well there's also no law against turning someone into a duck
Indeed. So not illegal. Which only leaves the moral ramifications. So what, exactly, is the negative moral implication of disallowing the use of magic by someone who uses magic for evil? What actual right to it do they have that outweighs the rights of the people they hurt with it?
And no, it is not akin to crippling or maiming or whatever other strawmen are throwing out. They're criminals whose bodies are perfectly fine and are suffering nothing beyond their own feeling of vulnerability that they've wantonly taken advantage of in other people.
well there's also no law against turning someone into a duck
Indeed. So not illegal. Which only leaves the moral ramifications. So what, exactly, is the negative moral implication of disallowing the use of magic by someone who uses magic for evil? What actual right to it do they have that outweighs the rights of the people they hurt with it?
And no, it is not akin to crippling or maiming or whatever other strawmen are throwing out. They're criminals whose bodies are perfectly fine and are suffering nothing beyond their own feeling of vulnerability that they've wantonly taken advantage of in other people.
Were Legend of Korra a more adult series I'd expect they'd have specific laws for using their powers illegally. Similar to what the Ministry of Magic had in Harry Potter.
well there's also no law against turning someone into a duck
Indeed. So not illegal. Which only leaves the moral ramifications. So what, exactly, is the negative moral implication of disallowing the use of magic by someone who uses magic for evil? What actual right to it do they have that outweighs the rights of the people they hurt with it?
And no, it is not akin to crippling or maiming or whatever other strawmen are throwing out. They're criminals whose bodies are perfectly fine and are suffering nothing beyond their own feeling of vulnerability that they've wantonly taken advantage of in other people.
I agree, it's essentially amoral (as in separate from a moral concern), much like turning someone into a duck
who is to say this person wouldn't ultimately be happier as a waterfowl? but the rub is that you have fundamentally changed this person's life, through de-bending or duck-bending. does anyone have the right to do that? should they? who the hell knows?
practically speaking, I think its really a case-by-case basis
0
Options
Muse Among MenSuburban Bunny Princess?Its time for a new shtick Registered Userregular
If you were a lady, who would you rather marry, Regular Joe or Bender Bob who can till the earth for your crops much faster, build you a strong, massive house, and easily protect you and your children? I actually think the world of Avatar would have had an even greater bender to non-bender disparity in the earlier days of civilization when agriculture and law systems were less established and tribalism more prevalent, when non benders had even less technological recourse. LOK is showing a world where bender/non-bender relations are coming to a head and where the avatar's usefulness and function is being questioned, but the value of bending would be seeing changes in perception too. We see how benders have obvious advantages in many lines of work over normals but what about once they start heading into a service economy? Whereas bending would have once been an invaluable recourse for a person trying to make a living off the land, safe from marauders roaming the country-side, it is not nearly as useful if you all you want is a nice office job with a nice view. I don't doubt that benders would have been top dog in ye olden days but LOK seems to be heading into a world where bending's utility is becoming more suited for lesser-class skilled trades. I think the normals are going to find natural economic evolution to budge more in their favor in the future, but the transition is going to be rough, and bending's obvious utility as a tool of terror, oppression and traditional bias isn't making things any easier.
If you were a lady, who would you rather marry, Regular Joe or Bender Bob who can till the earth for your crops much faster, build you a strong, massive house, and easily protect you and your children?
well there's also no law against turning someone into a duck
Indeed. So not illegal. Which only leaves the moral ramifications. So what, exactly, is the negative moral implication of disallowing the use of magic by someone who uses magic for evil? What actual right to it do they have that outweighs the rights of the people they hurt with it?
And no, it is not akin to crippling or maiming or whatever other strawmen are throwing out. They're criminals whose bodies are perfectly fine and are suffering nothing beyond their own feeling of vulnerability that they've wantonly taken advantage of in other people.
I agree, it's essentially amoral (as in separate from a moral concern), much like turning someone into a duck
who is to say this person wouldn't ultimately be happier as a waterfowl? but the rub is that you have fundamentally changed this person's life, through de-bending or duck-bending. does anyone have the right to do that? should they? who the hell knows?
practically speaking, I think its really a case-by-case basis
I agree.
