(03-10-2017, 02:51 PM)irukandji Wrote: [ -> ] (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.
Okey, want to get this straight....
NICK - No Happiness or does not deserve to have a happy life.
OTHERS - Should have their happiness and live happily ever after.
Poor Nick, well that is your prerogative.
(03-10-2017, 02:58 PM)Purity Wrote: [ -> ] (03-10-2017, 02:51 PM)irukandji Wrote: [ -> ] (03-10-2017, 02:48 PM)Purity Wrote: [ -> ] (03-10-2017, 02:44 PM)irukandji Wrote: [ -> ] (03-10-2017, 02:39 PM)Purity Wrote: [ -> ]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.
Okey, want to get this straight....
NICK - No Happiness or deserve to have a happy life.
OTHERS - Should have their happiness and live happily ever after.
Poor Nick, well that is your prerogative.
Since you're saying Nick deserves happiness.....who is responsible for rewarding him with happiness?
(03-10-2017, 03:01 PM)irukandji Wrote: [ -> ] (03-10-2017, 02:58 PM)Purity Wrote: [ -> ] (03-10-2017, 02:51 PM)irukandji Wrote: [ -> ] (03-10-2017, 02:48 PM)Purity Wrote: [ -> ] (03-10-2017, 02:44 PM)irukandji Wrote: [ -> ]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.
Okey, want to get this straight....
NICK - No Happiness or not deserving to have a happy life.
OTHERS - Should have their happiness and live happily ever after.
Poor Nick, well that is your prerogative.
Since you're saying Nick deserves happiness.....who is responsible for rewarding him with happiness?
I could say this too...Who is responsible for rewarding Monroe and Co with happiness if you are saying they deserve happiness and not Nick?
(03-10-2017, 03:05 PM)Purity Wrote: [ -> ] (03-10-2017, 03:01 PM)irukandji Wrote: [ -> ] (03-10-2017, 02:58 PM)Purity Wrote: [ -> ] (03-10-2017, 02:51 PM)irukandji Wrote: [ -> ] (03-10-2017, 02:48 PM)Purity Wrote: [ -> ]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.
Okey, want to get this straight....
NICK - No Happiness or not deserving to have a happy life.
OTHERS - Should have their happiness and live happily ever after.
Poor Nick, well that is your prerogative.
Since you're saying Nick deserves happiness.....who is responsible for rewarding him with happiness?
I could say this too...Who is responsible for rewarding Monroe and Co with happiness if you are saying they deserve happiness and not Nick?
I'm not. What I'm saying is that you are phrasing this incorrectly. The question should be: Are people *entitled* to happiness? The answer is no. People are not entitled to happiness.
Let me put it differently. If Nick wants to go beat someone to a pulp because that makes him happy, is he entitled to do that? Use the word deserve if you want. Can Nick go beat the crap out of someone because he deserves to be happy? No way.
(03-10-2017, 05:08 AM)New Guy Wrote: [ -> ]Quote:WINSTON-SALEM, NC -- A new highway billboard is stirring up controversy, protest, and debate in the Triad.
The sign reads, “Real men provide, real women appreciate it.”
The billboard is turning a lot of heads on the highway.
It's located on I-40 Business West, next to the Linville Road exit, between Greensboro and Winston-Salem.
Some folks were even spotted getting out of their cars to take pictures.
Love it or hate it --- everyone has a strong opinion on the message.
IMO if a man and woman begin a relationship, they should share a similar opinion about this, or their ship will sink.
There are many males who father children but do not provide.
N G
I have to agree. One of your best posts my friend. I shared this with several people
(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?
(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.
I so don't agree. I have such negative connotations regarding the word "entitled" because I feel it elevates one person/group above another. If anyone is entitled to happiness then everyone is. There's no cherry picking but life doesn't work that way that's why the world is such a miserable place to live for most people you'd likely term as entitled to happiness.
Happiness isn't even a state a being, at least it shouldn't be. Monroe and Rosalee are the most content with their life but they worry constantly. Adalind has found acceptance from one of the people she's hurt the most, I guess that qualifies as happiness. Nick is making the best of his situation has found a measure of joy in his family. If your gripe with Nick is that he's "happiness" has somehow impeded Eve finding her own, then Eve will be miserable for the rest of her life and Nick will just continue living his life with his family because it's his choice to live his life.
