SHRA : Good or Bad ? (Omega Flight #2 Spoilers)

[Transmetropolitan]

Didn;t we already spray for Skrulls? Or was that some other board I frequent...

[Dfense75]

Didn;t we already spray for Skrulls? Or was that some other board I frequent...

We did indeed spray for them. They have developed new and improved anti-bodies to combat our poisons. Due to their shape changing nature they are quick to adapt. We may very well be overwhelmed soon. The end is nigh.

[Legerd]

From what I've read IM was initially either opposed to the SRA or lukewarm with the idea. When he saw that it was inevitable he got behind it so that someone (more) sympathetic to heroes would be in charge. I don't recall reading anything that indicated the Illuminati were manipulating government and ochestrating America's acceptence of the SRA.

If he was against it then shouldn't he have opposed it like you were suggesting the other heroes do? As for the Illuminati, you're right, I misread something in another forum that made it sound like they deliberately started the Civil War, etc. Still, he used the situation to put his own agenda into play which resulted in criminal actions on the part of SHRA heroes.

The idea that any modern government is pristine and innocent is, IMO, incredibly naive. That there is some corruption going on in it, especially in a superpowered world, is virtually a given. Heck, the standard of living of Western societies is maintained, here and there, by the exploitation of less fortunate nations and people. And what of our lawabiding, tax-paying Yank neighbours living under the Bush Regime?

First off, please don't put words in my mouth. I never said any govt. was pristine and innocent. Secondly, I'm refering to the comic books where you can get people who are "innocent and pristine". Try to keep the argument within the scope of what we're talking about.

There is the idea of freedom of conscience, which is the reason why, for instance, we try high-ranking Nazis for war crimes, and not your rank and file Nazi soldier, muchless the people of Germany..

We have tried rank and file soldiers as war criminals, specifically the ones who worked in the death camps. I never mentioned anything about the average citizens though, so again stop putting words in my mouth. To make it perfectly clear, I hold individuals who are aware of criminal behaviours going on, and who are in a position to say or do something about it but don't, as the bad guys. Even worse are those who take advantage of the situation for personal gain.

IMO, heroes are defined by their deeds, as individuals, and not by at-a-glance oversimplifications, such as which side of a given political or ideological line they stand on.

Which I agree with. IM has been responsible for the death of Goliath; the impressing of Cloud 9 (a minor) into military service; cloning of an individual (without his permission) for use as a weapon and the imprisonment of people without trial. That is what I am judging him by.

I've been told by some anti-reg supporters that AF were government lackeys and always had been; maintaining consistency with their view of pro-reg Yanks... not all of whom are IM (not that he's SO bad himself)..

I never thought of AF as lackeys since they have disagreed with the govt. on many occassions, and have even refused funding to keep from becoming such. I don't hold all the pro-reg supers as lackeys either, but I do consider those like She-hulk (a defence lawyer yet) as such, since she, of all people, should be standing against an Act that violates the rights of the individuals involved.

Naturally, I agree with you that AF were heroes, who, while being ever mindful of Canadain society, were never mere lackeys. There was never any doubt of this in my mind. And I think this of them for the same reason that I think there are many pro-regs (and anti-regs) who remain heroes of the highest order, ie. because their deeds merit it.

Quite true.

[Le Messor]

Every time we speak of overturning those laws, you tell us we have only one choice: overthrow the government.
I question, then, where in your worldview there is room for the moderation you speak of? You keep going from one extreme to the other.

"Every time", huh? Perhaps you need to read a few of my posts before you accuse me of offering only one alternative every time, because your statement is so far off that it's absolut-ly ridiculous. And that makes it very difficult to even bother reading, let alone responding, to the rest of your post.

My basic point with that post was that your posts show a tendency towards extremes. For example, one exaggeration is enough to make you leave the thread.
Another:

I feel that if someone knowingly serves under a corrupt power when they have the choice to oppose it, then they are just as corrupt.

The idea that any modern government is pristine and innocent

It looks like it goes from either absolutely corrupt to 'pristine and innocent'. It can't be quasi-corrupt. The diet Coke of corrupt.

We're not so different, you and I. I know I go to extremes, too. A little bit. Hence why exaggeration above.

