Subject: Re: Civil War: No wrong side, my ass! (ASM Spoilers)
Date: 4/27/2006 9:34:35 PM
: List :
Tarquin Biscuitbarrel, Esq. wrote:
> So, after this week's ASM, is anyone going to try to argue against my
> original theory that there's a clear and present "wrong" side in the Civil
> War in Marvel's eyes?
> Joe Q. promised that there would be no right or wrong side in Civil War, and
> both sides would be presented evenly... and so far, the pro-registration
> side has been represented by a bunch of arrogant Henry Gyrich clones no one
> could love but their mothers, while the soon-to-be leader of that side was
> caught bold-face lying to Peter Parker, the "everyman" the readers will live
> Civil War through, while using questionable means to meet his ends before
> the Civil War has even begun.
As the person who wrote said issue...I beg to differ. It is your
argument that is a bit dishonest and misleading.
First off, you *characterize* the senators but I note that you do not
*quote* them. This is a nice debating tactic for trying to dismiss
someone, but it's not a very honest one.
Everything the senators said as their rationale for the registration
act is absolutely sensible and straightforward. There's not a
straw-man argument in the batch.
They said that if a doctor, or a lawyer, or an airplane pilot has to be
registered and licensed, so that they can be held accountable if
something goes wrong.
They said that lawyers and judges and politicians take similar risks of
attacks on themselves and their families by criminal elements, but they
don't wear masks to do their work.
They wouldn't let Spidey's testimony be entered into the official
record unless he provided his name and testified under oath...which is
standard protocol for the senate. Despite this, they were willing to
listen to what he had to say, and made the offer to take his testimony
officially if he were willing to abide by the law.
Each of those is a reasoned, rational position. How is this setting up
an obvious bad guy or wrong side? Throughout this issue and the one
preceding it, it's Tony and Peter who get basically shut down when they
can't really counter the valid points made by the senate committee.
To your latter point...you handily omit the fact that when Tony lied to
Peter, it was in service to trying to *prevent* the registration
act...meaning that at this moment, Tony was functioning in the
anti-registration side of things. So he lied in the interest of
advancing that cause. If that lie makes the side he's advancing the
"wrong" side, then by your own definition the anti-registration side is
wrong, not the pro.
You are conflating right and wrong with lawful and unlawful, and they
are two very different things. Yes, Peter feels strongly about this
issue...but feeling strongly about something doesn't make you right
(any more than it makes you right in the way you chose to characterize
this story, however strong your feelings about it might be). There are
all kinds of laws about which I strongly disagree...but they are the
law, and there are many who do feel they are right.
Right and wrong are moral, personal interpretations of what's going
on...the law is how society deals with those issues. You cannot
confuse the two.
Some feel gun registration is good, some think it's wrong; some are
pro-abortion, some are anti-abortion; some are for superhero
registration, some are against it. Each side can muster compelling
arguments on their behalf.
And all of them think that they are right.
And that was the job of the story, to make sure that both sides were
presented as honestly as possible, with each having legitimate reasons
for believing what they believe, not because they want to take over the
planet or advance some evil cause.
Speaking as the guy who read this, you can say otherwise,and believe
you are right.
As the guy who wrote this...I say you are wrong.
Difference is...I was there when the writing happened. You were not.
So I think the benefit is slightly on my side....