Topic Actions

Topic Search

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests

Honorverse ramblings and musings

Join us in talking discussing all things Honor, including (but not limited to) tactics, favorite characters, and book discussions.
Re: Honorverse ramblings and musings
Post by cthia   » Thu Nov 29, 2018 9:40 pm

cthia
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 11274
Joined: Thu Jan 23, 2014 12:10 pm

This can-o-worms isn't about me. It isn't even about Burdette. It is about the absolute truth of right and wrong in the eyes of the God you serve. Honor made the wrong decision when she chose not to at least isolate Nimitz. She should have divulged her special abilities to Burdette. Even if she wasn't legally required to do so under man's law. She should have come clean because it is the right thing to do in the eyes of God, and all that is pure and clean, under God's laws.

Honor knows this fact too, deep down inside her loins, but don't expect it to be too deeply embedded, after all, this is the forthright heroine Harrington we're talking about. IMO, If the shit ever hits the fan Honor will admit it to herself. She has never made the wrong moral decision completely devoid of what is right and wrong, especially when a much bigger picture is at stake. How much bigger than an example of the negative effects of forsaking the Prime Directive unleashed on her beloved Grayson? She chose to divulge her hidden finger when in Andermani space. Why? Because it was the right thing to do morally and righteously. It was also the right thing to do if the Andermani had already known about it and was testing her. It was also the right thing to do to preserve her God given integrity, which has always served her well in her travels and has always kept her safe because she followed God's way. A man's life wasn't even on the line in Andermani space. A way of life wasn't even on the line in Andermani space.

"Honor, I gave you these abilities because I knew one day you would become People's Champion of Grayson. I gave you, and you alone, these abilities, so that you can fight the good fight against powers and principalities. I gave you the spirit of discernment - the moral compass of what is right and wrong. You and you alone, I gave these abilities so that man can see that God's true champion is strong, is powerful, is righteous, so that you will not NEED to fight."

Excerpt from the conversation I expect Honor to receive from her God later in heaven.

Honor's moral compass will know the path chosen was righteously compromised.

Failing to divulge the nature of all of her blessings under the circumstances is a slight against God. Failing to divulge her abilities when it made the contest NO CONTEST can be closely argued as murder. And that is an unfair situation to put God in. It is unfair and unrighteous to the notion of right and wrong. God being the embodiment of right and wrong. Not a single one of us doubt that the outcome would have been the same if Nimitz had been removed. Honor certainly had no doubts that she was going to kill Burdette. If Nimitz had been removed, then we wouldn't be having this conversation now. And Grayson won't be suffering a blow to their religious beliefs having the conversation later.

If Woman A chooses to get into an all out brawl with Woman B, but Woman A gets her ass beat to within an inch of her life, what do you think the judge will do to Woman B when it is revealed that Woman B is really a man dressed as a woman? Should Woman B have told the truth?

In a nutshell, the God that Honor knows expects the same righteousness. Honor had never let him down before, even at the expense of her own peril.

Why is it unfair and considered cheating when someone who has the ability to count cards cleans out a casino? God gave him the extremely rare savant like mathematical ability? The poor schmuck will be thrown out on his ears, perhaps shot in some cases, even though he was never in danger of killing anyone. Although he was making a killing.

A true Christian should never be accused of setting the bar too low. The eyes of the entire world is on him. He could turn many sinners away. As witnessed by the many posts I've encountered in religious threads massacring the actions of a few - or the one - isolated Christians. Thus incriminating Christians en masse. In this case, Honor's actions can cause a religious stir on Grayson, and that is the true travesty.

Honor's sin is against God, not against man. And this entire can of worms is about Honor's sin against God, therefore the Protector's sin against God, as well as his and any possible future ramifications rendered unto Grayson.

