Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="The Sigil" data-source="post: 2053359" data-attributes="member: 2013">Wrote a very long post, but here's the only part I think is worth injecting into the discussion at the moment:And that's why I deliberately avoided it, because you're drawing up a Strawman with it.&nbsp; You're mixing the &quot;lawful/chaotic&quot; axis with the &quot;good/evil&quot; axis here.&nbsp; Due process is on the law/chaos axis, not the &quot;good/evil&quot; axis.&nbsp; A chaotic good character doesn't (and shouldn't) give a flying rat's tail about due process.&nbsp; Does that make him less good?&nbsp; I might add that there are many things that are crimes that are not evil.&nbsp; It wasn't lawful for Robin Hood to steal from the rich and give to the poor.&nbsp; He went ahead and did it because it was &quot;good&quot; without regard for &quot;due process.&quot;&nbsp; In many ways, chaotic good is &quot;easier to accomplish good with&quot; than lawful good, because chaotic good can just go out and do it, without having to worry about protocol, etc.&nbsp; But I'm getting off subject here.Suffice to say you are going to great lengths to try to link &quot;due process&quot; and therefore &quot;law&quot; with &quot;good&quot; and that is a strawman, which is why I rejected it.&nbsp; Due process is NOT inherently good.&nbsp; In many cases, it hinders &quot;justice&quot; from being done on those who have committed evil acts... maybe because they have a good lawyer.&nbsp; Maybe because they destroyed the evidence so well.&nbsp; Regardless, if even one &quot;evil act&quot; goes unpunished solely because of the requirements of the law, can the law truly be characterized as &quot;Good&quot; with a capital G?&nbsp; No, because now it's protecting those who have done evil from receiving justice!That's why I've tried to be very careful this whole time to keep &quot;Good&quot; and &quot;Law&quot; separate, and why it annoys me when people get careless and try to lump them back together.--The Sigil</blockquote>

[QUOTE="The Sigil, post: 2053359, member: 2013"] Wrote a very long post, but here's the only part I think is worth injecting into the discussion at the moment: And [b]that's why I deliberately avoided it,[/b] because you're drawing up a Strawman with it. You're mixing the "lawful/chaotic" axis with the "good/evil" axis here. [b]Due process is on the law/chaos axis, not the "good/evil" axis.[/b] A chaotic good character doesn't (and shouldn't) give a flying rat's tail about due process. Does that make him less good? I might add that there are many things that are crimes that are not evil. It wasn't lawful for Robin Hood to steal from the rich and give to the poor. He went ahead and did it because it was "good" without regard for "due process." In many ways, chaotic good is "easier to accomplish good with" than lawful good, because chaotic good can just go out and do it, without having to worry about protocol, etc. But I'm getting off subject here. Suffice to say you are going to great lengths to try to link "due process" and therefore "law" with "good" and that is a strawman, which is why I rejected it. Due process is NOT inherently good. In many cases, it hinders "justice" from being done on those who have committed evil acts... maybe because they have a good lawyer. Maybe because they destroyed the evidence so well. Regardless, if even one "evil act" goes unpunished solely because of the requirements of the law, can the law truly be characterized as "Good" with a capital G? No, because now it's protecting those who have done evil from receiving justice! That's why I've tried to be very careful this whole time to keep "Good" and "Law" separate, and why it annoys me when people get careless and try to lump them back together. --The Sigil [/QUOTE]

Verification