ana8
Missing you....
Magui
Scooby
No,they dont,...there are expections of course
exactly...what would they drink something not that good when they have the chance of drinking the best vamp foody?
faith's adn buff's blood...do ya remember btvs s1?he wasnt that strng
WatcherWes
When we were muck
I don't think Slayer blood is as empowering as people seem to think. The master drank Buffy's blood and he didn't seem to gain any power. Angel was also really strong before he drank any Slayer blood. I think it's just tasty. Also, Spike drank Slayer blood before Angel, and it was pretty clear that both Angel and Angelus were physically dominant to Spike. So I'd say slayer blood is just a tasty treat, not a steroid.
killerdwarf
Scooby
Agreed WW! And yes, Angelus is a powerful vamp who only ate rats for years, but to extend the metaphor, a Camaro SS with a 396 will still be a powerful car even if you only run regular fuel.
I see Allycat's point, though. Vamps are only doing what they do, preying on humans. We don't call a leopard evil for eating a gazelle, and according to Darwin, the leopard is improving the genetic lines of the gazelle population by pinging off the little sick ones. Maybe vamps perform the same function for humans...nah, I'm gonna take a stand and say they're evil.
I see Allycat's point, though. Vamps are only doing what they do, preying on humans. We don't call a leopard evil for eating a gazelle, and according to Darwin, the leopard is improving the genetic lines of the gazelle population by pinging off the little sick ones. Maybe vamps perform the same function for humans...nah, I'm gonna take a stand and say they're evil.
LadyLavinia
Scooby
Vamps are evil, but so are humans. We will always have evil or the potential for it, within us. It is the human's potential for evil that makes vamps evil.
killerdwarf
Scooby
Yup, and the presence of a soul is what allows a human to redeem themselves, while a vamp can't because, check it out, no soul.
So, are you saying that in the Buffyverse vamps don't enjoy their kills. A vampire is defined as a soulless creature, with no conscience, or remourse in the kill. Their possessed by a demon that kills for food. And everyone seems to be comparing that too humans eating other animals for food. The main difference is I don't kill my own food, it's dead and cooked for me when I eat it. I think if I had too I'd become a veggie.
The difference between an animal killing another animal for food in the wild, is that animals only hunt when they are hungry. Yes, vampires kill for nurishment, but they also kill aimlessly.
A
Allycat
Guest
jules, that's another difference between vampires and humas, they're true and honoust, we're too chicken to kill an animal, but if someone else does it for us and we pay them to (cause butcher do get indirectly paid by you) we don't mind, vampires however are just a bit braver, whether you kill the animal yourself or let someone else kill it, it's dead anyway!
WatcherWes
When we were muck
the thing that seperates vampires from humans is that while we both kill for food, it's universal with vampires that they enjoy the kill, and universally ignore the other options they have. The species, with two exceptions is universally evil.
A
Allycat
Guest
That's bull! It's not humane to not kill our food, but to pay other to do it for us, that's some sort of ignorance and it's sooo very low.
LadyLavinia
Scooby
Angel is not the most powerful vampire I've seen. Darla was more powerful when she was pregnant. And even the Master was more powerful than both.
Allycat, you might want to watch who you take that tone with...I'm stating my opinion....I didn't come out and say your theory was bull, I made a valid point and I don't appreciate being talked to like that.
It takes a certain kind of evil to be able to kill....I don't care what it is your killing.....
WatcherWes
When we were muck
yes, pregnant Darla was the most powerful at the time, at least in terms of strength, but she certainly didn't have the speed and agility working for her. Also, the Master may've been stronger than Angel during Buffy season one, but he lost to Buffy, and Angelus was later able to fight a better trained Buffy to a standstill.
Chasity
Peace. Love. Death Metal.
Yes, they are evil. Even if they have a soul, I'm sure they are still capable of being evil-just as some humans with souls are really evil.
T
This Year's Girl
Guest
Interesting topic, Allycat. Personally, I'm starting to think there really is no good nor evil, except for maybe "the powers that be" and the First. Everything/everyone else is just somewhere in that grey zone of morality... for example, Spike without a soul in S5/S6 was much more "good" than many soulful humans (terrorists, etc). You can't just separate things into two simple catagories like that.
WatcherWes
When we were muck
hey, remember in season 6 when Spike thought his chip wasn't working and tried to bite that girl? man, what a great guy.
killerdwarf
Scooby
This Year's Girl:
We all have the capacity for good or evil, and yes, any given person is able to perform evil acts as well as good. This does make everything seem a washed-out shade of grey, but there is a way to "get the colour to come out"...you have to look at the things a person does when he/she does evil. If they try to make amends, and try not to do that thing again, then we can firmly put them in the camp of "good". Even an attempt that fails to get the "never doing it again" thing right is a "good" act IMO, since the intent is to do a good thing in response to a bad one. At the other end of the scale, an evil person will feel no remorse, and actively seek to do the same kind of harm again for whatever reason. There is no attempt to repair the damage. Vamps are incapable of remorse...they have no soul to prod them into feeling it, and they can't repair a ripped jugular...
So, yes, grey is everywhere, but if you pull back a bit and look at the big picture, sometimes things get a little clearer...not always, but sometimes!
We all have the capacity for good or evil, and yes, any given person is able to perform evil acts as well as good. This does make everything seem a washed-out shade of grey, but there is a way to "get the colour to come out"...you have to look at the things a person does when he/she does evil. If they try to make amends, and try not to do that thing again, then we can firmly put them in the camp of "good". Even an attempt that fails to get the "never doing it again" thing right is a "good" act IMO, since the intent is to do a good thing in response to a bad one. At the other end of the scale, an evil person will feel no remorse, and actively seek to do the same kind of harm again for whatever reason. There is no attempt to repair the damage. Vamps are incapable of remorse...they have no soul to prod them into feeling it, and they can't repair a ripped jugular...
So, yes, grey is everywhere, but if you pull back a bit and look at the big picture, sometimes things get a little clearer...not always, but sometimes!
LadyLavinia
Scooby
I guess a standstill for Angel was being stabbed in the gut by a sword. Wait! I forgot that Spike managed to get the best of Buffy at least twice. Joyce saved her butt the first time ("School Hard") and the Initiative's chip in Spike's brain saved her the second time ("Out of My Mind"). Now, would you say that Spike was the more powerful vampire? I don't think so.
Vamps are incapable of remorse...they have no soul to prod them into feeling it, and they can't repair a ripped jugular...
Humans are also incapable of remorse. You would be surprised at the number of times that humans have excused or dismissed acts that one would deem "evil". Or how rare it is to hear a human express any kind of remorse. Hmmm, maybe we're not that different from vampires, after all.
I also recalled Spike looking remorseful for sleeping with Anya, while Xander was attacking him. However, when Xander called him an "evil, souless dead thing", Spike's remorse disappered. It's amazing how an insult can change one's opinion.