What is the sin? Glad you asked. It isn't so much lying by omission, though that's on the table. It isn't so much exhibiting morally bankrupt tendencies, though that's on the table. It isn't so much introducing infidel behavior as the People's Champion into a religious system of beliefs on a very religious planet. Though that is on the table. Oh no. Each of those transgressions arguably straddle the line of sins against man. I'm more concerned with Honor's sin against God, which is to introduce controversy into his plan. When she didn't need to do. Why would it have been wrong that she isolate Nimitz to remove all later doubt? Doubt of Christians in their God and Tester. Doubt of sinners and infidels galaxy wide for the righteousness of Grayson.

It would have been the RIGHT thing to do. Everyone knows I am a believer. A Christian. I recall a conversation or two admonishing me for suggesting that only a true Christian is capable of compassion. Even against one's enemies. Love thy enemy. Although I didn't actually suggest that. I suggested that compassion can be found in anyone, but that it should always be found in Christians. It is like looking for rare pearls. You can sometimes find them in sand snails, but you expect to find them in oysters.

Burdette is portrayed as a loathsome character in the story. Certainly from the screen time we are allotted of him. Much of his troubles can mostly be attributed to that misogynistic miscreant of mayhem Mueller making him and everyone else his patsy, drawing on Burdette's intense and sincere concern for Grayson and his hatred for the handmaiden Harrington as Benjamin's poison. I don't mean to belittle Burdette's transgressions, but through it all, he is always portrayed as devoutly religious and genuinely concerned about the welfare of Grayson. Which brings me to RFC's post included by Vince.

There have been countless atrocities committed by "so called Christians" in the name of God. And many non believers can regurgitate examples on demand. But there are many examples where Christian beliefs saved millions of people. How many were saved from Pharoah along with their bloodline? How many Jews were saved during the Holocaust? How many Negroes during slavery and up to the present? How many native Americans?

How many innocent lives were lost in doing so? For the bigger picture?

I cried reading RFC's post . . .
Flag In Exile, Author's Note wrote:I completed this manuscript in October 1994. At that time, I'd structured the events which occur in Chapter Nineteen because I could think of no more loathsome, despicable, and cowardly act any individual or group of individuals could commit. It is my belief that the sentence "The end justifies the means"—that suppression, repression, and/or murder become somehow acceptable if committed in the name of a "cause" or belief which reduces individuals to expendable pawns—is the vilest of human poisons, and that terrorism, regardless of the terrorist's "cause," is the ultimate act of dehumanization. I did not expect that between the time I wrote this novel and the time it was published a United States citizen in Oklahoma City would demonstrate an even worse contempt for human life and the fundamental values of his own society or prove capable of an act even more despicable than my fictional villains. That some human beings are capable of such atrocities is an inescapable lesson of history. That we cannot allow those acts to go unpunished or extend to those who commit them any shred of respect, whatever the "cause" which motivated them, is a lesson the civilized human community must teach itself.
Do pardon by bold.

If I were to meet the man any time soon, I would hug him for this post. Deep down inside I feel he needs it. I share his point of view completely and I feel his pain. If it cuts him half as deeply as it does me, it is debilitating. I know for a fact that David Weber believes in God, so this viewpoint doesn't surprise me at all. I would expect nothing less from a true Christian.

Remember what my teachers told me? My uncanny ability to become the character? I became the author when I read that post. Tears. Tears. Tears.

I feel the exact same way. BUT! Where does the line begin and the line end? Bear with me. I can't remember the particular documentary. But it had something to do with our military targeting some very bad individuals. Terrorists. Intel came down the pipeline that several very bad, MOST WANTED terrorists had plans to meet in this particular building in the midst of a civilian neighborhood in another country, of which I forget all of the details. If anyone can remember the details please come forth. The terrorists planned it that way, had a habit of doing so. Our military got the okay to bomb the building, even though there was a 25 % chance of an "unacceptable" number of casualties. I was watching little kids who were about to die. All on satellite. I'm still not over that attack. Why is that okay? The attack was in the name of a cause. Is the difference simply the formal license to kill by the military? A military with the good of an entire country as a cause, America? Why is it wrong for an individual to kill in the name of God, to save a planet? But the navy can murder in the name of its country.