Up to now, Amon's only exercised it to the harm of others. If it's between Jolt having lightning hand or kids going hungry because dad had to pay extortion money today, Jolt can go suck it. He doesn't need the power nor does he deserve. The idea that it's wrong because then we might as well start maiming criminals is asinine.
well there's also no law against turning someone into a duck
Indeed. So not illegal. Which only leaves the moral ramifications. So what, exactly, is the negative moral implication of disallowing the use of magic by someone who uses magic for evil? What actual right to it do they have that outweighs the rights of the people they hurt with it?
And no, it is not akin to crippling or maiming or whatever other strawmen are throwing out. They're criminals whose bodies are perfectly fine and are suffering nothing beyond their own feeling of vulnerability that they've wantonly taken advantage of in other people.
I agree, it's essentially amoral (as in separate from a moral concern), much like turning someone into a duck
who is to say this person wouldn't ultimately be happier as a waterfowl? but the rub is that you have fundamentally changed this person's life, through de-bending or duck-bending. does anyone have the right to do that? should they? who the hell knows?
practically speaking, I think its really a case-by-case basis
Look, any given bender cannot defeat any given non-bender.
But the benders have access to what is effectively magic. That gives them an advantage. Amon is somewhat right but is too extreme in his methods and rhetoric. That's what makes him an interesting villain (also: he has a cool mask!).
Can we please stop the power level arguments?
Indeed. That he wants to rid the world of bending I wouldn't support. But him taking it away from criminals? Cry me a river. Guy's Batman who actually stops villains without killing them.
Punishment doesn't fit the crime. Should we cut off your hands for smoking weed? Maybe gouge out your eyes for speeding? Screw the police, let's all get together and decide whatever punishment feels appropriate to our particular mob mentality and put our weapons to work, eh?
Complete nonsequitr on those punishments. Politics of marijuana aside and speeding (outside of a school zone) being a misdemeanor unless you took a rocket car on the freeway, the gangs have been using their abilities as benders to beat up on people--primarily, I would guess, non-benders (criminals being a superstitious and cowardly lot)--and taking their money. When you arrest someone for armed robbery, you take the gun away.
And really, if you keep speeding through a school zone with kids around, not only would I not cry if you got your car taken away, I would be pouring a mixture of hfcs, bleach, and ether into your oil.
0
Options
silence1186Character shields down!As a wingmanRegistered Userregular
I am amazed how both this and the SE++ Korra threads have exploded, and we only just had the THIRD episode. I can't keep up!
It's entirely possible it's just the association with the Equalists. However the fact that the class is being taught underground doesn't seem necessary.
0
Options
CokomonOur butts are worth fighting for!Registered Userregular
Man, all this talk of bender / non-bender equality is reminding me of Harrison Bergeron.
You all miss the most important comparison: Sato is clearly smarter than the vast majority of Republic City, and he used that intelligence to get rich. Surely Amon should be lobotomizing him, right? He wants everyone to be equal, but that's never going to happen until everyone is as dumb as the dumbest person.
So you support randomly assigning guns to people at birth?
Actually it's akin to giving someone a dull knife at birth. Without training on how to use it and sharpen it, they're just as dangerous to themselves as they are to others around them when they use it*. Being able to direct it in some meaningful fashion and for it to be deadly, requires sharpening that only training brings.
* for those who don't know the euphemism: "you're more likely to cut yourself with a dull knife than with a sharp one". Which is true.
In the first series Aang, Katara, and a handful of others express or outright show how an unskilled bender's abilities can be dangerous and unpredictable to themselves and everyone around them. Katara randomly destroys ice sheets when she gets angry, accidentally freezes Soka, bends the wrong way, and really has little control over her powers until she has training, and only then can she actually stand up in any kind of fight even against non-benders before that she's pretty helpless except for a little flailing.
Yes let's look at the nefarious things Amon has done.
Stolen bending from criminals. EVILLLLL!
He should do better things for society like Korra did when she tore apart a city block.
Technically, what he's saying is "I can cut off a part of your anatomy, philosophy, and being. Also, there's nothing you can do about it." Non-benders see it as making benders "normal", benders see it as mutilation. Basically, he's trying to get benders to react to this. Non-benders who already dislike benders will not see it as anything special. Benders, however, will see it the same way as bender-haters see bending, a threat held above the head of every bender.
