2497 réponses à ce sujet

[leaguer of one]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

For the same reason we don't allow mentally ill to raise their own children. The mage simply pose a danger to their own child, wether they want to or not.

Oh my god... Mages are not that dangerous. Heck, we have many mages in the dragon age series that succesfully raised families of their own with no problems. Sorry but I don't buy that.

[leaguer of one]

MisterJB wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...
O.O

Are you serious?

Why oh heavens why!?! Who are we, or the Chantry, to dictate who can and who cannot have the right to have children or a family!?! Why shouldn't mages be allowed to raise children, or have kids of their own? There is no logical reason for it.

I gave you logical reasons. Mage overpopulation, difficulty to control, mage emotions, non-mage children.
Are you going to adress them or just continuing to use morality as a shield?

It's more of a problem that you think your point was logical. Sorry it's not.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Medhia Nox wrote...

Every human in the United States is registered - it's called a social security number.

Not true.  Social Security Numbers are not mandatory.

I just looked it up.  I knew that the Canadian equivalent (Social Insurance Number) wasn't mandatory, and it turns out the SSN isn't either.

[EmperorSahlertz]

dragonflight288 wrote...

And so it came to pass, that the Hitler card was played.
http://static.tvtrop...hitlercard2.jpg

And actually it isn't the same logic at all. First of all, Hitler and Pol Pot used the premise that the targeted demographics of their Genocide had already done their damage, and was continueing to do so. Furthermore, as we know, it was only a percieved threat, spun by them, so that it would seem real, and the people of their contries was in such a state, taht they needed a scapegoat.

The threat of mages is real, and as such the "Hitler argument" falls flat on its face, since it can't apply to sucha situation.

I didn't use the hitler card lightly, and simply mentioning it simply does not take away the validity of my statement. Pro-templars are advocating whole-sale slaughter, genocide, and are using the same logic Hitler, Pol Pot and other dictators who ended up committing genocide did.

Simply pointing out and demonizing my own comment does absolutely nothing to take away the validity of my comment. 

No. Pulling apart your argument does that. Your attempts at likening the Templar sentiment to Hitlers rhetoric is asinine. Hitler was using the downtrodden mentality and the need for a scapegoat in his people, to promote his own hate, by inducing an image of a threat, which had no basis in reality. Mages DO pose a threat. Therefore your simily is incorrect.

dragonflight288 wrote...

For the same reason we don't allow mentally ill to raise their own children. The mage simply pose a danger to their own child, wether they want to or not.

Mages aren't mentally ill.

I didn't say they were.

Modifié par EmperorSahlertz, 02 octobre 2013 - 09:03 .

[leaguer of one]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Medhia Nox wrote...

Every human in the United States is registered - it's called a social security number.

Not true.  Social Security Numbers are not mandatory.

I just looked it up.  I knew that the Canadian equivalent (Social Insurance Number) wasn't mandatory, and it turns out the SSN isn't either.

Funny point on that... I never had a job were I did not have one nor gone to a school that never asked for one.

It may not be mandatory but to get an averge job you clearly need one. In the end everyone nearly has one.

[addiction21]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

And actually it isn't the same logic at all. First of all, Hitler and Pol Pot used the premise that the targeted demographics of their Genocide had already done their damage, and was continueing to do so.

Don't you mean the Dalish?

[Sylvius the Mad]

The SSN is mandatory only if you want to be legally employed or receive government services.

[leaguer of one]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

The SSN is mandatory only if you want to be legally employed or receive government services.

Name one person who does not want that? That makes it indirectly manditory, not becasue of the state but because of the dependence of basicly needs. 

[ScarMK]

leaguer of one wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

The SSN is mandatory only if you want to be legally employed or receive government services.

Name one person who does not want that? That makes it indirectly manditory, not becasue of the state but because of the dependence of basicly needs. 

I would assume the Amish are one group.  Then again, I know **** about them so.  Grain of salt and all.

[dragonflight288]

No. Pulling apart your argument does that. Your attempts at likening the Templar sentiment to Hitlers rhetoric is asinine. Hitler was using the downtrodden mentality and the need for a scapegoat in his people, to promote his own hate, by inducing an image of a threat, which had no basis in reality. Mages DO pose a threat. Therefore your simily is incorrect.