The line is oftentimes blurred. Burdette may have been despicable onscreen. He may have been despicable in person. But he still could have been correct that Grayson is being led down the wrong path.

I suppose what I'm asking is this. When the military is guilty of the same thing, what then? Can not a true man of God be as altruistic as the military? Cannot one good man make a difference?

****** *

Vince wrote:When I asked you to don't lose track of the forest for the trees, and to extend your arguments to their ultimate conclusion, this is the end state if Honor (or Benjamin) had revealed her empathic abilities and Burdette is excused from facing Honor as Protector's Champion, after challenging her: Burdette gets away with murder,, and Honor is ostracized and shunned--at best. Burdette and the rest of the other extreme conservative Keys (Mueller, etc.) can now commit any crime, no matter how heinous, in furtherance of their goals--the ends justifying the means--and get away scot-free by sheltering behind their Key of Steadholdership, crying challenge to the Protector's Justice--the only way a Steadholder can be brought to justice--and not having to face Honor with the Sword of State in her hands in combat.

Is that your preferred outcome? Do you think that outcome is right, or just?


That isn't how I see it at all. Burdette was charged and sentenced. Challenging was his last chance to escape the wrath of the Protector and his Champion and to silence what he felt is the whore of Babylon. Had Honor divulged her specific abilities which made this particular duel grossly unfair and arguably tantamount to murder, it would have justly placed the burden of choice in Burdette's hands, to either withdraw his challenge and accept his original fate or take his chances with Supergirl. He would have had no choice but to continue, but the choice would have been his, made with all of the facts. More importantly, removing any later chance of a scandal of epic proportions brought to Grayson and preserving the integrity of the People's Champion and more importantly the righteousness of Grayson's religious beliefs. Does anyone think any human would challenge Supergirl?

Burdette's criminal history, personality or personal profile has no bearing on whether he is correct that the Protector is leading Grayson astray or whether he should lose his right to challenge. That would smack too much of a Black man having no rights because of his checkered past. Or simply because everyone knows him to be Black. All beside the point of whether he is in the wrong when cornered by Police.

This entire can-o-worms could have been anesthetized had Honor simply did the right thing and isolated Nimitz, removing all doubt. My concern is not for Burdette. It is for the People of Grayson's relationship with their God, as it should be. My concern is not for Honor, it is for the Grayson's relationship with their God, as it should be. It isn't even for Benjamin, but for the Grayson's relationship with their God, as it should be. It is about the salvation of Grayson.

I didn't miss the forest for the trees, nor the jungle for the forest.

.
Last edited by cthia on Mon Dec 03, 2018 7:47 am, edited 1 time in total.

Son, your mother says I have to hang you. Personally I don't think this is a capital offense. But if I don't hang you, she's gonna hang me and frankly, I'm not the one in trouble. —cthia's father. Incident in ? Axiom of Common Sense
Top
Re: Honorverse ramblings and musings
Post by Daryl   » Fri Nov 30, 2018 6:42 am

Daryl
Admiral

Posts: 2882
Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2010 12:57 am
Location: Queensland Australia

I'd disagree.
One is a "genie" with greater strength and faster reflexes, who at that point doesn't know about any emphatic sense, but is injured and exhausted.
The other is an acknowledged master in this "sport", uninjured and fresh. He also is a male, so obviously superior. Not even sure if Honor knew about his skill set?
Did Burdette mention to Honor about his tournament skills and wins?
Fair fight.
Top
Re: Honorverse ramblings and musings
Post by cthia   » Fri Nov 30, 2018 7:21 am

cthia
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 11274
Joined: Thu Jan 23, 2014 12:10 pm

Daryl wrote:I'd disagree.
One is a "genie" with greater strength and faster reflexes, who at that point doesn't know about any emphatic sense, but is injured and exhausted.
The other is an acknowledged master in this "sport", uninjured and fresh. He also is a male, so obviously superior. Not even sure if Honor knew about his skill set?
Did Burdette mention to Honor about his tournament skills and wins?
Fair fight.

