(03-10-2017, 02:20 PM)irukandji Wrote: [ -> ]There is no difference. Right now the only one I see who's unhappy is Eve. The rest of the characters appear just fine. Don't you agree?
With Eve, I have nothing against. If Nick had a choice to turn time, he would have had it different with Juliette. But now it is different, Eve is no saint too and she will have to live with what she has done and how she became what she is and move on, just like Nick who never asked to be a Grimm, but has and still trying to make the best of it from past experience and move on.
(03-10-2017, 02:06 PM)irukandji Wrote: [ -> ] (03-10-2017, 01:50 PM)Purity Wrote: [ -> ]You will need to watch S1 and S2 once again, their explaintions on thier Pre-Nick moments were clear it was no good.
Well, unfortunately, I don't have access to seasons 1 and 2, so I'll have to take your word on that. My point is that Monroe can talk about hunting and eating humans but unless we actually see him hunting and eating, we really have no idea of how horrendous the crime was that he committed. For example, maybe he hunted and killed only the criminal element who were sentenced to death anyway. He may have liked eating his victims alive or he suffocated them before dining. Did he hunt children or old people? Who can say? All we have are some general words to describe his past.
(03-10-2017, 02:05 PM)rpmaluki Wrote: [ -> ]We can't make assumptions about Grimms when it comes to things like marriage and family based on Nick alone just as we shouldn't make assumptions about hexenbiests based on the four we've seen so far and an extremely biased account found in one of Nick's books.
Why?
It's inconclusive data considering there's potentially hundreds if not thousands of hexenbiests out there and scores of Grimms running around doing whatever they please (besides killing wesen) since there's no governing body for them to tell them how to live. Nick's grandfather taught both his daughters how to be Grimms, probably told them their heritage before they got their abilities. Kelly Burkhardt had a family and could have done as her father had her time with them not been cut short, Josh's father, well we know what he did. Nick can do whatever he wants, he proved that by not listening to his aunt. I think he has regrets about Juliette but not enough to keep him from building a life with the family he didn't expect to have but was probably secretly longing for. He wants to hold on to it, if this is happiness for him, then good for him.
Monroe and Rosalee have talked several times about their "dark" past which is why we found them where we did at the beginning of the show, Monroe a sworn vegetarian and Rosalee clearly the very opposite of her drug fueled youthful self. If you can't believe the characters' own accounts about the kind of lives they lived then this debate is pointless, since you're denying the facts as presented by the show itself.
(03-10-2017, 02:28 PM)rpmaluki Wrote: [ -> ]Monroe and Rosalee have talked several times about their "dark" past which is why we found them where we did at the beginning of the show, Monroe a sworn vegetarian and Rosalee clearly the very opposite of her drug fueled youthful self. If you can't believe the characters' own accounts about the kind of lives they lived then this debate is pointless, since you're denying the facts as presented by the show itself.
First of all, I'm not denying anything. The debate was not about Monroe's past or Rosalee's past, or Hank's past or anyone's past. The question posed, which had nothing to do with what I was talking about was whether they should be redeemed and deserve happiness.
I was talking about Nick and *only* Nick. It wasn't me who brought up the rest of the characters deserving happiness. *I* said *Nick* didn't deserve happiness.
(03-10-2017, 02:20 PM)irukandji Wrote: [ -> ] (03-10-2017, 02:15 PM)rpmaluki Wrote: [ -> ] (03-10-2017, 02:00 PM)irukandji Wrote: [ -> ] (03-10-2017, 01:50 PM)Purity Wrote: [ -> ]Regarding Nick to apologize to his friends, my Q is apologise for what...?
How about for not being an upstanding person who should have helped others? How about being a better man and not incriminating his friends in his intrigues?
But his crimes extend well beyond the circle of the scoobies. So my question is once he gets done apologizing to his friends, who does he apologize to for those other crimes?
Why would a person like that deserve happiness. His happiness should be in the fact that after all he's done, he's really lucky to be alive.
He's a Grimm, he didn't make anyone do anything against their will the chose to help him, they are are still choosing to him. The scoobies, much like Nick needs to take responsibility of their actions and decisions, end of story.
I never said they were guiltless. What I said is that Nick is the most guilty because he was the instigator.
(03-10-2017, 02:20 PM)Purity Wrote: [ -> ] (03-10-2017, 02:06 PM)irukandji Wrote: [ -> ]My point is that Monroe can talk about hunting and eating humans but unless we actually see him hunting and eating, we really have no idea of how horrendous the crime was that he committed. For example, maybe he hunted and killed only the criminal element who were sentenced to death anyway. He may have liked eating his victims alive or he suffocated them before dining. Did he hunt children or old people? Who can say? All we have are some general words to describe his past.
