Jasmine's baddie ??
- Thread starter Dyoll
- Start date
Blondie Bear
Zydrate Addict
It wasn't just about people dying. It was about the loss of self-determination, self-control, and free will. In order to be a peaceful world, everyone had to stop being human. Kind of like Invasion of the Body Snatchers.
C
charmingslayer
Thats creepy
Dancing man
Scooby
She was eating people! :lmao: That's evil in my book! But I really liked Jasmin...she made me laugh.
C
charmingslayer
Thats a joke right...lol
Dancing man
Scooby
Yeah It wasnt as black and white as that though. Eating a few people to save billions is a fair trade.
Unless your the one being eaten. :lmao:
Joyce Summers
Mom of a Chocoholic
I agree with what Blondie Bear said- it was very Body Snatchersish.
For there to be total world peace people can not be allowed to disagree, which means they cannot be allowed to have an opinion, thus free will goes out of the window.
If we're ever going to have that kind of peace in the world, it has to be on our terms and because we actively made the decision. Not because some otherworldly being eradicates our thoughts, our opinions, everything that makes us who we are.
World peace at the sacrifice of hundreds of lives, and myself? The loss of my own identity, rendering me unable to enjoy the peace that I didn't even actively achieve beyond letting myself be controlled by something outside of me? No thanks. I'll take average world quiet over that world peace anyday.
Plus like Lyri said- anything that eats people is evil in my book. It's like cannibalism but to the Nth term where N is an impossibly high number
For there to be total world peace people can not be allowed to disagree, which means they cannot be allowed to have an opinion, thus free will goes out of the window.
If we're ever going to have that kind of peace in the world, it has to be on our terms and because we actively made the decision. Not because some otherworldly being eradicates our thoughts, our opinions, everything that makes us who we are.
World peace at the sacrifice of hundreds of lives, and myself? The loss of my own identity, rendering me unable to enjoy the peace that I didn't even actively achieve beyond letting myself be controlled by something outside of me? No thanks. I'll take average world quiet over that world peace anyday.
Plus like Lyri said- anything that eats people is evil in my book. It's like cannibalism but to the Nth term where N is an impossibly high number
Joyce Summers
Mom of a Chocoholic
If we're going to go with the argument of 'It's not the same level of evil' then can we call any demon evil? After all, they are just doing what's in their nature. They were born to be evil.
Just like we don't call lions evil for killing their prey maybe we shouldn't call demons evil for killing theirs.
Jasmine took away free will, ate people and sacrificed Cordy's life for her own, not to mention the innocent girl who was sliced and diced so she could be brought into the world. She may not be the same type of Evil as Caleb and The Gentlemen but then neither was The Master or Glory (Who really just wanted to go home after all) or The Trio (who were just humans). They are all evil, just with different techniques and motives. That's how I see it anyway.
Just like we don't call lions evil for killing their prey maybe we shouldn't call demons evil for killing theirs.
Jasmine took away free will, ate people and sacrificed Cordy's life for her own, not to mention the innocent girl who was sliced and diced so she could be brought into the world. She may not be the same type of Evil as Caleb and The Gentlemen but then neither was The Master or Glory (Who really just wanted to go home after all) or The Trio (who were just humans). They are all evil, just with different techniques and motives. That's how I see it anyway.
Lyri
amazingly well said
Her intentions were good though she went about it the right way. All the other "baddies" new what they was doing was evil and kept at it however jasmine thought she was doing right trying to help people rather then destroy them like the other "baddies".
R
randiann
Guest
She was trying to take over the world; that is never a good thing. She was all about the power, not about making everyone happy. She took away their free will, and ate some of them. Jasmine=EVIL
To me that statement is like saying "Well Hitler was JUST trying to help out the Caucasian population. It's not his fault he had to kill people in order for them to flourish..."
To me that statement is like saying "Well Hitler was JUST trying to help out the Caucasian population. It's not his fault he had to kill people in order for them to flourish..."
Like Joyce said, what about Glory? All she wanted to do was go home. She knew that people would die in the process, but to her they were accpetable sacrifices. Dawn was an acceptable sacrifice. Was what she did any more or less wrong than what Jasmine did?
Both of them wanted a better world for themselves...Glory wanted to go home, Jasmine wanted world peace.
