[quote]Captain Cornhole wrote...
Considering the templars Kerras and Alrik are rapists, and one of Alrik's intended victims is a child mage (Ella - as we know from Bethany's letter to Hawke in Act II), your analogy is a little off.
I'm not saying the Templars and Chantry are saints here, there are obviously problems and issues that need to be fixed. There are incendents of ill treatment that need to be corrected, thing is Templars exist for the reason of keeping society safe from bad mages. Not all mages are bad, I hoped people would understand this, but apparently not. The ones that are bad, there is little that can be done to help them apart form locking them up, at the very least make sure they are comfortable while locked up.[/quote]
The fact you compared mages to sex offenders tells me you aren't interested in a serious discussion. It would be as though someone compared Templars to ****s (which would be a better...if stil wrong comparison btw). It was disengenous and designed to evoke a negative emotional response towards those who side with mages. By making the comparison you ARE at least implicitly saying that all mages are bad and no we do NOT lock up sex offenders because they might offend. We lock them up after they do....and no you are not supposed to hold people without charge indefinately. (And you can't charge a person for being what they are.)
[quote]
What charges are brought against mages - being born with magical ability? Being different than most Andrastians? Their religion saying that mages are "cursed" and that templars have "domination over mages by divine right"? Mages are imprisoned in Circle Towers for being born with magical ability - essentially, because they are mages. If you are so eager to bring real world examples into this discussion, we have plenty of examples of groups of people being imprisoned for being "different" - just look at WWII.
Did I say being a mage is a crime, and that they should be locked up for being different? No, so please reread what I said, before pulling the **** card again. Look I'm not hear to defend the Chantry's beliefs, but the Templars (despite the things bad about them) exist for a reason, keeping inocents safe from bad mages. I'm not saying Templars should act like gestapo and arrest every single mage, what I am saying is there is an obvious need for having a police force of sorts that is there to protect innocents from abominations and blood magic let alone the mages themselves.
[/quote]
By making the initial comparison you are trying to say that being a mage is a crime, and that means you are treating mages as sub-human..,and thus you ARE in effect saying that the templars should act like the Gestapo. Should there be dedicated police and a magical arm (preferably in the hands of the crown and OUT of the hands of the chantry) that is designed to protect against magical crimes and threats including abominations? Yes. That arm should include both templar-like warriors and magic. That does NOT mean you should treat people as being subhuman for having green eyes....or for being mages. As for blood magic, I've always said that blood magic should be strictly regulated but given how easily demon can teach it, forbiddening it entirely (along with a lot of what the chantry has done) is just stupid.
[quote]
Ian isn't stupid for having a different point of view than you. I honestly think your analogy is lacking and baiting, to be quite frank.
No hard feelings against Ian here, I understand people have different views but when you ignore all my counter arguments and what have you that kinda speaks for it's self. And fair enough your entitled to feel how ever you would like about my anology.
[/quote]
I am not ignoring your counterarguments. I think they are lacking at best. Not agreeing with you is not ignoring you. I also think you are not terribly interested in an honest debate or you would not have made the comparison you did.
[quote]
Also, not all blood mages are the same, and some Grey Wardens use blood magic, as Duncan notes in the Magi Origin. They use it against the darkspawn, because it gives them an edge against the greatest threat to Thedas. The Joining and the phylacteries are also two examples of blood magic. It's noted in the lore for Dragon Age II that there is some discussion about well-intended mages turning to blood magic as a reaction against the templars, strictly to keep themselves from getting imprisoned or killed. Blood magic allows mages to use magic without templars nullifying their abilities, so I don't see why all blood mages should be villified for the actions of some.
And do the Wardens not police themselves if one of them falls victim to corruption or demon influence? There is do denying blood magic has it's advantages, but when you resort to blood magic there is a greater chance that one will become addicted to it. Look at Orisino, can you justify using blood magic to fight templars, sure. But can you justify sacrificing all those other mages in the process? No, that's what blood magic is at times. People can have well intentions, but their well intentions don't mean anything if ultimately what they are doing ends up harming an innocent party, which happens far to often.
[/quote]
Can you justify sacrificing Lady Isolde to save her son who was innocent? I am not condoning Orsino's actions, but presuming the other mages volunteered (which they did), then it is at least justifiable. If the Wardens can police themselves, if the Dalish and the Avaar, and even the early Andrastian cults could all police themselves, then there is no reason for the circle as it exists....at least if you believe that protection was the reason the circle was actually established. However see the Codex Entry "History of the Circle" and we find that protection of mundanes was the furthest thing from the mind of the Chantry when the Circles were established.