The logic used to justify mass slaughter of mages is the exact same logic Hitler used to justify mass slaughter of Jews, Gypsies, Gays, and so on. Exactly the same.

I'm calling it out because it's true. I don't like saying it, as I would like to believe the world has moved past Hitler's idealogy and cruelty.

If people don't like me comparing their logic to Hitler's, then the answer is quite simple. Don't use Hitler's logic.

I didn't say they were.

Let me elaborate.

With the mentally ill, we take them on an individual basis. Mental illness comes in various severities, one person may have a stronger case of dementia than another, one person being bi-polar may have more control over themselves than another person who's bi-polar.

If we can ascertain through individual actions that they are not fit to raise children, it is then we act.

What you and others have proposed that we keep mages from raising children simply for the act of existing as justification, and therefore, mages cannot compared to the mentally ill.

[EmperorSahlertz]

addiction21 wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

And actually it isn't the same logic at all. First of all, Hitler and Pol Pot used the premise that the targeted demographics of their Genocide had already done their damage, and was continueing to do so.

Don't you mean the Dalish?

Well... I could.. If the Templars are using the same logic as Hitler, then the Dalish are doing that aswell certainly.

[EmperorSahlertz]

dragonflight288 wrote...

No. Pulling apart your argument does that. Your attempts at likening the Templar sentiment to Hitlers rhetoric is asinine. Hitler was using the downtrodden mentality and the need for a scapegoat in his people, to promote his own hate, by inducing an image of a threat, which had no basis in reality. Mages DO pose a threat. Therefore your simily is incorrect.

The logic used to justify mass slaughter of mages is the exact same logic Hitler used to justify mass slaughter of Jews, Gypsies, Gays, and so on. Exactly the same.

I'm calling it out because it's true. I don't like saying it, as I would like to believe the world has moved past Hitler's idealogy and cruelty.

If people don't like me comparing their logic to Hitler's, then the answer is quite simple. Don't use Hitler's logic. 

They can't stop using it, if tehy never used it to begin with. Sadly you appear incapable of distinguishing between advocating preparation agaisnt an actual threat, and promoting an imaginary threat.

dragonflight288 wrote...

I didn't say they were.

Let me elaborate.

With the mentally ill, we take them on an individual basis. Mental illness comes in various severities, one person may have a stronger case of dementia than another, one person being bi-polar may have more control over themselves than another person who's bi-polar.

If we can ascertain through individual actions that they are not fit to raise children, it is then we act.

What you and others have proposed that we keep mages from raising children simply for the act of existing as justification, and therefore, mages cannot compared to the mentally ill.

Mages are also judged on an individual basis. All those who goes to the Circle are deemed unfit for raising children.

[leaguer of one]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...



Let me elaborate.

With the mentally ill, we take them on an individual basis. Mental illness comes in various severities, one person may have a stronger case of dementia than another, one person being bi-polar may have more control over themselves than another person who's bi-polar.

If we can ascertain through individual actions that they are not fit to raise children, it is then we act.

What you and others have proposed that we keep mages from raising children simply for the act of existing as justification, and therefore, mages cannot compared to the mentally ill.

Mages are also judged on an individual basis. All those who goes to the Circle are deemed unfit for raising children.

No they 're not. All mages are forced into the circle reguardless  of there character. They are only allwo to have families based on political power. It has nothing to do with judging if they are goo parents or not. They are just flat out told they can't.
Mage are no danger to there families as long as they learn how to deal with there powers and know how to resist demons...And that is all mages that pass their Harrowing.

There is no reason to not allow them to have families.

Modifié par leaguer of one, 02 octobre 2013 - 09:48 .

[dragonflight288]

They can't stop using it, if tehy never used it to begin with. Sadly you appear incapable of distinguishing between advocating preparation agaisnt an actual threat, and promoting an imaginary threat.

*sigh* You obviously missed my alternate system compared to the Chantry-controlled one. It's one that requires all mages to go learn. I don't advocate removing mages rights like marriage or the ability to have children, or slaughtering them just in case.

They are people, and as such, deserved to be treated as such. Precautions have to be made, like requiring all mages to go learn and not be allowed to leave until after they can prove they can control themselves.

I am fully aware of the difference between preparing for an actual threat, and I know when it becomes overkill. What the Chantry does, and what many pro-templars (not all) advocate is overkill.

