04-05-2019, 06:14 AM
(04-04-2019, 06:10 PM)syscrash Wrote: This like other statements only view this event from and emotional point of view. When the showed made it evident the decision was a logical one. Could they have chosen Elizabeth instead of Kelly yes. But that would say Sean could have contacted his mother that quick. It was stated Sean had no way to contact his mother. But more important I have yet to see anyone consider. Elizabeth is in hiding, having a baby would be a problem. that Kelly was able to do it does not mean Elizabeth could. We know nothing about how they survive. They only thing we do know is Kelly has contact with the resistance. We know nothing about who Elizabeth knows.
It is the same argument of why didn't Kelly take Adalind with her. Even if we ignore or assume Kelly got over the reasons why she had problems with Adalind. It would still require being on the run with someone who could put you at risk, even if it was unintentional
AS for the good and bad. I see people are having trouble with the new form of writing action shows. Gone are the days of the hero being the one fighting to truth, justice, and the american way. Watch most shows and the characters are ambiguous. Show are find with having the protagonist being willing to lye, cheat, steal, and kill if for the grater good. But what is even newer is having the protagonist becoming the antagonist only to go back to being the protagonist. I see the reason people have problems with this is they can't get past the logic of needing to reconcile past actions.
You say in your statement, "that Kelly was able to do it does not mean Elizabeth could".
The issue I see with your statement is that Kelly was not able to do it. Kelly herself proved that.
The best way to frustrate a cyberbully is to ignore him.