- Le Messor
"I don't know why I go to extremes--
It's either too high or too low,
There ain't no in-betweens."
- Billy Joel

P.S. Skrull spray doesn't work.

[Legerd]

It looks like it goes from either absolutely corrupt to 'pristine and innocent'. It can't be quasi-corrupt. The diet Coke of corrupt.

Can it be the Cherry Coke of corrupt, or is that too corrupt?

We're not so different, you and I. I know I go to extremes, too. A little bit. Hence why exaggeration above.

Going to extremes is a sure sign of being a Skrull. OMG, Powersurge is a Skrull too!

[Powersurge]

Going to extremes is a sure sign of being a Skrull. OMG, Powersurge is a Skrull too!

Shhhhh. Don't tell... or we'll replace you too.

[Powersurge]

My basic point with that post was that your posts show a tendency towards extremes. For example, one exaggeration is enough to make you leave the thread.

What thread have I left as a result of a single (or many, for that matter) exaggeration?!

I feel that if someone knowingly serves under a corrupt power when they have the choice to oppose it, then they are just as corrupt.

The idea that any modern government is pristine and innocent

It looks like it goes from either absolutely corrupt to 'pristine and innocent'. It can't be quasi-corrupt. The diet Coke of corrupt.

It certainly can be quasi-corrupt. The U.S. government of Marvel CW for instance is "quasi-corrupt"... and/or "quasi-straight" straight dependin gon how one decides to look at it.

So, if you can pretty well guaren-damn-tee that you'll find corruption in any government, how can a person a person of your inclination serve any government? Based on personal bias, inclination, what issues are important to you and which are not? Do you launch a thorough investigation and oppose the government in question if it is found to be (based on whatever criteria), say, 50.125% corrupt, but not if it's only, say, 49.95% corrupt?

Corruption is corruption. And if all men are to be held accountable for the doings of their State, or at least some component of it, than all men are equally guilty.

[Legerd]

So, if you can pretty well guaren-damn-tee that you'll find corruption in any government, how can a person a person of your inclination serve any government? Based on personal bias, inclination, what issues are important to you and which are not? Do you launch a thorough investigation and oppose the government in question if it is found to be (based on whatever criteria), say, 50.125% corrupt, but not if it's only, say, 49.95% corrupt?

Corruption is corruption. And if all men are to be held accountable for the doings of their State, or at least some component of it, than all men are equally guilty.

To reiterrate, what I said was "If a person knowingly serves under a corrupt power when they have a choice, then they are just as corrupt." Most people serve their gov't in the belief it is just and honest. In any gov't there are corrupt individuals, that doesn't make the entire gov't corrupt. However, if the gov't was, let's say Dr. Doom's, then to willingly subject your countrymen to unjust imprisonment or acts of cruelty by Doom's orders makes you corrupt.

How can an individual "be held accountable for doings of their State" if they can't affect their gov't in its day-to-day activities? While in some countries the average person can vote for a political party, sign petitions, hold protests, sue or even accuse politicians under the law, that same person can't walk into the Capital and start making changes as he/she sees fit. Most people stand against what they see as gov't corruption by one of the above mentioned ways. To take the example of the Latverian gov't, how can a local peasant be held accountable for the crimes of Dr. Doom when he/she wouldn't be able to do anything to stop them, assuming the person was even aware of them?

[Powersurge]

How can an individual "be held accountable for doings of their State" if they can't affect their gov't in its day-to-day activities? While in some countries the average person can vote for a political party, sign petitions, hold protests, sue or even accuse politicians under the law, that same person can't walk into the Capital and start making changes as he/she sees fit. Most people stand against what they see as gov't corruption by one of the above mentioned ways. To take the example of the Latverian gov't, how can a local peasant be held accountable for the crimes of Dr. Doom when he/she wouldn't be able to do anything to stop them, assuming the person was even aware of them?

Sounds about right to me.

[Le Messor]

Every time we speak of overturning those laws, you tell us we have only one choice: overthrow the government.
I question, then, where in your worldview there is room for the moderation you speak of? You keep going from one extreme to the other.

