Um... okay, in THESE THREE CASES they defended it. That's good, of
course supposing that the other nations actually agreed to let the
Chantry's Templars pass through their lands. In regards to this, you
seem to think that somehow the "orphan theory" only applies to these
Marches or if it doesn't hold true for these last three AS WELL then it
is invalid, thus it somehow can't hold true to ANY of the previous six?
Please clear that up.
Again, you are only applying my
"fund-raising theory" (theories now) to the last three Marches and thing
is-- it's irrelevant of whether or not it doesn't hold true to all but
one of the cases, that doesn't make it invalid. That just doesn't make
it true to all but that one particular case.
So... heh (this is
the funny part, for me) if my questions were an argument it would have been a valid argument, just
not valid for ALL, which I never claimed in the first place (if you'd
like to spin my questions around and say I'm making claims). I said "an
Exalted March" and "could have been gathered during the Exalted
Marches", which is easily demonstrable.
The question remains,
does the good cancel the bad that the organization/institute has done
and continues to do? Pulling the 'it happened 150 years ago' card
doesn't work. It didn't ONLY happen 150 years ago, it happened multiple
times in different ages for mutliple and/or different reason, some of
which you mentioned. I could just as well say 'because of this pattern, I
have no reason to believe that they WOULD NOT declare another Exalted
March if the same reasons which they claimed as the justification for
any one of the Exalted Marches presented themselves again'. Basically
(and in the case of the elves, specifically): they did it once, NO ONE
stopped them (in fact, they were practically "invited" by Orlais) , if
they feel like doin' it again,
who's to say they won't? Irrespective of whether or not someone will
stop them this time or even if they would actually do it. And yeah, I
realize it would be harder this time as they are all spread out in
clans, but again, that's irrelevant.
No, you're not getting it. The examples are applied to the last Exalted Marches in the case of the
orphans because it effectively destroys your orphan example. You can't be raising orphans from events that happened over a hundred years ago, and we have absolutely no reason to believe that they've stopped helping the orphans (in fact we know they havent) simply because the orphans of that march are no longer present. In other words: We have established a pattern of the Chantry -always- helping Orphans, not merely when it suits their political needs or as a sort of bandaid to keep the peasantry happy.
The Exalted Marches against the Qunari are brought up in the case of monetary gain specifically because it's the only March which mentions coming about a peaceful resolution specifically because they wanted to -rebuild- the liberated nations. Rebuilding certainly means money, and the context of it certainly suggests that the Chantry will have a hand in it.
I don't even know what to say in response to your last paragraph because it's doesn't make a ton of sense to me. We already knew/established that there had been multiple Exalted Marches, and we pretty much know that if the Chantry survives, there will be more. You bringing it up again sounds an awful lot like you disagree with the concept of an Exalted March itself, which is your choice, but is merely opinion and says nothing of the virtue of the Chantry.
Oh and just because it's interesting...
Two interesting things to keep in mind about the last bout of Exalted Marches:
1. The Marches actually liberated conquered territory. During the Third Blight both Orlais and the Imperium occupied "liberated" territory.
2. The Chantry allowed Rivain to follow the Qun, and allowed them to negotiate the peace.
It's also worth mentioning that there were two massacres against humans who converted to the Qun, but such is war and we have no reason to believe that the acts were anything more than fanatical or perhaps overextended (potential hostiles? Civilians who may work with the Qunari but cutting your supply lines?) commanders. The Qunari, on the other hand, massacred any who refused to either accept the Qun or become a slave, and those who became slaves usually died from exhaustion or starvation.
Ultimately the point is that the Chantry can be trusted far more than the various nation states in upholding some sort of "common good" (I feel odd saying that, like I'm referencing the Tau), and that there is some tolerance there, although I wouldn't be shocked if Rivain saw an Exalted March sometime in the future.
Retour en haut
completely reformed, either way I would gladly fight against it.
The end justify the means mentality does not legitimize an action.