Both of them were willing to sacrifice an innocent girl for their own purposes...in Glory's case, this person was Dawn, in Jasmine's it was the school girl Connor found. But, in Jasmine's case, she actually succeeded in her sacrifice, Connor killed the girl.
Both of them turned their backs on the conscequences of their actions...by opening the portal, Glory would unleash hell on Earth. By creating world peace, Jasmine had to take away everyone's free will.
How can you class one of them as evil, and thus believe they deserve to be in the baddies catagory, and think the other was simply misunderstood?
Both of them wanted a better world for themselves...Glory wanted to go home, Jasmine wanted world peace.
Both of them were willing to sacrifice an innocent girl for their own purposes...in Glory's case, this person was Dawn, in Jasmine's it was the school girl Connor found. But, in Jasmine's case, she actually succeeded in her sacrifice, Connor killed the girl.
Both of them turned their backs on the conscequences of their actions...by opening the portal, Glory would unleash hell on Earth. By creating world peace, Jasmine had to take away everyone's free will.
How can you class one of them as evil, and thus believe they deserve to be in the baddies catagory, and think the other was simply misunderstood?
J
Joyce Summers
"AMAZINGLY well said"? Are you implying me saying something well is a shocker? Haha. ;)
I agree with what Joyce said but I never put glory in my list of other baddies. And yea I do see your point I hadn’t thought of it like that. I wasn’t ever meaning to say Jasmine was a goodie I just wanted to debate it. thanks for this I now have a clearer point of view on her.
Joyce Summers
Mom of a Chocoholic
Ah, but the wrong thing done for the right reasons is still the wrong thing....
(And as for wanting to debate Jasmine- you clearly picked a good topic, hehe)
Kana
Soulless human
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2007
- Messages
- 1,305
I think it is a good debate. The difference between Jasmine and the others was her argument. Let us assume that she is telling the truth. Jasmine's argument about the deaths she caused was in her view a Utilitarian argument. There is presumably no human upside to Glory's plan but Jasmine (and Lilah) argued that either way you look at it there will be a price. Jasmine argued that although she made a choice which resulted in people's death, so did Angel. If her Utilitarian argument holds up, more people will die because of Angel, not only that, the people who do die will possibly die lonely and unhappy.
In short, Jasmine could at least present a case of justification for her actions. Whether they can be excused is debatable but most would agree with Angel that the price is too high. Also Jasmine was questioning which is more evil, suffering or robbing people of free will. The First Evil, for example presumably would bring about the end of the world, whereby people would suffer. If we believe Jasmine (and I'm not saying we have to) she was trying help people but she had a different view of how to make things right than Angel.
I'd assume that the FE didn't care about making anything right for mankind. Jasmine would not perhaps advocate what FE was doing because it would lead to human suffering. Again making the assumption that Jasmine believe she making things right for us, then she at least had good intentions, which makes Jasmine more morally ambiguous than anything else. Angel originally assumed that she simply wanted power but it possible that simply believed that mankind could save themselves from the pain we in effect have created ourselves.
From the subjective point of view, I value my free will from personal perspective and would be happy to keep my pain in exchange for my identity and ideals, however, from the inside of her influence, I'd be happier. It really depends on you values and principles. Most of us would say "I don't want to suffer" but it's more arguable what price we'd pay for ending it. Jasmine argues more than once that absolute good doesn't exist, only different concepts or indeed human concepts of good. I don't agree with Jasmine's world order but I do think that it's a argument of beliefs and concepts. Angel believes that freedom is worth pain, Jasmine cannot understand why this concept is so important if it's only a point of view and not an absolute. Her argument is that if you take away moral absolutes, you simply have a world of suffering or a world without suffering, however Jasmine takes away the choice to make the initial decision. If we want pain, give us pain.
In short, Jasmine could at least present a case of justification for her actions. Whether they can be excused is debatable but most would agree with Angel that the price is too high. Also Jasmine was questioning which is more evil, suffering or robbing people of free will. The First Evil, for example presumably would bring about the end of the world, whereby people would suffer. If we believe Jasmine (and I'm not saying we have to) she was trying help people but she had a different view of how to make things right than Angel.