Don't fully understand how you could write that first and last sentence without any sense of irony over "baggage"
It's because the two sentences aren't in conflict with one another, at all.
Referring to the fact that you constantly make similar complaints of "this here part of the internet".
So far, we have seen a lot of benders terrorizing non-benders. While I'm not convinced Amon will be nearly as equalizing as he portrays himself, I think it's interesting to see.
We've seen a select few benders terrorizing everyone, bender and non-bender alike. They're gangs, it's what they do whether they have fire bending or pointy sticks. The rest of the benders shown are police, pacifists, factory workers, professional sports stars, and generally stand up people. The total of benders terrorizing people is around 5 shown so far (if you count Korra disrupting the equalists).
I don't think we'd be having this discussion if Amon had broken the guy's kneecaps or gouged out his eyes
Because that would actually be crippling them. As many people have been so eager to point out, while they can no longer bend people who can't bend are clearly in no way at a disadvantage to those who can.
If we lived in a world where everyone had one leg and you were born with two, is cutting off that second leg any less crippling to you?
They have an ability.
Forcibly removing that ability, whether it puts them on par with everyone else or not, is crippling.
Mako and Bolin make so little sense. "When we were kids, our family was killed by a fire bender extortionist. So sometimes for money, we work for a fire bender extortionist."
I think you're getting Amon's story mixed up with Mako and Bolin.
Amon had the extortionist; Mako's mother and father were killed by a mugger.
And you don't see Mako plotting to destroy all bending, now do you? And don't give me the "Well Amon isn't a bender" line because at the *very* least he's a spirit bender but he's likely also an air bender as well.
Unlikely to be an air bender. There was only one at the time of the last series, and the others are all directly related to the avatar. Moving quickly or being agile doesn't come with the prerequisite of being an air bender. In fact Pro Benders all have some level of the agile air-bender-like movements in their fighting.
My bet is that he's a fire bender, but mostly because I think the "pure" firebending form of bending the energy of life is more related to energy bender (what everyone else calls spirit bending).
Quick note on energy/spirit bending. The Lion Turtle in series one said that before the benders learned to bend the elements, people learned to bend the energy within themselves. Which does point that bending elements and energy are directly related. Which probably means that Amon is a bender of some sort. Also, the "stole my face" thing is giving me strong "Ko" (spirit from the first series) vibes due to the predilection for both giving information freely and stealing faces, but I somehow doubt he's involved.
Technically, what he's saying is "I can cut off a part of your anatomy, philosophy, and being. Also, there's nothing you can do about it." Non-benders see it as making benders "normal", benders see it as mutilation. Basically, he's trying to get benders to react to this. Non-benders who already dislike benders will not see it as anything special. Benders, however, will see it the same way as bender-haters see bending, a threat held above the head of every bender.
A person's anatomy is their physical being. Not their magic. And while bending can be fueled by philosophy, philosophy does not require it. And frankly if your philosophy is "I can use bending to steal from people weaker than me" I still don't care.
If we lived in a world where everyone had one leg and you were born with two, is cutting off that second leg any less crippling to you?
They have an ability.
Forcibly removing that ability, whether it puts them on par with everyone else or not, is crippling.
Wowza. So anyone who's not a bender is crippled.
Edit: I will also add it's kind of insulting to say someone who has full use of their body is now crippled.
Technically, what he's saying is "I can cut off a part of your anatomy, philosophy, and being. Also, there's nothing you can do about it." Non-benders see it as making benders "normal", benders see it as mutilation. Basically, he's trying to get benders to react to this. Non-benders who already dislike benders will not see it as anything special. Benders, however, will see it the same way as bender-haters see bending, a threat held above the head of every bender.
A person's anatomy is their physical being. Not their magic. And while bending can be fueled by philosophy, philosophy does not require it. And frankly if your philosophy is "I can use bending to steal from people weaker than me" I still don't care.
If we lived in a world where everyone had one leg and you were born with two, is cutting off that second leg any less crippling to you?
They have an ability.
Forcibly removing that ability, whether it puts them on par with everyone else or not, is crippling.
