Jump to content

Targaryen Morality


Damsel in Distress

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, The Doctor's Consort said:

Nice excuse for madness.

No excuse for madness but his contribution to the Faith is very very large. The Faith gained a lot from the Targs even though they're not very religious. They kept the power balance between the crown and Faith very well after Maegor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, khal drogon said:

No excuse for madness but his contribution to the Faith is very very large. The Faith gained a lot from the Targs even though them not being very religious. They kept the power balance between the crown and Faith very well after Maegor.

That isn't an excuse for their deceit or their sins. If someone is corrupted and breaks the law but gives some money to charity he is still a criminal. Same with the Targs, they were breaking the law and they were not respecting anything and anyone while thinking that they were Über Humans and no one else was good enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, The Doctor's Consort said:

That isn't an excuse for their deceit or their sins. If someone is corrupted and breaks the law but gives some money to charity he is still a criminal. Same with the Targs, they were breaking the law and they were not respecting anything.

Who cares about sins? The Faith stopped caring itself. Targs built them their greatest sept and the Faith is the crown religion. That is not deceit when the Faith itself conceded it for the Targs.  Still Targs gave up polygamy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, khal drogon said:

Who cares about sins? The Faith stopped caring itself. Targs built them their greatest sept and the Faith is the crown religion. That is not deceit when the Faith itself conceded it for the Targs.  Still Targs gave up polygamy.

The Faith didn’t stop caring; they were forced to accept the Targ abominations but that doesn’t mean that the law changed. Just like the rest of Westeros, they were forced to accept the Targs as their ruler but once they were free of them no one cared about if they were alive or dead.

There is nothing in the books that mentions that polygamy was ever illegal so even if they give it up, which isn’t a fact, they gave up something that was never illegal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Targaryens are little better or worse than the other noble and royal houses. But their good apples were certainly much more progressive than the average lord or previous king.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, The Doctor's Consort said:

Civilize? Incest is the civilization they brought? :lmao:

They didn't even followed the Seven as their incest proves, they used the Seven.

Just as the Targaryens made some accommodations to the faith, the faith made some accommodations to the Targaryens.  They conquered the land after all and the ruler makes the rules.  It's not unprecedented.  Mutual give and take happens all the time.  To use an example, the Faith made accommodations rather than burning down all of the weirwood trees in the south.  The Targaryens were very tolerant and adaptable when it came to religion, which is the best way to be. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Widowmaker 811 said:

Just as the Targaryens made some accommodations to the faith, the faith made some accommodations to the Targaryens.  They conquered the land after all and the ruler makes the rules.  It's not unprecedented.  Mutual give and take happens all the time.  To use an example, the Faith made accommodations rather than burning down all of the weirwood trees in the south.  The Targaryens were very tolerant and adaptable when it came to religion, which is the best way to be. 

Only the Targs never gave up anything. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, The Doctor's Consort said:

Only the Targs never gave up anything. 

 

They allowed the faith to exist.  Would Black Harren do the same if he had managed to conquer beyond the Riverlands?  Would the Starks allow the faith to spread in the north if they had remained kings of winter?  I do not believe so.  The Targaryens were very generous to the faith. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Widowmaker 811 said:

They allowed the faith to exist.  Would Black Harren do the same if he had managed to conquer beyond the Riverlands?  Would the Starks allow the faith to spread in the north if they had remained kings of winter?  I do not believe so.  The Targaryens were very generous to the faith. 

You can believe whatever you want, the fact is that we have examples of the Seven being present at the North before the Targs and the fact that even under the King of the Isles and the Rivers the Riverlords were not forced to follow the Drowned God pretty much prove that you are wrong.

After all religion was a tool at their hands and it is proved that they never trully followed the Seven. If they had followed them they wouldn't had broke their law.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, The Doctor's Consort said:

 

After all religion was a tool at their hands and it is proved that they never trully followed the Seven. 

Government and religion used one another until recently .  A smart ruler, which the Targaryens primarily were, used religion to their advantage. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Widowmaker 811 said:

Government and religion used one another until recently .  A smart ruler, which the Targaryens primarily were, used religion to their advantage. 

No one disagrees with that. The point is that the Targs were morally wrong to deceive the rest of Westeros in order to use them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, The Doctor's Consort said:

The Faith didn’t stop caring; they were forced to accept the Targ abominations but that doesn’t mean that the law changed. Just like the rest of Westeros, they were forced to accept the Targs as their ruler but once they were free of them no one cared about if they were alive or dead.

There is nothing in the books that mentions that polygamy was ever illegal so even if they give it up, which isn’t a fact, they gave up something that was never illegal.

So polygamy was never illegal or Targs never stopped practicing it because that might be the only way Jon Snow will have a claim? Expert level fact twisting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, khal drogon said:

So polygamy was never illegal or Targs never stopped practicing it because that might be the only way Jon Snow will have a claim? Expert level fact twisting.

Polygamy was never illegal because it wasn't mentioned in the books. Personally I don't care if Jon is trueborn or not and I don't care if someone claims that the Targs have a claim at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, The Doctor's Consort said:

Polygamy was never illegal because it wasn't mentioned in the books. Personally I don't care if Jon is trueborn or not and I don't give a damn if someone claims that the Targs have a claim at all.

Then what's all the fuss about Maegor?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, khal drogon said:

Then what's all the fuss about Maegor?

High Septon's niece, Ceryse Hightower, was the first wife and a second was was a threat to her, her title  and her family. Especially since she hasn't given birth to a child something that a second wife could had done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, The Doctor's Consort said:

Which would mean that that were only pretending to follow the Seven and they were deluding everyone because they thought they were Über Humans and the laws did not apply to them. How is that morally right?

The bolded:  if they have magic genes they kind of are, and if they have magic genes that gives them monopoly on dragons... Aren't they technically uber-humans who make their own laws?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, The Doctor's Consort said:

High Septon's niece, Ceryse Hightower, was the first wife and a second was was a threat to her, her title  and her family. Especially since she hasn't given birth to a child something that a second wife could had done.

So that's not opposing polygamy? If no I won't argue further.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Sigella said:

The bolded:  if they have magic genes they kind of are, and if they have magic genes that gives them monopoly on dragons... 

If they had maybe but we don't know if they did and since the Valyrians were not the only that had dragons I don't see how they are. After all at least the First Men seems to also have magic genes and the Durrandons had Gods' genes.

22 minutes ago, Sigella said:

Aren't they technically uber-humans who make their own laws?

Then why they didn't rule over themselves and they went to rule over common people? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...