I'd assume that the FE didn't care about making anything right for mankind. Jasmine would not perhaps advocate what FE was doing because it would lead to human suffering. Again making the assumption that Jasmine believe she making things right for us, then she at least had good intentions, which makes Jasmine more morally ambiguous than anything else. Angel originally assumed that she simply wanted power but it possible that simply believed that mankind could save themselves from the pain we in effect have created ourselves.
From the subjective point of view, I value my free will from personal perspective and would be happy to keep my pain in exchange for my identity and ideals, however, from the inside of her influence, I'd be happier. It really depends on you values and principles. Most of us would say "I don't want to suffer" but it's more arguable what price we'd pay for ending it. Jasmine argues more than once that absolute good doesn't exist, only different concepts or indeed human concepts of good. I don't agree with Jasmine's world order but I do think that it's a argument of beliefs and concepts. Angel believes that freedom is worth pain, Jasmine cannot understand why this concept is so important if it's only a point of view and not an absolute. Her argument is that if you take away moral absolutes, you simply have a world of suffering or a world without suffering, however Jasmine takes away the choice to make the initial decision. If we want pain, give us pain.
Hello Cutie
Save_us.222
I guess everything in this world isn't black and white. And that's the problem- what she was doing was the 'right' thing, but in the 'wrong' way... it depends if you find it acceptable to see a few die to achieve world peace, or whether every human has the right to live in a less than perfect world. In Angel, the fact that they tried to stop her made her a 'baddie' hence why she's under that category.
For me, Jasmine is definitely a baddie. She started committing terrible murders even before she was born. And bringing The Beast to LA. How many people died because of this? In my opinion, this is enough to qualify someone as evil. Good person would never kill so many human beings. The fact that the purpose was saving billions of people doesn't justify that. Every single life is important. Everyone wants to live, despite this death of one person affects many others ( family, friends).
But Jasmine tried also to control everyone. She took away their ability of having their own opinions. And they weren't themselves without them. The prize of perfect happiness and peace was too high and people couldn't even decide whether they want to pay it or not.
But Jasmine tried also to control everyone. She took away their ability of having their own opinions. And they weren't themselves without them. The prize of perfect happiness and peace was too high and people couldn't even decide whether they want to pay it or not.
palabravampiress
Bidet of Evil
I think I would have liked to have given Jasmine more of a chance... seen what she could do. That's hard for me to say. I value freedom above pretty much anything. 99% of the time, individual free will is better than a fascist state (or world) in which your choice is to tow the pretty, happy party line or be killed. That's not really good, it's just the appearance of good. Absolute power corrupts absolutely, and history has proven time and time again that individual human facist leaders tend to lead to more suffering and killing than good once the numbers are tallied in the end.
But Jasmine wasn't a human. She was a God. I think that, given the chance, she might have surprised us. I think she had a better than average chance of ensuring peace, happiness, and prosperity for the people of the world. A lot of people die willingly for peace every day (ironically, they do so in war). If it came down to it and I was one of the chosen, I'd probably willingly give my life in order to maintain the world that Jasmine promised.
I think I would have put Jasmine on the side of good had she done one thing differently: chosen Angel & co. as a senate, as a sort of check-and-balances sort of thing. I think Jasmine needed a panel of humans who could use their human experience to help keep Jasmine honest and acting in the best interest of their fellow humans. The fact that she wantes absolute power and didn't leave anyone with free will is what makes me question her true motives.
But Jasmine wasn't a human. She was a God. I think that, given the chance, she might have surprised us. I think she had a better than average chance of ensuring peace, happiness, and prosperity for the people of the world. A lot of people die willingly for peace every day (ironically, they do so in war). If it came down to it and I was one of the chosen, I'd probably willingly give my life in order to maintain the world that Jasmine promised.
I think I would have put Jasmine on the side of good had she done one thing differently: chosen Angel & co. as a senate, as a sort of check-and-balances sort of thing. I think Jasmine needed a panel of humans who could use their human experience to help keep Jasmine honest and acting in the best interest of their fellow humans. The fact that she wantes absolute power and didn't leave anyone with free will is what makes me question her true motives.
Kana
Soulless human
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2007
- Messages
- 1,305
But Jasmine clearly didn't trust humans to make the decision. If she had, she wouldn't have even bothered to do all that. Jasmine lacks the basic faith that mankind can help themselves. To her it would be like giving a toddler the final say. She honestly believes that humans will destroy themselves without ultimate conforming to her so called version of good.