Something that's been bothering me...
Posted: 2005-04-20 09:25am
Why would the Jedi Council want to bring balance to the force? Isn't it better to have the scales tipped toward the side of good?
Get your fill of sci-fi, science, and mockery of stupid ideas
http://stardestroyer.dyndns-home.com/
http://stardestroyer.dyndns-home.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=67000
Huh? What makes you think that the Jedi Council 'created' the prophecy or even know what it entails?Jaepheth wrote:Why would the Jedi Council want to bring balance to the force? Isn't it better to have the scales tipped toward the side of good?
Maybe, but we have no evidence of a lie, unless you already assumed the Jedi are good, so they won't do it.Kurgan wrote:Isn't HoloNet news a propaganda rag cooked up by the corrupt press (Palpatine has a hand in it? Naaaah...)?
In that case they thought the parents were dead. They did rescue the kid from a ruined building.PainRack wrote:The parents permission apparently isn't needed, the holonet website contains a news article on how there were protests against the Jedi taking a child over the objections of the parent.
Apparently, the baby was all of six months old. There was no way that any kind of significant Force power could have been taught. The Jedi training program takes about a decade to bring someone up to Padawan level.2000AD wrote:In that case they thought the parents were dead. They did rescue the kid from a ruined building.
According to the article they do require parental consent in normal cases. They didn't give the kid back in this case because they had already trained her for a bit and you don't want someone just wandering around with force powers.
Actually it's 14 months old {Linkage), and they'd spent at least 6 months with the baby.Kazuaki Shimazaki wrote:Apparently, the baby was all of six months old. There was no way that any kind of significant Force power could have been taught. The Jedi training program takes about a decade to bring someone up to Padawan level.2000AD wrote:In that case they thought the parents were dead. They did rescue the kid from a ruined building.
According to the article they do require parental consent in normal cases. They didn't give the kid back in this case because they had already trained her for a bit and you don't want someone just wandering around with force powers.
Fine. It is a toddler (and we are talking the very earliest bit of toddler) instead of a total infant.2000AD wrote:Actually it's 14 months old {Linkage), and they'd spent at least 6 months with the baby.
Actually, I won't. There's a clear conflict of interest here (it isn't like they have a massive surplus of Jedi), if nothing else, and it is a situation with no "second opinion" source. The guy's explanation was miserably inadequate and irresponsible. That maggot had better at least explain what exercises he did, and how they are supposed to have opened the Force-eye further.Now i don't know if that's old enough for force powers to manifest , but if a Jedi Master who's spent all his life with the Force says, "It'll be too dangerous" i'd be inclined to believe him, and not just because he waved his hand when he said it.
I'd guess a six month old baby would have some memory of its parents. That's not the issue. They are making excuses so they can, understand this , enslave the kid for the rest of its life. Jedi service mixes some of the worst aspects of slavery (in that it is for the whole life), indoctrination (they brainwash you the whole life this is honorable, so hopefully you won't notice the nice things of life you are missing out on) and conscription (in that you are sent to dangerous places to die).In a real world situation would taking a baby away from it's mother at age 8 onths and raising it with someone else for 6 months cause it any mental harm? Would they be able to remember their origional parents in the first place?