[quote]
Your statement was disingenious - which was part of the problem. No one doubts that magic is dangerous and that mages can cross the line, but whether the Chantry of Andraste and the Order of Templars are the solution is debated by many. In my eyes, it isn't the right solution to put mages under the control of an anti-mage religious organization that preaches hatred and intolerance towards them across the continent.
And that's what I've been saying, Templars and Chantry have their flaws. And changes need to be made within the Templar Order to make things more friendly and hospitable to mages. But what are we to do, disband the templars all together? If we were to do that, local police forces would be over whelmed, Wardens could barely handle the darkspawn, nor Kirkwall the Qunari. Have an instituation that sets criminal and potential criminal mages apart from society I think is in everyone's best interest. Sorta like what the Asari doe with ardatyachi, minus the whole being set apart just for being born with it.
[/quote]
Part of that is letting mages themselves be treated as human being as PART of the solution. You are engaging in a classic false dichotomy here. No pro-mage poster is saying that mages and magic be totally unregulated. We are saying that the chantry should not be a part of it, and a way needs to be found that does NOT treat a class of people as subhuman.
[quote]
How is Ian white-washing anything by addressing that there are societies where mages co-exist with non-mages, without Chantry or templar control?
Not nessicarly what you just stated being the white washing, what I mean by that is he is willingly over looking that an abomination would not have wiped out early civilization. We know that there are less mages comapred to regular people so say there is ratio one mage to ever 300 peoples. When things start off there wouldn't be that many peoples, so by math it would be until a little while that you end up with an mage based off the math. As population increases you will get more mages and eventually an abomination. I think a few hundred peeps can handle an abomination on a good day. That isn't to say abominations aren't dangerous as they have wiped out tribes before, but to say what Ian is saying is silly. He is pretending that there would be no civilization, and that only until when the Chantry and Templars came around did we have conflict. This is not true.
[/quote]
It's very simple. Magic has been around in Thedas as long as there has been people. Let's assume it's one mage in 100 people (seems a good ballpark estimate since population numbers in Thedas seem to be low anyway). That means that in any group of people larger than 20, there's a very good chance that someone is a mage. Now if we assume that a mage really were the walking timebomb the chantry claims, at least 1:2 or so would go abomination in their lifetime killing scores of people. Given that most primitive tribes are 100 people or less, you would have the population of that tribe cut by 90% every generation by abominations.
There's a word for that: extinction.
Either mages are far less common than 1:100 (even 1:1000 leads to extinction) and we know from game play and codex entries this is not so, or mages go abomination at a far, far lower rate and thus are far safer than the Templar and Chantry wish to admit.
[quote]
The Band of Three addresses that Kirkwall is a proverbial Hellmouth. It's why virtually all the mage antagonists are insane and stupid, apparently.
Then is what I have been saying not accurate? It's a Hellmouth, thats why there is a need to protect mages from themselves and innocents from them. Other places are probably not as bad, others are probably worse, but my point still stand.
[/quote]
You are going to protect mages by locking them up ON TOP OF A MAGICAL TOXIC WASTE DUMP?
Really? Really????
[quote]
Mages can commit wrong actions and cross the line - no one doubts that. Simply because some people don't agree with the tactics of the Chantry or the templars doesn't mean that they whitewash anything - they simply don't think that allowing an anti-mage religious organization to have "domination over mages by divine right" is the right idea. Just look at what happened in Kirkwall - the Knight-Commander ordered the genocide of an entire population of men, women, and children to appease a hypothetical mob only because these people were mages.
Listen, I'm not saying he is white washing based on disagreeing with the Templars or Chantry, even I disagree with them. Like you stated if you don't think the Chantry or Templars should have authority over mages, that is fine too. Based off the evidence in codex and in the three games I would say there is a need for a police force of sorts to make sure mages don't go crazy, it doesn't have to be templars, maybe create another religious free oranization to police, because you cannon deny there is a need for something like the templars.
[/quote]
Again the false dichotomy. NO ONE HAS SAID DIFFERENTLY! No one is saying that there doesn't need to be magical regulation and police. However, comparing mages to sex offenders was way over the line and does not indicate you wish an honest discussion.
[quote]
With that said I think the Knight Commander is a bad example, she was already paranoid and slightly bigoted from the start, getting her hands on Bartrand idol only made her worse. I wouldn't call what she did, genocide, but it clearly was wrong. Even her own templars turn on her in the end, if you pay attention to the diolouge there is anti knight commander sentiment stirring withing Kirkwall's Templar order.
[/quote
GIven Lambert (the Knight Divine), there are more Templars like Meredith than like Gregoire.
-Polaris
Retour en haut
Bad times.