Mages are also judged on an individual basis. All those who goes to the Circle are deemed unfit for raising children.

What you just said is an oxymoron. "They are treated on an indivdual basis" and "all of them who go to the circle are deemed unfit for raising children" cannot work hand in hand. You claim on the one hand that they are treated individually, and not even a complete sentence later, you say "all mages are deemed unfit to raise children by the Chantry."

Simply because they're mages. That's not individual basis, that's mages being denied the right to have children they aren't like regular people who can't use magic.

You can't have both statements be true.

[EmperorSahlertz]

leaguer of one wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...



Let me elaborate.

With the mentally ill, we take them on an individual basis. Mental illness comes in various severities, one person may have a stronger case of dementia than another, one person being bi-polar may have more control over themselves than another person who's bi-polar.

If we can ascertain through individual actions that they are not fit to raise children, it is then we act.

What you and others have proposed that we keep mages from raising children simply for the act of existing as justification, and therefore, mages cannot compared to the mentally ill.

Mages are also judged on an individual basis. All those who goes to the Circle are deemed unfit for raising children.

No they 're not. All mages are forced into the circle reguardless  of there character. They are only allwo to have families based on political power. It has nothing to do with judging if they are goo parents or not. They are just flat out told they can't.
Mage are no danger to there families as long as they learn how to deal with there powers and know how to resist demons...And that is all mages that pass their Harrowing.

They is no reason to not allow them to have families.

World of Thedas makes it quite clear, that there are mags who are allwoed to stay outside of the Circles, because their magical talent is of such insignifcance as to might aswell be non-existant. And any amge, no matter how trained, might be a danger to everyone around them. There is no guarentee that they won't become possessed.

[Sylvius the Mad]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Mages are also judged on an individual basis. All those who goes to the Circle are deemed unfit for raising children.

What characteristics would a mage have to exhibit in order to be judged fit for raising children?

[EmperorSahlertz]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Mages are also judged on an individual basis. All those who goes to the Circle are deemed unfit for raising children.

What characteristics would a mage have to exhibit in order to be judged fit for raising children?

An insignificant enough magical talent as to not necessitate going to the Cirlce obviously.

[leaguer of one]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

leaguer of one wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...



Let me elaborate.

With the mentally ill, we take them on an individual basis. Mental illness comes in various severities, one person may have a stronger case of dementia than another, one person being bi-polar may have more control over themselves than another person who's bi-polar.

If we can ascertain through individual actions that they are not fit to raise children, it is then we act.

What you and others have proposed that we keep mages from raising children simply for the act of existing as justification, and therefore, mages cannot compared to the mentally ill.

Mages are also judged on an individual basis. All those who goes to the Circle are deemed unfit for raising children.

No they 're not. All mages are forced into the circle reguardless  of there character. They are only allwo to have families based on political power. It has nothing to do with judging if they are goo parents or not. They are just flat out told they can't.
Mage are no danger to there families as long as they learn how to deal with there powers and know how to resist demons...And that is all mages that pass their Harrowing.

They is no reason to not allow them to have families.

World of Thedas makes it quite clear, that there are mags who are allwoed to stay outside of the Circles, because their magical talent is of such insignifcance as to might aswell be non-existant. And any amge, no matter how trained, might be a danger to everyone around them. There is no guarentee that they won't become possessed.

Direct quote and page number please.

[EmperorSahlertz]

I'll post it when I get home to my copy. But it was in the magic section if I recall correctly.

[leaguer of one]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Mages are also judged on an individual basis. All those who goes to the Circle are deemed unfit for raising children.

What characteristics would a mage have to exhibit in order to be judged fit for raising children?

An insignificant enough magical talent as to not necessitate going to the Cirlce obviously.

Seriously that is counter to the point of finding and teaching the mages. The point is that they would use there powers out of ignorance and learn to resist demons. How does having less magic power do that?

[Sylvius the Mad]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

And any amge, no matter how trained, might be a danger to everyone around them. There is no guarentee that they won't become possessed.

I fail to see how that justifies imprisonment.

[leaguer of one]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

I'll post it when I get home to my copy. But it was in the magic section if I recall correctly.

Then I  don't beleive it. The one points of the circle to make sure mages learn to resist demons, how do mages with less power not attract demons?

