person: honor

Date Night Rp (Cont.)

Goopy soon placed a small squirrel on the table, “Well, I remembered you love squirrels and I wanted to ask you the same thing so…. meet Cheese and well

Will you marry me too?” 

She awkwardly chuckled and shook a bit, as Cheese sniffed the air.

@staxurst

Was thinking about desert island ethics and other constructed ethical dilemmas, so I figured I’d submit some thoughts I had about a popular example: the Red Wedding.

To defend his method for assassinating the Starks and their supporters, Tywin Lannister asks Tyrion whether is it better to kill 12 men at dinner or 12,000 men on the battlefield. This makes sense at first, but - as I’m sure Tywin himself knew - it leaves out the fact that the precedent would lead to killing far more than 12 men.

Guest-right is an ancient custom in the real world as well as Westerous that ultimately derives from a very basic relationship, that of a host and their guest. Before the age of motels or even taverns, the only shelter from the elements you were likely to find when traveling was that the roof of a local, caves being both much less common and, usually, much less useful than fiction would have you believe. Mythology is full of just how seriously this was taken, with the torment and death of the offender being seen as entirely just and proper for such a miserable creature.

More relevant here, though, is that sacred hospitality allowed strangers or even enemies to break bread together (a phrase deriving from this practice) without fear for their lives. A modern comparison would be using a flag of truce to set up an ambush, or slaughtering an embassy, only on a far more personal level. A flag of truce shows your honor as a warrior, and an embassy your honor as a nation, but how you treated your guests defined your honor as a person. By breaking this, frankly, holy bond, the Freys and their Lannister allies showed beyond any shadow of a doubt that their word means nothing. Any chance for peace that doesn’t involve the complete destruction of heir enemies died in that wedding, because they proved that they had no respect for the conventions that allow humans to interact with each other on a peaceful basis even in the worst of circumstances.

Tywin and Walder Frey didn’t just kill 12 men at dinner - they killed every one of the men who died that may have lived if they made peace.

This we know. The Earth does not belong to us; we belong to the Earth. All things are connected, like the blood that unites one family. Whatever befalls the Earth, befalls the children of the Earth. We do not weave the web of life; we are only a strand of it. Whatever we do to the web, we do to ourselves. ~ ~ Chief Seattle

In the name of daybreak
and the eyelids of morning
and the wayfaring moon
and the night when it departs,

I swear I will not dishonor
my soul with hatred
but offer myself humbly
as a guardian of nature,
as a healer of misery,
as a messenger of wonder
as an architect of peace.

In the name of the sun and its minors
and the day that embraces it
and the cloud veils drawn over it
and the uttermost night
and the male and the female
and the plants bursting with seed
and the crowning seasons of the firefly
and the apple, I will honor all life

—wherever and in whatever form
it may dwell—on Earth my home,
and in the mansions of the stars.

—  Diane Ackerman

anonymous asked:

If Eddard had known about Jaimie reasons for slaying his king. Do you suppose he may have been more understanding? Particularly given his mindset to dishonor himself and his wife to claim Jon as his own bastard (apparently)? Or would he have been same old stubborn Ned?

I think this is one of those situations where the society is simply not very well-equipped to handling the transgression. Unquestionably, stopping Aerys from murdering a half-million citizens in a fit of pique is a good thing and Jaime was right to do so, but Westeros is a society bound in oaths and Jaime killing Aerys is a violation of some of the strongest taboos in Westeros, as well as undercutting the rebellion’s desire to bring Aerys to account for his crimes (and vengeance, there’s an element of that behind the whole thing as well, retribution is an oft-ignored but ever-present component of a justice system).

If Eddard found out about the wildfire plot, it’s safe to say that he would definitely bluescreen for a bit. Eddard might not believe in a coup attempt by the Lannisters if Jaime is shown to have acted to stop Aerys’s atrocity, and that has its own implications, though the murder of Elia, Rhaenys, and Aegon the Infant certainly won’t endear the lion to the wolf (I’d imagine even if those murders hadn’t happened, Eddard would be sore at the bandwagon jumpers).

The way that Eddard doesn’t see it as a betrayal is if Jaime is able to successfully explain that his oath as a knight superseded the oath of the Kingsguard. His duty to protect the defenseless of Kings’ Landing demanded it, and Aerys willingly forsook his obligations as a king (he had for a while, anyway), but even then it’s a hard sell. Oathbreaking is not looked kindly on a society built on oaths, and again, the rebellion had bringing Aerys to account as a key objective, robbing them of that through murder of everyone within arm’s reach of House Targaryen meant tainting the purity of their cause in Eddard’s eyes.

It’s a hard sell, though I think Eddard could eventually be convinced. Jaime might have needed to save the Targaryen children (or Tywin never order their murders) in order to convince Eddard that the Lannisters weren’t planning a coup, which would change how he handles the situation.

Thanks for the question, Anon.

SomethingLikeALawyer, Hand of the King

مَن كَانَ يُرِيدُ الْعِزَّةَ فَلِلَّـهِ الْعِزَّةُ جَمِيعًا ۚ إِلَيْهِ يَصْعَدُ الْكَلِمُ الطَّيِّبُ وَالْعَمَلُ الصَّالِحُ يَرْفَعُهُ ۚ وَالَّذِينَ يَمْكُرُونَ السَّيِّئَاتِ لَهُمْ عَذَابٌ شَدِيدٌ ۖ وَمَكْرُ أُولَـٰئِكَ هُوَ يَبُورُ

Whosoever desires honour, power and glory then to Allāh belong all honour, power and glory [and one can get honour, power and glory only by obeying and worshipping Allāh (Alone)]. To Him ascend (all) the goodly words, and the righteous deeds exalt it (the goodly words i.e. the goodly words are not accepted by Allāh unless and until they are followed by good deeds), but those who plot evils, theirs will be severe torment. And the plotting of such will perish.

(Sūrah Fātir, 35:10)