leaguer of one wrote...
MisterJB wrote...
KaiserShep wrote...
In other words, sacrificing freedom is fine, so long as it's not yours.
We have sacrificed our freedoms in order to coexist. That is the purpose of law; restrict our freedoms based on what we might do because human beings are dangerous.
It is only logical that those who pose an even greater danger ; the mages; should sacrifice more of their freedoms than those who are less threatening.
I partly agree with JB. We do have to put some limits on freedom to maintain order. But that does not mean we have to take away most freedoms from that group. The ideal from of order is that it changes when need be. That one ideal of order is not force on every problem that comes up. That order must be maintain not imposed.
In times of stress, such as creation or crisis, order is maintained only because it can be imposed. Inertia works well when there are no challenges, but when people are their own limiters they tend not to be very limited at all.
That said giving the mages more freedoms is not a bad thing. Letting have families, a town ship, and free access in the tower should be minimale requirements for the circle. Order should not come as a boot to the head.
I disagree on brutally pragmatic grounds: unlimited family connections is a grave issue for maintaining cloister environments because family is a constant link between the inside and outside. For maintaining a cloister, this is bad, and renders it unsustainable far quicker. The key to emotional buy-in with a cloister is keeping the cloister the dominant social link of the target: when a person has external ties like family, they not only have an external catalyst for escape but also have an already established support network they can get aid from in an escape.
For a cloister like a Circle, which operates on a premise similar to a quarantine, this is unacceptable if you're serious about keeping the mages in the Circle in the first place. In order to maintain isolation from the outside world, they must break ties with the outside world.
No, I don't like this- I'll even call this one of the effective evils of psychology. I dislike it, but it's a nature of how such a system works. Maintaining family ties outside the system will only weaken commitment to the system.
Instead of letting the outside family in, I believe the compromise (not a solution- I see no actual solution) would be to build a family
inside the Circle. Even if an apostate has gotten maried outside, bring the nuclear family from the outside in (if the family wants). Of course, this is a one-way only deal: once you are in the system, you're locked in. Even the mundanes.
Mages would be allowed to marry eachother or any willing non-Templar and start families if they met certain conditions. They must have passed the Harrowing, no exceptions. Past escape attempts are a no-no, and are grounds for separation and loss of child custody. Child custody and visitation rights might be dependent on having a history of good standing: you might not be allowed to see or raise any children until five/ten years after a Harrowing, but afterwards can see them freely. But, assuming you're not a major rule breaker, getting married gets you moved to a separate living area for married couples, with your new roommate being your spouse. Marriages would be approved by the First Enchanter, not the Templars: the Knight Commander would be notified, but can not block. Only the local Chantry overseer can veto a marriage, and then only if the Knight Commander provides a sufficiently persuasive case of history and evidence.
Marriage would be a privelage, not a right. The point of this is to allow (and even encourage) families for mature,
proven mages how have shown maturity and a history to the system, rather
than unions of passion or irresponsiblity. As a part of it, it wouldn't be impossible to have it taken away from you. If there is sufficient proof that the mage has conducted serious crimes, then they can be separated from their spouse (moved to a different circle if a mage, or a Chantry if a mundane), and lose custody of their children (to be raised by the Chantry). Teaching anti-Circle dogma, or anti-Templar instigation, would likewise be grounds for restrictions.
Mundane spouses and children, once inside the system, are not allowed to leave the Circle or Chantry system (though they can leave for another circle or instutition). They, too, will have phylacteries, but would otherwise be a responsibility of the Chantry. Spouses would work for the Chantry and provide services and support for the Circle: cleaning, cooking, accounting, whatever. Children would receive a formal education, similar to what mages and Templars receive. Both children and spouses would receive regular classes and meetings with a Chantry representative to both remind them of the rules and rights in the Circle, and to allow them to express their questions or concerns. Parents, while allowed to teach their children in additional lessons and values in their own time, would not be allowed to teach their children anti-circle dogma. Doing so would be grounds would be grounds for separation.
There's more, of course, but ultimately the point is that the opportunity for a family is made available... inside the Circle. There's kindness intended in this, but also a deep cynicism: one of the greatest emotional buy-ins for people to stay in less-than-ideal areas is family, and creating a family in the circle can serve to help dissuade mages from leaving. While there will doubtless be mages who want to lead their family to escape, if history is an indication most will not.
And, having felt evil for the arguable betterment of mages, I take my leave.
Retour en haut