[MisterJB]

leaguer of one wrote...
BS. If that were true all countries would be fighting revolutions to this day. This is not a case of someone wanting what someone else has. It's a case mages want basic freedoms. No one would be hurt if that is done resonably. Saying they will be never satisfied is a lazy excuse and lazy thinking. 

Great, now I have to explain how the world works without giving real world examples...

What the mages are demanding is more freedom. The keyword here being "more". The reason elves in Orlais have rebelled but humans didn't it's because the extablishment is set up with humans in mind; regardless of how one improves the Circle, it will always exist because mages are dangerous. This will never satisfy many mages.
If their numbers keep increasing, it becomes harder to control them. This is basic logic.

 The idea of keeping the number of mages lower for better managment is ignorant being that more mages are being born and found in dramatic ammount.

Exactly why we shouldn'y be encouraging their reproduction.

The systme the templar are using is flawed and will fall apart, like all tyrannical systems.

Because you get to decide what makes a system "tyrannical"?

And no the mage will not try to ecape the circle with there children is the circle is given better living conditions. Really, this is a case of leaving a place the clothes and feeds you for a world that demandes you do it yourself while hiding. That is much worse for children.

Some people will always prefer freedom over confort.

Sorry but you don't have any excuse for trying to make the circle better for mages. Just do ing that will solve most of every thing.

What is better for mages is not necessarely better for non-mages.

[MisterJB]

leaguer of one wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

I'll post it when I get home to my copy. But it was in the magic section if I recall correctly.

Then I  don't beleive it. The one points of the circle to make sure mages learn to resist demons, how do mages with less power not attract demons?

"Chantry law requires those with significant magical ability to join the nearest Circle and live under its supervision. While Thedosians with extremely low levels of magical talent are generally permitted to go about their lives, they are still closely watched."

Page 99

[leaguer of one]

MisterJB wrote...

leaguer of one wrote...
BS. If that were true all countries would be fighting revolutions to this day. This is not a case of someone wanting what someone else has. It's a case mages want basic freedoms. No one would be hurt if that is done resonably. Saying they will be never satisfied is a lazy excuse and lazy thinking. 

Great, now I have to explain how the world works without giving real world examples...

What the mages are demanding is more freedom. The keyword here being "more". The reason elves in Orlais have rebelled but humans didn't it's because the extablishment is set up with humans in mind; regardless of how one improves the Circle, it will always exist because mages are dangerous. This will never satisfy many mages.
If their numbers keep increasing, it becomes harder to control them. This is basic logic.

 The idea of keeping the number of mages lower for better managment is ignorant being that more mages are being born and found in dramatic ammount.

Exactly why we shouldn'y be encouraging their reproduction.

The systme the templar are using is flawed and will fall apart, like all tyrannical systems.

Because you get to decide what makes a system "tyrannical"?

And no the mage will not try to ecape the circle with there children is the circle is given better living conditions. Really, this is a case of leaving a place the clothes and feeds you for a world that demandes you do it yourself while hiding. That is much worse for children.

Some people will always prefer freedom over confort.

Sorry but you don't have any excuse for trying to make the circle better for mages. Just do ing that will solve most of every thing.

What is better for mages is not necessarely better for non-mages.

1."What the mages are demanding is more freedom. The keyword here being "more". The reason elves in Orlais have rebelled but humans didn't it's because the extablishment is set up with humans in mind; regardless of how one improves the Circle, it will always exist because mages are dangerous. This will never satisfy many mages.
If their numbers keep increasing, it becomes harder to control them. This is basic logic."

Wrong. The reason the circle  has problem have nothing to do with the number of mages. The only reason why you want less mages is because  you want it to be easier for you to bring down the hammer. That the problem. You don't have to. Saying if you give them more they will want more is ignorate and lazy thinking. This is the same excuse people use to try to keep segragation on african americans  in the 1950's.  The mages are not going to take an mile when given an inch . It's a poor excuse.

2."Exactly why we shouldn'y be encouraging their reproduction."

It nothing to do with encoragement. It's about basic rights.

3."Because you get to decide what makes a system "tyrannical"?"

If the majority of the system is ignored  by the athority then it is a Tyranny.

4."Some people will always prefer freedom over confort."

Not the people with children nor most mages.

5."What is better for mages is not necessarely better for non-mages."

Giving mages more freedoms is not going to effect the non-mages.