When I started a thread about loving having an evil race I can stomp with impunity, and some others have expressed their agreement with that sentiment, you saying that such a thing "might also be morally bankrupt" it feel very directed.
It is, perhaps, poor wording.
But consider - if you just paint some figures as Evil and Stompable... how much moral content is there going to be in the resulting play?
We were told upthread that
much of the point was to distance the players from the heavy needs of everyday moral decisions, to stop thinking about that stuff for a while! So, yeah, while we can note that "bankrupt" was a colorful term that might push buttons, in honestly we should not expect the resulting play to have a whole lot of moral value.
This is not saying that the
players are morally bankrupt overall. The instances of play are a small part of their overall lives. But those instances of play aren't going to be fodder for Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood either, now are they?