This debate began with Nick not deserving to be happy because he has caused pain to others. What is the difference then with Monroe, be it pre-Nick or after-Nick, hunted old people, children or not, the point is he still killed, hunted or what ever dark acts....Does this mean he does not deserve to be happy with Roselee because of the hurt he caused?
No one here is a saint, they all had hurt.
Right now they simply try to make the best of it all now and the future in the super natural world they live in.
There is no difference. Right now the only one I see who's unhappy is Eve. The rest of the characters appear just fine. Don't you agree?
While Nick is happy, I don't think he's done anything to deserve happiness. That's my take on him.
So basically you're unhappy that everyone's happy while Eve is unhappy?
(03-10-2017, 02:33 PM)rpmaluki Wrote: [ -> ] (03-10-2017, 02:20 PM)irukandji Wrote: [ -> ] (03-10-2017, 02:15 PM)rpmaluki Wrote: [ -> ] (03-10-2017, 02:00 PM)irukandji Wrote: [ -> ] (03-10-2017, 01:50 PM)Purity Wrote: [ -> ]Regarding Nick to apologize to his friends, my Q is apologise for what...?
How about for not being an upstanding person who should have helped others? How about being a better man and not incriminating his friends in his intrigues?
But his crimes extend well beyond the circle of the scoobies. So my question is once he gets done apologizing to his friends, who does he apologize to for those other crimes?
Why would a person like that deserve happiness. His happiness should be in the fact that after all he's done, he's really lucky to be alive.
He's a Grimm, he didn't make anyone do anything against their will the chose to help him, they are are still choosing to him. The scoobies, much like Nick needs to take responsibility of their actions and decisions, end of story.
I never said they were guiltless. What I said is that Nick is the most guilty because he was the instigator.
(03-10-2017, 02:20 PM)Purity Wrote: [ -> ] (03-10-2017, 02:06 PM)irukandji Wrote: [ -> ]My point is that Monroe can talk about hunting and eating humans but unless we actually see him hunting and eating, we really have no idea of how horrendous the crime was that he committed. For example, maybe he hunted and killed only the criminal element who were sentenced to death anyway. He may have liked eating his victims alive or he suffocated them before dining. Did he hunt children or old people? Who can say? All we have are some general words to describe his past.
This debate began with Nick not deserving to be happy because he has caused pain to others. What is the difference then with Monroe, be it pre-Nick or after-Nick, hunted old people, children or not, the point is he still killed, hunted or what ever dark acts....Does this mean he does not deserve to be happy with Roselee because of the hurt he caused?
No one here is a saint, they all had hurt.
Right now they simply try to make the best of it all now and the future in the super natural world they live in.
There is no difference. Right now the only one I see who's unhappy is Eve. The rest of the characters appear just fine. Don't you agree?
While Nick is happy, I don't think he's done anything to deserve happiness. That's my take on him.
So basically you're unhappy that everyone's happy while Eve is unhappy?
Not at all. I'm just trying to figure out why Nick deserves happiness.
(03-10-2017, 02:34 PM)irukandji Wrote: [ -> ] (03-10-2017, 02:33 PM)rpmaluki Wrote: [ -> ] (03-10-2017, 02:20 PM)irukandji Wrote: [ -> ] (03-10-2017, 02:15 PM)rpmaluki Wrote: [ -> ] (03-10-2017, 02:00 PM)irukandji Wrote: [ -> ]How about for not being an upstanding person who should have helped others? How about being a better man and not incriminating his friends in his intrigues?
But his crimes extend well beyond the circle of the scoobies. So my question is once he gets done apologizing to his friends, who does he apologize to for those other crimes?
Why would a person like that deserve happiness. His happiness should be in the fact that after all he's done, he's really lucky to be alive.
He's a Grimm, he didn't make anyone do anything against their will the chose to help him, they are are still choosing to him. The scoobies, much like Nick needs to take responsibility of their actions and decisions, end of story.
I never said they were guiltless. What I said is that Nick is the most guilty because he was the instigator.
(03-10-2017, 02:20 PM)Purity Wrote: [ -> ] (03-10-2017, 02:06 PM)irukandji Wrote: [ -> ]My point is that Monroe can talk about hunting and eating humans but unless we actually see him hunting and eating, we really have no idea of how horrendous the crime was that he committed. For example, maybe he hunted and killed only the criminal element who were sentenced to death anyway. He may have liked eating his victims alive or he suffocated them before dining. Did he hunt children or old people? Who can say? All we have are some general words to describe his past.