"Every time", huh? Perhaps you need to read a few of my posts before you accuse me of offering only one alternative every time, because your statement is so far off that it's absolut-ly ridiculous. And that makes it very difficult to even bother reading, let alone responding, to the rest of your post.

What thread have I left as a result of a single (or many, for that matter) exaggeration?!

This one...
But... wait... you're still here?!? Now I'm confused.
Or just dumb. It's not fair beating me with ur smartz.

Okay, you didn't leave; but you didn't respond to the post, either. (Beyond saying: 'the first line is an exaggeration'.) It looks like you didn't read the rest of it, based on: "... that makes it very difficult to even bother reading, let alone responding, to the rest of your post." and not responding to the rest of the post.

- Le Messor
"He is the Extreme!"
- Twister

[Powersurge]

Every time we speak of overturning those laws, you tell us we have only one choice: overthrow the government.
I question, then, where in your worldview there is room for the moderation you speak of? You keep going from one extreme to the other.

Western democracy may (or may not) be the best government system ever; that doesn't mean it's very good. It means the human race doesn't do good government systems.
That said; overthrow it? And replace it with... what, exactly? A dictatorship?
Concordantly, I can't come up with anything better. Ergo, it would be irresponsible to overthrow it. Vis a vis, if it starts doing all the things that the 'evil' governments do that make them 'evil', it's suddenly no better.
That doesn't mean overthrow it; it means do what you can to undermine that particular law.

It logically follows that if you believe a government is shot through with evil, it should be overthrown and replaced by something better. If I seem to be jumping to extremes, it is likely because it seems that your view is that a single (bad) law makes a government corrupt

This doesn't mean I support Cap starting a civil war.
It means I support the new New Warriors subverting the cause, flaunting the law, etc... And the New Avengers, while we're at it.
Which gets them a lot closer to the middle ground than it is possible to be, and remain within the bounds of the SHRA. The SHRA's boundaries are too far away from the middle ground.

Sounds fair enough to me, and a far cry from starting a CW to boot.

Super Human Registration Act model 1:
"If people want to fight crime, they must be trained and licenced."
Super Human Registration Act model 2:
"We will round up everybody with superpowers to put them in the SHIELD superhuman army."
..snip...

model 1 is the law Stark offered the Marvel Universe.
model 2 is the law Stark gave them.
...snip...

Pow, I think you and me both agree with and fully support model 1.

Where we differ is model 2. You seem to be saying: 'model 1 is good, therefore the SHRA is good, therefore any variation on it is good. Therefore, model 2 is good. Because that's what we've got, and it's law!' (Speak the last in whispered tones of reverence.)

Problem is, you can't 'work within' that law without doing all those things Del accused Stark of (above). That's how the law works.
If you obey the law, then yes, you become a clone of Stark.
[/quote]

No. I'm not saying that model 2 is good because model 1 is good.

In fact, what I've been saying all along is that "the law" (as a general body of legislation, of which the SRA is but one small, non-essential, and new/unrefined part) and the system are good, and that, as a result, this one isolated law can be overturned or ammended with enough will. Thus, a civil war shouldn't be considered one's first and only option.

And you can support the system without supporting every particular piece of legisaltion on the books and being a "clone" of those who drafted the SRA.

[Le Messor]

I didn't expect an answer so soon! Dude, get some sleep!

it seems that your view is that a single (bad) law makes a government corrupt.

Aha! I think we've found the source of the misunderstanding.
What I've been saying is that the SHRA (Stark In-Law Remix) is bad, and that I don't support it; not that it makes the government whole government corrupt. Despite the occasional Homer-inspired outburst.

-Le Messor
"Even a prostitute can’t find work in a town full of nymphomaniacs."

[Powersurge]

I didn't expect an answer so soon! Dude, get some sleep!

Well, admittedly, I work nights, but for cripes sake, it's already 8 pm here!!

[Le Messor]

I didn't expect an answer so soon! Dude, get some sleep!

Well, admittedly, I work nights, but for cripes sake, it's already 8 pm here!!

That's too early in the morning to be up.

(Sorry, I thought it'd be about 3am or something.)

- Le Messor
"What time is it? Tuesday? That's too early."