Miri1984 wrote...
The perception of abominations is so coloured by the Chantry doctrine - what constitutes an abomination, really? Is Wynne an abomination? She does pretty much exactly the same thing Anders does (calls on a spirit when she's in trouble) so should the Templars have killed her? I know some people think they should have.
I mean, is it just because Wynne was old and unromancable that people don't mind her hanging around camp?
I think it helps that she appeared to be the most moral character in the party. Although you had to take her word for it when she said she was possessed by a benevolent spirit, her actions suggest she wasn't an 'abomination' in the sense of Uldred. Anders is another kettle of fish because his spirit is corrupted and out of control.
I'd use another word to 'abomination' but I don't know of an appropriate alternative. Possessed person, maybe? Although Wynne wasn't technically possessed, she still seemed to retain free will.
In a conversation with her, she can agree that an abomination is something that is consumed by madness and can't remember the person it once was. This doesn't include Wynne, nor Connor for that matter. It seems half and half with Anders from his story, but that might just be the initial confusion of the change. Uldred however seemed completely possessed (although we don't know what he was like before.).