She knew about her empathic abilities Daryl. Not only did she know, she knew Nimitz wasn't going to stop letting her use them!

I don't know why everyone keeps falling back on the false news defense that she didn't know when I long ago posted that fact as Exhibit A. It is the reason for this entire can of worms. Ain't no fake news here.

I think everyone of you knows deep down in your loins that Honor made the wrong call concerning Nimitz, to remove all doubt. It was a gross strategic error uncharacteristic of Honor. That's why the only thing to fall back on is . . .

"She didn't know about her abilities then." She did.

"Her skills weren't strong enough." They were.

And my favorite, thrown out immediately upon my opening this can of worms . . .

"She hadn't yet developed the skill in story line." She had.

That was offered up immediately by Weird Harold, because it is the only thing that would have explained Honor's uncharacteristic strategic error.

Introducing deceit, unfairness and unrighteousness into a duel based on religion and faith and subjecting the religion and faith of the whole of Grayson to uncertainty and scandal is a crucial miscalculation of strategy.

I can more readily accept and agree with one of my friend's explanations that "Honor was simply so preoccupied, hurt, exhausted and emotionally compromised over the loss of the kids and the priest that the subject of Nimitz escaped her and she needed Nimitz for emotional support."

That is understandable, and it yields to the truth that Honor is wrong. I agree that it was not a conscious decision, but it is radioactive fuel waiting to be opened in a can of worms.

Again, this can of worms is raging amongst my friends in seven countries and 22 cities. Raging! As well as here in the forum. If it can cause a [C c]onstitutional crisis amongst my friends, what hath it power to do on Grayson?

That is truly the jungle missed for the trees.

Son, your mother says I have to hang you. Personally I don't think this is a capital offense. But if I don't hang you, she's gonna hang me and frankly, I'm not the one in trouble. —cthia's father. Incident in ? Axiom of Common Sense
Top
Re: Honorverse ramblings and musings
Post by tlb   » Fri Nov 30, 2018 8:23 am

tlb
Rear Admiral

Posts: 1130
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 10:34 am

cthia wrote:Introducing deceit, unfairness and unrighteousness into a duel based on religion and faith and subjecting the religion and faith of the whole of Grayson to uncertainty and scandal is a crucial miscalculation of strategy.

Precisely because it is a duel based on religion and faith is why no uncertainty or scandal was introduced, because no one can deceive God. To explain that let's go through some earlier dialogue.

tlb wrote:It was only Burdette that thought to take advantage of the system that still contained the possibility of trial by combat. Why wouldn't he; even it were certain that Honor had all the advantages you claim and none of the disadvantages of inexperience, tiredness and injury? He have gotten himself into the situation where he had taken actions that resulted in the death of children and Reverend Hanks. If he did not fight the Champion then the Protector would condemn him to death. If he fought the Champion and won, then Honor would be dead, the Protector would be disgraced and his position would be vindicated.

cthia wrote:All fair under Caesar's law of dueling. So? How does any of that give Honor the authority to unscrupulously misuse her God given abilities betraying any God of any faith?

Also, Burdette didn't get himself in that situation, he feels that Protector Benjamin put him and all of Grayson in a much more untenable position.

So in your view Burdette bore no responsibility for the actions he took in response to the Protector's policies, just because he feels the Protector was wrong?
Honor did her duty as Champion and so served God and the Protector as best she could. To refuse to do so would exonerate Burdette of his crimes and vindicate his opposition to the Protector's policies. If God gave her the abilities, then how is it wrong to use them to defend God and Protector? The sources I read state that Moses was punished for disobedience in striking the rock after being told to speak to it, not for misuse of talent by using the rod to do so.
tlb wrote:The Protector's Champion is selected in a way that ignores any ability with the sword. You gave up the claim about fairness when you accepted that a 90 year old man (without prolong) could have been the Champion and so forced to fight Burdette.

cthia wrote:Why would that signify me giving up any claim on fairness? That is fair under man's law. Again, Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. That is Caesar's law. In and of itself, it does not offend the laws of God.