This debate began with Nick not deserving to be happy because he has caused pain to others. What is the difference then with Monroe, be it pre-Nick or after-Nick, hunted old people, children or not, the point is he still killed, hunted or what ever dark acts....Does this mean he does not deserve to be happy with Roselee because of the hurt he caused?
No one here is a saint, they all had hurt.
Right now they simply try to make the best of it all now and the future in the super natural world they live in.
There is no difference. Right now the only one I see who's unhappy is Eve. The rest of the characters appear just fine. Don't you agree?
While Nick is happy, I don't think he's done anything to deserve happiness. That's my take on him.
So basically you're unhappy that everyone's happy while Eve is unhappy?
Not at all. I'm just trying to figure out why Nick deserves happiness.
Doesn't everyone deserve happiness?
(03-10-2017, 02:33 PM)irukandji Wrote: [ -> ]First of all, I'm not denying anything. The debate was not about Monroe's past or Rosalee's past, or Hank's past or anyone's past. The question posed, which had nothing to do with what I was talking about was whether they should be redeemed and deserve happiness.
I was talking about Nick and *only* Nick. It wasn't me who brought up the rest of the characters deserving happiness. *I* said *Nick* didn't deserve happiness.
Okey so your are now saying that you are fine with Monroe are others finding and deserving happiness but Nick only should not, disregarding the past acts Nick's friends have done pre-Nick and After-Nick?
(03-10-2017, 02:39 PM)Purity Wrote: [ -> ] (03-10-2017, 02:33 PM)irukandji Wrote: [ -> ]First of all, I'm not denying anything. The debate was not about Monroe's past or Rosalee's past, or Hank's past or anyone's past. The question posed, which had nothing to do with what I was talking about was whether they should be redeemed and deserve happiness.
I was talking about Nick and *only* Nick. It wasn't me who brought up the rest of the characters deserving happiness. *I* said *Nick* didn't deserve happiness.
Okey so your are now saying that you are fine with Monroe are others finding and deserving happiness but Nick only should not disregarding the past acts Nick's friends have done?
When did I bring Monroe into the debate?
(03-10-2017, 02:37 PM)rpmaluki Wrote: [ -> ]Doesn't everyone deserve happiness?
Your question should be formatted differently. You should ask instead:
Is everyone entitled to happiness?
The answer is no.
(03-10-2017, 02:44 PM)irukandji Wrote: [ -> ] (03-10-2017, 02:39 PM)Purity Wrote: [ -> ] (03-10-2017, 02:33 PM)irukandji Wrote: [ -> ]First of all, I'm not denying anything. The debate was not about Monroe's past or Rosalee's past, or Hank's past or anyone's past. The question posed, which had nothing to do with what I was talking about was whether they should be redeemed and deserve happiness.
I was talking about Nick and *only* Nick. It wasn't me who brought up the rest of the characters deserving happiness. *I* said *Nick* didn't deserve happiness.
Okey so your are now saying that you are fine with Monroe are others finding and deserving happiness but Nick only should not disregarding the past acts Nick's friends have done?
When did I bring Monroe into the debate?
No...your debate still falls down to in general because I mean if you say Nick does not deserve happiness, then it means non of the scoobies deserve happiness. Isn't Monroe and others part of the show? Thier actions affect Nick's life as his to thiers too. This was never a one man's show.....
(03-10-2017, 02:48 PM)Purity Wrote: [ -> ] (03-10-2017, 02:44 PM)irukandji Wrote: [ -> ] (03-10-2017, 02:39 PM)Purity Wrote: [ -> ] (03-10-2017, 02:33 PM)irukandji Wrote: [ -> ]First of all, I'm not denying anything. The debate was not about Monroe's past or Rosalee's past, or Hank's past or anyone's past. The question posed, which had nothing to do with what I was talking about was whether they should be redeemed and deserve happiness.
I was talking about Nick and *only* Nick. It wasn't me who brought up the rest of the characters deserving happiness. *I* said *Nick* didn't deserve happiness.
Okey so your are now saying that you are fine with Monroe are others finding and deserving happiness but Nick only should not disregarding the past acts Nick's friends have done?
When did I bring Monroe into the debate?
No...your debate still falls down to in general because I mean if you say Nick does not deserve happiness, then it means non of the scoobies deserve happiness. Isn't Monroe and others part of the show? Thier actions affect Nick's life as his to them too. This was never a one man's show.....
And as I said to rpmaluki, the question/statement should be formatted differently. You should be asking if everyone is entitled to happiness. The answer is no.