No, it is not. They are not crippled any more than someone who's lost a weapon. Losing your unnecessary advantage that you abuse others who don't have it with no less is not receiving a disability.
Oh no, Jolt can't fire bend now! He can merely do everything else any other human in the world can and far more than a lot of actually crippled people.
Technically, what he's saying is "I can cut off a part of your anatomy, philosophy, and being. Also, there's nothing you can do about it." Non-benders see it as making benders "normal", benders see it as mutilation. Basically, he's trying to get benders to react to this. Non-benders who already dislike benders will not see it as anything special. Benders, however, will see it the same way as bender-haters see bending, a threat held above the head of every bender.
A person's anatomy is their physical being. Not their magic. And while bending can be fueled by philosophy, philosophy does not require it. And frankly if your philosophy is "I can use bending to steal from people weaker than me" I still don't care.
The threat is not just against the benders who are bad people. From the perspective of the non-benders at the revelation, Amon was simply targeting benders who are a danger. To the benders, Amon is actively threatening every single bender everywhere regardless of their actions, and their rhetoric ("tear down the bender establishment") only establishes the bender's perception of the act as the more correct one.
If we lived in a world where everyone had one leg and you were born with two, is cutting off that second leg any less crippling to you?
They have an ability.
Forcibly removing that ability, whether it puts them on par with everyone else or not, is crippling.
Wowza. So anyone who's not a bender is crippled.
You're a poorly trained Word Bender, but you are one, I give you that.
But noin a world where everyone only has one leg one-legged people are not crippled, and two legged people are merely more able in certain aspects. However, the definition of crippled does not come from everyone else, but from the individual. If you remove an ability from an individual that is not shared by everyone, then that cripples them, they are no longer the whole of mind and body as they once were
No, it is not. They are not crippled any more than someone who's lost a weapon. Losing your unnecessary advantage that you abuse others who don't have it with no less is not receiving a disability.
They lose a part of their spirit. In a world where spirit actually has a manifestation.
Show one single time it has ever been said that taking away bending takes away their spirit.
0
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
No, it is not. They are not crippled any more than someone who's lost a weapon. Losing your unnecessary advantage that you abuse others who don't have it with no less is not receiving a disability.
They lose a part of their spirit. In a world where spirit actually has a manifestation.
0
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
No, it is not. They are not crippled any more than someone who's lost a weapon. Losing your unnecessary advantage that you abuse others who don't have it with no less is not receiving a disability.
They lose a part of their spirit. In a world where spirit actually has a manifestation.
Show one single time it has ever been said that taking away bending takes away their spirit.
...That's what bending is. It's their spirit,chi, whatever. Listen to Iroh when he talks about bending.
The threat is not just against the benders who are bad people. From the perspective of the non-benders at the revelation, Amon was simply targeting benders who are a danger.
Literally every single bender on that stage was a criminal. To include Bolin who decided working for a crime syndicate was apparently a great plan.
But noin a world where everyone only has one leg one-legged people are not crippled, and two legged people are merely more able in certain aspects. However, the definition of crippled does not come from everyone else, but from the individual. If you remove an ability from an individual that is not shared by everyone, then that cripples them, they are no longer the whole of mind and body as they once were
So taking away someone's gun is crippling then since they no longer have the ability to use it.
And you know, if I can manage to not insult people how about you try the same?
0
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
Quid, the difference between a tool and a part of yourself should be absolutely obvious.
No, it is not. They are not crippled any more than someone who's lost a weapon. Losing your unnecessary advantage that you abuse others who don't have it with no less is not receiving a disability.
They lose a part of their spirit. In a world where spirit actually has a manifestation.
Show one single time it has ever been said that taking away bending takes away their spirit.
...That's what bending is. It's their spirit,chi, whatever. Listen to Iroh when he talks about bending.
Yes he says it's the manipulation of chi. He does not, nor does anyone else, say that it's lost solely because a person loses their bending. Guru Pathik arguably had an extremely powerful spirit and wasn't a bender at all.
This is more like removing someone's ability to use technology by rewiring part of their brain, in a world where normal people already have their brains wired that way.
Amon is the ultimate jock, making sure that everyone is equally unable to use the internet. Or hammers.