If Caesar's law places a 90-yr-old man in a position where he has to fight, then so be it. Let him fight for righteousness. If he dies, let him die righteously. If he lives, let him live righteously.

You refer to Caesar's law of dueling in several places, but that is a fundamental misunderstanding of the difference between a duel and Trial by Combat in a religious society. Just as in early Christian times, it is expected that God will be involved in the outcome of a trial. So it is not expected that someone can end as both righteous and dead. I tried to explain that to you previously and without justification you called it a "secular belief, born of infidels".

On Grayson, Trial by Combat is a rejection of secular law and a direct appeal to God's judgment as Burdette made clear in his challenge:
Let your Champion stand forth and prove the true will of God sword-to-sword, in the ancient way of our fathers, and may God preserve the righteous!

Here is the Wikipedia article on Trial by Ordeal stating there is an general expectation of divine interaction in these trials:
Trial by ordeal was an ancient judicial practice by which the guilt or innocence of the accused was determined by subjecting them to a painful, or at least an unpleasant, usually dangerous experience. The test was one of life or death, and the proof of innocence was survival. In some cases, the accused was considered innocent if they escaped injury or if their injuries healed.

In medieval Europe, like trial by combat, trial by ordeal was considered a "judgment of God" (Latin: judicium Dei): a procedure based on the premise that God would help the innocent by performing a miracle on his behalf. The practice has much earlier roots, attested to as far back as the Code of Hammurabi and the Code of Ur-Nammu.

In pre-modern society, the ordeal typically ranked along with the oath and witness accounts as the central means by which to reach a judicial verdict. Indeed, the term ordeal has the meaning of "judgment, verdict" (German Urteil, Dutch oordeel), from Proto-Germanic *uzdailjam "that which is dealt out".
.
.
.
Theoretical approaches
According to a theory put forward by economics professor Peter Leeson, trial by ordeal may have been effective at sorting the guilty from the innocent. On the assumption that defendants were believers in divine intervention for the innocent, then only the truly innocent would choose to endure a trial; guilty defendants would confess or settle cases instead. Therefore, the theory goes, church and judicial authorities could routinely rig ordeals so that the participants—presumably innocent—could pass them. To support this theory, Leeson points to the great latitude given to the priests in administering the ordeal and interpreting the results of the ordeal. He also points to the overall high exoneration rate of accused persons undergoing the ordeal, when intuitively one would expect a very high proportion of people carrying a red hot iron to be badly burned and thus fail the ordeal. Peter Brown explains the persistence and eventual withering of the ordeal by stating that it helped promote consensus in a society where people lived in close quarters and there was little centralized power. In a world where "the sacred penetrated into the chinks of the profane and vice-versa" the ordeal was a "controlled miracle" that served as a point of consensus when one of the greatest dangers to the community was feud. From this analysis, Brown argues that the increasing authoritativeness of the state lessened the need and desire for the ordeal as an instrument of consensus, which ultimately led to its disappearance.
Top
Re: Honorverse ramblings and musings
Post by kzt   » Fri Nov 30, 2018 8:50 am

kzt
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 10023
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2010 7:18 pm
Location: Albuquerque, NM

It it isn't explained clearly by Wikipedia and requires actually reading the books to understand an issue then some people are simply never going to get it.
Top
Re: Honorverse ramblings and musings
Post by cthia   » Fri Nov 30, 2018 9:36 am

cthia
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 11274
Joined: Thu Jan 23, 2014 12:10 pm

kzt wrote:It it isn't explained clearly by Wikipedia and requires actually reading the books to understand an issue then some people are simply never going to get it.

