Is it fair for the reader to arbitrarily lay judgement at the doorstep of characters who have killed family members versus characters who have killed in general? (Meaning that murderers who have killed family members are somehow even more villainous than the books' "regular" murderers.) Case in point: Tyrion's murder of Tywin was one of his finest moments to my mind, yet it frequently shows up as a talking point for Tyrion's detractors. Tywin was far and above one of the great antagonists of the first three books, and there were plenty of people hoping for his death. To boot, the amount of emotional trauma he caused Tyrion was incredibly significant. We have several real world examples of children who have killed their parent(s) due to some abuse the parent was putting the child through (mental, physical, etc.) and while the act of killing is rarely condoned, I can't say I've heard people throw in "what's worse, he killed his own parent!" as a cause to further villainize the act, especially when the parent was a perpetrator of their own child's abuse.
Given that the moral code of Westeros is different from our own, I understand Westerosi group think lending way to the view that the kinslayer is beneath contempt. What I'm curious about is whether or not it's fair for the reader to adopt that same thought process when standing in judgement of characters and their actions.
Because it's inevitable, I also thought about this in terms of Stannis/Renly and Robb/Karstark as well. Is it somehow more deplorable that Stannis had Renly shadow-baby-assassinated given that Renly is his brother? Regardless of whether he was his brother or not, Renly was in open defiance with a (rather large) host at his back. While Robb's execution of Karstark was arguably one of his "less than wise" decisions, is it fair to bring into the argument that it was foolish because Karstark was distantly related to him and so Robb is somehow more villainous?
Just because the "gods" despise the kinslayer, does that mean we should too?