opportunities.

4 Likes
602

I never said others don’t get treated unfairly too, which works are you talking about? Islam got negatively singled out a lot for a few years after 9/11, and that was wrong. For the past 10-15 years, the media has been shifting to positive discrimination (almost as if overcompensating).

I cited several reasons for my opposition involving the lore and quality of writing (such as Turalyon moving further away from fanaticism and having Velen and Faol as voices of moderation for him… only for people to try and peg him as a Light fanatic baddie), did you read those reasons? How much of this debate have you read?

Some people are ignoring my arguments about the lore and writing because they think I’m only doing this due to my beliefs (which is also an Ad Hominem claim from some of them).

While you have a point, making everything shades of grey can also be just as limiting; if everyone is “right” or everyone is “wrong”, no one is either because “right” and “wrong” have lost all meaning. If everything is edgy, nothing is.

603

Hate to break it to you bud, but the majority of life is a series of morally grey choices. Most things aren’t ever black and white. Few things are outright wrong, everyone agrees stuff like murder etc are wrong.

Life gets easier when people stop trying to put everything in a neat little box :wolf:

1 Like
604

But how is murder defined?

Hate to break it to you bud, but easy doesn’t equal justified.

To use your example, how many murderers murder because they see that as the “easy” solution to get what they want? (whether it’s money, pleasure, revenge, comfort, confidentiality…)

Life gets richer when people stop trying to base morality on selfish gain.

605

Murder is still wrong…like literally every single civilization has or had a law against the taking of a innocent life….

Like why are you trying to justify the taking of a life as long as you get something out of it? Seems a bit sick and twisted

It’s almost like you missed the ENTIRE point.

606

Don’t twist my words. I wasn’t trying to trying to justify the taking of a life as long as you get something out of it. I was explaining the flaw with your argument for life being mostly morally grey. Especially this part;

If everyone agreed murder is wrong, there’d be a lot less killing in the world. We - as in humanity - have a remarkable tendency to justify wrongdoing, including murder.

607

There’s a reason we have court systems and rule/laws because life and the decisions we make are COMPLICATED and not black and white as you want them to be.

Which is the entire damn point that went right over your head. :wolf:

608

And yet even the courts aren’t infallible (look at the debacle that is the Kyle Rittenhouse trial).

Things might not be as black and white as I want them to be, but they aren’t as much shade of grey as you claim either.

Which the point I’m trying to make that I think you missed.

609

No one is saying they’re infallible and sometimes they do fail. But there’s a reason we arent living in the Stone Age and still stoning people because they were different or had a disability nobody understood.

610

I know shades of grey exist. My points are black and white exists more than most people today either realize or are willing to admit, and just because certain choices make life “easier” doesn’t mean people should do them.

611

Nobody is suggesting otherwise though. Don’t know who you think is. :wolf:

612

Where do you stand on the Kyle Rittenhouse debacle?

I think it’s pretty clear he committed second degree murder, or at the very least was provoked into manslaughter. I agree the courts might not be good at delivering fair justice.

1 Like