Eve must make her own choices to find contentment in her life that no longer has anything to do with Nick just as he has without her. It's not entirely his fault that Eve's life is in the crapper. They both made choices and there were consequences on both sides. Nick being the "most guilty" as you say, doesn't absolve Eve of her responsibility in the choices she made, one of those choices being to reign death and destruction over Nick because they both couldn't communicate at a most crucial part of their lives/relationship. I know people always blame Nick for abandoning Juliette because when she asked him to kiss her biest face, he turned away and he went for a walk to think things through but Nick didn't dump Juliette, he wanted to find a solution but it was Juliette who torched the remains of their already broken relationship.
And I repeat Nick has never made anyone do anything against their will, they ALL made their choices, knowing how things could go. What these people deserve and are entitled to is to live the life they without forcing it on someone else or standing in their way.
(03-10-2017, 03:13 PM)irukandji Wrote: [ -> ] (03-10-2017, 03:05 PM)Purity Wrote: [ -> ] (03-10-2017, 03:01 PM)irukandji Wrote: [ -> ] (03-10-2017, 02:58 PM)Purity Wrote: [ -> ] (03-10-2017, 02:51 PM)irukandji Wrote: [ -> ]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.
Okey, want to get this straight....
NICK - No Happiness or not deserving to have a happy life.
OTHERS - Should have their happiness and live happily ever after.
Poor Nick, well that is your prerogative.
Since you're saying Nick deserves happiness.....who is responsible for rewarding him with happiness?
I could say this too...Who is responsible for rewarding Monroe and Co with happiness if you are saying they deserve happiness and not Nick?
I'm not. What I'm saying is that you are phrasing this incorrectly. The question should be: Are people *entitled* to happiness? The answer is no. People are not entitled to happiness.
Let me put it differently. If Nick wants to go beat someone to a pulp because that makes him happy, is he entitled to do that? Use the word deserve if you want. Can Nick go beat the crap out of someone because he deserves to be happy? No way.
I think you should rephrase correctly....
Your first paragraph is more focused on real life in general, since it is no one in particular but the word People.
Quote:I'm not. What I'm saying is that you are phrasing this incorrectly. The question should be: Are people *entitled* to happiness? The answer is no. People are not entitled to happiness.
Your second paragraph is focused on the show being it a fantasy to the super natural world.
Quote:Let me put it differently. If Nick wants to go beat someone to a pulp because that makes him happy, is he entitled to do that? Use the word deserve if you want. Can Nick go beat the crap out of someone because he deserves to be happy? No way.
The 2 paragraphes do not coincide. 1 super natural to a show, the other in general real life.
Though to avoid confusion...
Yes to the real world. People do and should have or deserve happiness.
Regarding the show Grimm, Why not? Nick should deserve happiness, he has longed for it and it is his choice to make and no ones.
(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.
Sigh...I love JellyFish logic. She is like, so awesome. Irukandji, you are correct in your assessment.
(03-10-2017, 03:22 PM)rpmaluki Wrote: [ -> ]I so don't agree. I have such negative connotations regarding the word "entitled" because I feel it elevates one person/group above another. If anyone is entitled to happiness then everyone is. There's no cherry picking but life doesn't work that way that's why the world is such a miserable place to live for most people you'd likely term as entitled to happiness.
So does the word, "deserve". Use it if it makes you happy.
Is anyone truly safe on this show? They nearly tore each other apart under the influence of a spell in Blind Love. Ironically, that happened because Nick did his job and arrested someone seven years ago. It wasn't because of him being a Grimm. They all would've died had it not been for Rosalee being pregnant.
Everyone is going to be at risk at one point or another. Honestly, they all should've died at some point. Monroe and Rosalee went undercover often and were at great risk. Nick, Hank, and Wu being cops is dangerous in itself without the addition of wesen. Juliette would've put herself at risk facing off against her friend's abuser without knowing what she was getting herself into if Nick hadn't told her about her pal being a Fuchsbau. I'm pretty sure other posters could come out with plenty of examples of everyone's lives being threatened.
Everybody facing constant peril is one of the unofficial rules of the show. I really don't think Adalind or the kids would be any safer away from Nick. BC wanted her independent of him. It was her relationship with Sean that interested them.