This is more like removing someone's ability to use technology by rewiring part of their brain, in a world where normal people already have their brains wired that way.
Amon is the ultimate jock, making sure that everyone is equally unable to use the internet.
I'd compare it to something like Deus Ex.
People can literally make guns part of their body. And that's fine. But if they go around shooting people I'm not going to be torn up about removing the gun if it doesn't harm them.
I haven't read the comics, but from what I understand of them Ozai is still doing swimmingly in the sanity and mental health departments despite having his ability to bend forcibly removed.
The_Tuninator on
0
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
I haven't read the comics, but from what I understand of them Ozai is still doing swimmingly in the sanity and mental health departments despite having his ability to bend forcibly removed.
Yes but in their world it's the Avatar's purpose to bring balance, and Aang refused to kill, so he had to do the next best thing. Amon has none of that guidance or authority. And it is still removing (or at the very least blocking, since I have my doubts that Amon is actually energybending) a part of a person's spirit.
This is more like removing someone's ability to use technology by rewiring part of their brain, in a world where normal people already have their brains wired that way.
Amon is the ultimate jock, making sure that everyone is equally unable to use the internet.
I'd compare it to something like Deus Ex.
People can literally make guns part of their body. And that's fine. But if they go around shooting people I'm not going to be torn up about removing the gun if it doesn't harm them.
Sure. But it's not something to be done at all lightly.
I haven't read the comics, but from what I understand of them Ozai is still doing swimmingly in the sanity and mental health departments despite having his ability to bend forcibly removed.
Yes but in their world it's the Avatar's purpose to bring balance, and Aang refused to kill, so he had to do the next best thing. Amon has none of that guidance or authority. And it is still removing (or at the very least blocking, since I have my doubts that Amon is actually energybending) a part of a person's spirit.
You still haven't shown the bolded to be true. You're merely assuming.
Posts
If that happened in Republic City I'm sure they'd add it to the law system.
But perhaps there should be...
and so we are on the same page
Indeed. So not illegal. Which only leaves the moral ramifications. So what, exactly, is the negative moral implication of disallowing the use of magic by someone who uses magic for evil? What actual right to it do they have that outweighs the rights of the people they hurt with it?
And no, it is not akin to crippling or maiming or whatever other strawmen are throwing out. They're criminals whose bodies are perfectly fine and are suffering nothing beyond their own feeling of vulnerability that they've wantonly taken advantage of in other people.
Were Legend of Korra a more adult series I'd expect they'd have specific laws for using their powers illegally. Similar to what the Ministry of Magic had in Harry Potter.
I agree, it's essentially amoral (as in separate from a moral concern), much like turning someone into a duck
who is to say this person wouldn't ultimately be happier as a waterfowl? but the rub is that you have fundamentally changed this person's life, through de-bending or duck-bending. does anyone have the right to do that? should they? who the hell knows?
practically speaking, I think its really a case-by-case basis
I agree.
Up to now, Amon's only exercised it to the harm of others. If it's between Jolt having lightning hand or kids going hungry because dad had to pay extortion money today, Jolt can go suck it. He doesn't need the power nor does he deserve. The idea that it's wrong because then we might as well start maiming criminals is asinine.
Duck bending.
And all the more promise it shows for the character too. I'm hoping he isn't as obvious or sinister about his intentions as others seem to be.
And really, if you keep speeding through a school zone with kids around, not only would I not cry if you got your car taken away, I would be pouring a mixture of hfcs, bleach, and ether into your oil.
Link and major spoilers inside.
Chi blocking appears to be illegal and yet more bender cops.
I am really interested to find out just what, exactly, justifies this raid.
What's this hanging now?
Clip spoilers.
Twitter: Cokomon | dA: Cokomon | Tumblr: Cokomon-art | XBL / NNID / Steam: Cokomon
Actually it's akin to giving someone a dull knife at birth. Without training on how to use it and sharpen it, they're just as dangerous to themselves as they are to others around them when they use it*. Being able to direct it in some meaningful fashion and for it to be deadly, requires sharpening that only training brings.
* for those who don't know the euphemism: "you're more likely to cut yourself with a dull knife than with a sharp one". Which is true.