Oh, stop being an anal orifice. You really need to work on your beef with Wikipedia. Intelligent users recognize it for what it is. A quick and dirty, convenient reference point. A single point. More intelligent users like engineers (myself), doctors and lawyers don't rely on Wikipedia for critical information. And I'm certain NASA don't use it to put men in space.

But for everyday references, it works just fine. LOL

Someone please check this guy's ID at the door when he leaves. Adolescents shouldn't be allowed in adult conversations.

Son, your mother says I have to hang you. Personally I don't think this is a capital offense. But if I don't hang you, she's gonna hang me and frankly, I'm not the one in trouble. —cthia's father. Incident in ? Axiom of Common Sense
Top
Re: Honorverse ramblings and musings
Post by tlb   » Fri Nov 30, 2018 10:01 am

tlb
Rear Admiral

Posts: 1130
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 10:34 am

kzt wrote:It it isn't explained clearly by Wikipedia and requires actually reading the books to understand an issue then some people are simply never going to get it.

cthia wrote:Oh, stop being an anal orifice. You really need to work on your beef with Wikipedia. Intelligent users recognize it for what it is. A quick and dirty, convenient reference point. A single point. More intelligent users like engineers (myself), doctors and lawyers don't rely on Wikipedia for critical information. And I'm certain NASA don't use it to put men in space.

But for everyday references, it works just fine. LOL

Someone please check this guy's ID at the door when he leaves. Adolescents shouldn't be allowed in adult conversations.

I am fairly certain that this was a slam at you, not Wikipedia; and you are the one being childish and abusive.
Top
Re: Honorverse ramblings and musings
Post by cthia   » Fri Nov 30, 2018 10:58 am

cthia
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 11274
Joined: Thu Jan 23, 2014 12:10 pm

tlb wrote:
kzt wrote:It it isn't explained clearly by Wikipedia and requires actually reading the books to understand an issue then some people are simply never going to get it.

cthia wrote:Oh, stop being an anal orifice. You really need to work on your beef with Wikipedia. Intelligent users recognize it for what it is. A quick and dirty, convenient reference point. A single point. More intelligent users like engineers (myself), doctors and lawyers don't rely on Wikipedia for critical information. And I'm certain NASA don't use it to put men in space.

But for everyday references, it works just fine. LOL

Someone please check this guy's ID at the door when he leaves. Adolescents shouldn't be allowed in adult conversations.

I am fairly certain that this was a slam at you, not Wikipedia; and you are the one being childish and abusive.


tlb wrote:
kzt wrote:It it isn't explained clearly by Wikipedia and requires actually reading the books to understand an issue then some people are simply never going to get it.

cthia wrote:Oh, stop being an anal orifice. You really need to work on your beef with Wikipedia. Intelligent users recognize it for what it is. A quick and dirty, convenient reference point. A single point. More intelligent users like engineers (myself), doctors and lawyers don't rely on Wikipedia for critical information. And I'm certain NASA don't use it to put men in space.

But for everyday references, it works just fine. LOL

Someone please check this guy's ID at the door when he leaves. Adolescents shouldn't be allowed in adult conversations.

I am fairly certain that this was a slam at you, not Wikipedia; and you are the one being childish and abusive.

Of course it was a slam on me. The same old tired-ass slam I always get from him. Hence my sarcastic response. You didn't understand karma, having trouble with sarcasm too? Wikipedia will help!

OTOH, you admit that he slammed me, but that I'm the one being childish and abusive. But then, you've always been a bit slow in matters yourself. Since you've personally deputized yourself and are keeping score, you see.

And, your understanding of the Bible leaves much to be desired. I know from many of the religious threads what I am up against on this matter. It doesn't surprise me. Though it does sadden me.

I must do what Honor failed to do and admit that I've got a leg up in this conversation since it rages hot in my social circles. So many of the points broached here have already been encountered. The good thing amongst my friends is they aren't immature and childish and they are believers themselves. I don't have to argue obvious points or have to contend with disagreement for the sake of.

