Marvel Universe >> View Post
·
Post By
Piotr W.

In Reply To
MysteryMan

Subj: Re: Seriously?
Posted: Sun Apr 08, 2007 at 01:49:00 pm EDT
Reply Subj: Re: Seriously?
Posted: Sun Apr 08, 2007 at 01:09:17 pm EDT

Previous Post

> > That depends...what if I had these amazing powers to do good but was taken out of the equation.
> >
> > Years later I come back and my friends tells me he used some of my DNA to help preserve democracy from another of my friends who thought he was better then everyone else.
>
> Ah, but you're using some pretty biased language here \:\-\)

Almost everything you originally said was completely biased...so I felt free to use the same such bias from the other side of the equation.

> When it comes to Captain America's actions, you wrote some lengthy sentences about how he thought he was better than everyone else etc.

And everything you said about & CO's actions were extremely scewed if not outright wrong.

> At the same time, you're actually putting Iron Man's actions into some very kind words, greatly lessening they impact. MM, Stark didn't simply "use some of Thor's DNA to help preserve democracy". He took Thor's DNA without his permission at the time Thor was *alive* and *could* be asked for it! And more, Stark didn't "save the democracy" in some abstract way. He created a cyborg-clone without free will to be used as a weapon!

As opposed to you putting those actions into overly bad light? It's your tactic not to debate with logic but emotions. How do you know he took it without Thors permission...you know the guy that was injured multiple times while working for the govt. Who was patched up more then once after fights...dont you think they had some medical records on him so as to better treat him? The DNA was used after they thought he was dead. We dont really know HOW they got the DNA.

This clone used as a weapon argument is a tired...Cap was created to defends democracy...oh wait under your definition Cap was created to be a weapon...yeah yeah..Cap is a weapon that was created to fight for democracy but ended his days fighting against it. I guess according to you Tony should have left his Iron Suit at home...because its a freaking weapon.

> I'm not trying to debate merit of Cap's actions, because they have no bearing on the fact that what Stark did, was blatantly immoral. if you defend Stark, you should as well defend Doom or Magneto.

Sure they do...Cap's actions started a WAR...in WAR you fight a WAR...it's no longer just a brawl in the ring...it's a WAR. You use weapons in a WAR...both sides use WEAPONS...BOTH, because you know it's a WAR.

See there you go again...Tony's actions are NOT the same as Doom's or Magneto's. You dont debate you just say I dont like it so thats EVIL!

Well how about this then...they are ALL EVIL...every character in the comics now because either they have joined the pro-reg side or are in hiding breaking the law because they consider themselves above it.

> Almost everything you originally said was completely biased...so I felt free to use the same such bias from the other side of the equation.

Would you care then to point out exactly where my bias is visible?

Stating that Iron Man created mindless berserker clone from DNA taken without Thor's consent, is describing objectively what happened. There's no bias here - all of this are *facts*. Stating that, I claim that such behaviour is immoral. You believe otherwise? Fine, but put some actual arguments defending Iron Man's actions - not start using imprecisely language to dilute the meaning of facts.

I ask you:

- did Iron Man create Thor's clone?
- was Thor a sentient being with free will?
- was *Clor* a sentient being with free will?
- did Thor give an actual permission to collect his DNA?
- did Clor behave exactly the way Stark & Co thought he would?

My answers fot this questions are: yes, yes, no, no, no. And I'm still only describing facts without judging them. If you think that I got the facts wrong, then please - point out where I got things wrong.

And if I got things right, please tell: how do you justify creating a mindless berserker clone of Thor from DNA taken from Thor without his consent?

> As opposed to you putting those actions into overly bad light?

See above. Exactly where did I put Stark's actions into overly bad light? I just described them *precisely*.

> How do you know he took it without Thors permission...

I know it because *Hank Pym* said it explicitily in Civil War #4. Should I provide an actual quote?

> you know the guy that was injured multiple times while working for the govt. Who was patched up more then once after fights...dont you think they had some medical records on him so as to better treat him?

Stark didn't have Thor's DNA from government medical records. He got it from Thor's hair he collected possibly during "*the first Avengers meeting*!

> This clone used as a weapon argument is a tired...Cap was created to defends democracy...oh wait under your definition Cap was created to be a weapon...

Actually yes, Captain America *was* created as a weapon. The difference is, Steve Rogers subjected himself to Super-Soldier Serum voluntarly. And he wasn't *lobotomized* after the fact.

> Sure they do...Cap's actions started a WAR...

I repeat: it has *nothing* to do with Cap's actions! Actually, I believe that Cap acted in increasingly retarded way during the crossover. And I'm really more of Iron Man fan.

But this has no bearing that I see no justification for what Stark did.

> in WAR you fight a WAR...it's no longer just a brawl in the ring...it's a WAR. You use weapons in a WAR...both sides use WEAPONS...BOTH, because you know it's a WAR.

So, you're basically saying that putting a "war" label on some incidents actually releases all participants from basic standards of morality?

> See there you go again...Tony's actions are NOT the same as Doom's or Magneto's.

They *are*. Should we debate point by point all the similarities?

Please tell: if Doom did exactly what Stark did, would you still claim it was moral?

> You dont debate you just say I dont like it so thats EVIL!

Actually, my point of view is clear: I see no moral justification for creating a mindless killer clone out of DNA taken without person's permission. If you think it is justifiable, please present your arguments.


Posted with Microsoft Internet Explorer 6 on Windows XP
Alvaro's Comicboards powered by On Topic™ © 2003-2018 Powermad Software
All the content of these boards Copyright © 1996-2018 by Alvaro Ortiz and Dave Galanter. Software Copyright © 2003-2018 Powermad Software