In the first series Aang, Katara, and a handful of others express or outright show how an unskilled bender's abilities can be dangerous and unpredictable to themselves and everyone around them. Katara randomly destroys ice sheets when she gets angry, accidentally freezes Soka, bends the wrong way, and really has little control over her powers until she has training, and only then can she actually stand up in any kind of fight even against non-benders before that she's pretty helpless except for a little flailing.
Technically, what he's saying is "I can cut off a part of your anatomy, philosophy, and being. Also, there's nothing you can do about it." Non-benders see it as making benders "normal", benders see it as mutilation. Basically, he's trying to get benders to react to this. Non-benders who already dislike benders will not see it as anything special. Benders, however, will see it the same way as bender-haters see bending, a threat held above the head of every bender.
We've seen a select few benders terrorizing everyone, bender and non-bender alike. They're gangs, it's what they do whether they have fire bending or pointy sticks. The rest of the benders shown are police, pacifists, factory workers, professional sports stars, and generally stand up people. The total of benders terrorizing people is around 5 shown so far (if you count Korra disrupting the equalists).
If we lived in a world where everyone had one leg and you were born with two, is cutting off that second leg any less crippling to you?
They have an ability.
Forcibly removing that ability, whether it puts them on par with everyone else or not, is crippling.
Unlikely to be an air bender. There was only one at the time of the last series, and the others are all directly related to the avatar. Moving quickly or being agile doesn't come with the prerequisite of being an air bender. In fact Pro Benders all have some level of the agile air-bender-like movements in their fighting.
My bet is that he's a fire bender, but mostly because I think the "pure" firebending form of bending the energy of life is more related to energy bender (what everyone else calls spirit bending).
Quick note on energy/spirit bending. The Lion Turtle in series one said that before the benders learned to bend the elements, people learned to bend the energy within themselves. Which does point that bending elements and energy are directly related. Which probably means that Amon is a bender of some sort. Also, the "stole my face" thing is giving me strong "Ko" (spirit from the first series) vibes due to the predilection for both giving information freely and stealing faces, but I somehow doubt he's involved.
+1
Wowza. So anyone who's not a bender is crippled.
Edit: I will also add it's kind of insulting to say someone who has full use of their body is now crippled.
I think. Which would, very loosely, translates to "Question of hunger is answered (character with a blurry center god fucking dammit)
No, having your bending taken away is crippling.
No, it is not. They are not crippled any more than someone who's lost a weapon. Losing your unnecessary advantage that you abuse others who don't have it with no less is not receiving a disability.
Oh no, Jolt can't fire bend now! He can merely do everything else any other human in the world can and far more than a lot of actually crippled people.
But noin a world where everyone only has one leg one-legged people are not crippled, and two legged people are merely more able in certain aspects. However, the definition of crippled does not come from everyone else, but from the individual. If you remove an ability from an individual that is not shared by everyone, then that cripples them, they are no longer the whole of mind and body as they once were
Show one single time it has ever been said that taking away bending takes away their spirit.
They lose a part of their spirit. In a world where spirit actually has a manifestation.
...That's what bending is. It's their spirit,chi, whatever. Listen to Iroh when he talks about bending.
So taking away someone's gun is crippling then since they no longer have the ability to use it.
And you know, if I can manage to not insult people how about you try the same?
Yes he says it's the manipulation of chi. He does not, nor does anyone else, say that it's lost solely because a person loses their bending. Guru Pathik arguably had an extremely powerful spirit and wasn't a bender at all.
A difference between an actual physical part of your body and magic you're accustomed to having should be obvious too but here we are.
Amon is the ultimate jock, making sure that everyone is equally unable to use the internet. Or hammers.
I'd compare it to something like Deus Ex.
People can literally make guns part of their body. And that's fine. But if they go around shooting people I'm not going to be torn up about removing the gun if it doesn't harm them.
Yes but in their world it's the Avatar's purpose to bring balance, and Aang refused to kill, so he had to do the next best thing. Amon has none of that guidance or authority. And it is still removing (or at the very least blocking, since I have my doubts that Amon is actually energybending) a part of a person's spirit.
Sure. But it's not something to be done at all lightly.
You still haven't shown the bolded to be true. You're merely assuming.