Then I get kzt's post just when my friends compliment the forum for a descent conversation conducted maturely for a change. So much for that.

If the conversation delves too deeply under the skin, no need to pick fights. Pick less cerebral topics, like the performance of tech.

Son, your mother says I have to hang you. Personally I don't think this is a capital offense. But if I don't hang you, she's gonna hang me and frankly, I'm not the one in trouble. —cthia's father. Incident in ? Axiom of Common Sense
Top
Re: Honorverse ramblings and musings
Post by Dauntless   » Fri Nov 30, 2018 11:14 am

Dauntless
Commodore

Posts: 959
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2015 11:54 am
Location: United Kingdom

my one post on this matter.


in Changer of worlds (honorverse anthlogy 3, first story) nimitiz tells his clan that even now, she (Honor) does not realise that she (Honor) is now reading the emotions, instead of just picking up what nimitz sends her, meaning that her control is still less then what she will have later, and this is at least 2 T years after the fight. This story take place in the gap between book 6 and 7.

but Citha is right to some extent that the ability to sense emotions could be seen as an unfair advantage by someone trying to twist things, though i'd say the years of martial arts training and the ability to recognise when someone will make a move and automatically countering it, as seen in her sparring matches in book 6, is a much greater one.


Burdette chose the fight: he could have taken his chances with a court, slim as they were, if he didn't know what he was facing that was his fault. EVERYONE saw the footage of Honor rescuing Benjamin and co when the assassins attacked.

even if Honor had disclosed her ability, what would it have changed? His only way of avoiding the trial and its guaranteed death sentence was to fight the protectors champion.

a proxy fight where Honor or both are replaced might work but he would be known as the coward who wasn't willing to face a mere woman, neither his ego or the other opposition keys would been happy with that. so she can sense his emotions? all he was feeling was anger, anticipation and glorious purpose.

yes she had an advantage he didn't. several in fact, empath, 40 years of martial arts, actual live combat experience both up close and more distant.

Burdette had trained with the sword for decades and was the better swordsman, he was also fresh and unwounded.

so it wasn't a fair fight on EITHER side, with both having advantages the other did not and could not be given anytime soon. so as both were at a disadvantage against the other it was as fair as it was possible to make it.
Top
Re: Honorverse ramblings and musings
Post by tlb   » Fri Nov 30, 2018 12:57 pm

tlb
Rear Admiral

Posts: 1130
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 10:34 am

cthia wrote:Of course it was a slam on me. The same old tired-ass slam I always get from him. Hence my sarcastic response. You didn't understand karma, having trouble with sarcasm too? Wikipedia will help!

OTOH, you admit that he slammed me, but that I'm the one being childish and abusive. But then, you've always been a bit slow in matters yourself. Since you've personally deputized yourself and are keeping score, you see.

And, your understanding of the Bible leaves much to be desired. I know from many of the religious threads what I am up against on this matter. It doesn't surprise me. Though it does sadden me.

If the conversation delves too deeply under the skin, no need to pick fights. Pick less cerebral topics, like the performance of tech.

I would not be surprised to learn that you know more about the Bible than I do; since this is not a Christian discussion group, it normally does not matter.

I am sorry that you think there is something personal between us, instead of recognizing that you spin out so many opinions that you generate much more to disagree with than others. You must not have noticed that I have had some strong arguments with quite possibly a cat and others.

I do recognize the sarcasm in your remark about my lack of understanding. It would be more correct to say that I disagree in general with your use of the concept of karma and also with your specific application of it to Beowulf. Have you read to the end of UH yet?

Saying KZT slammed you and saying your response was less than measured are not mutually exclusive. Actually I would have preferred that he had not posted that, so you could have said what you think of the religious component of Trial by Combat. It deflected you from something more cerebral.
Top

Return to Honorverse