[ SECRET POST #5539 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #5539 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.


01.



__________________________________________________



02.



__________________________________________________



03.



__________________________________________________



04.



__________________________________________________



05.



__________________________________________________



06.



__________________________________________________



07.



__________________________________________________



08.

















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 45 secrets from Secret Submission Post #793.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[meadowphoenix]

Honestly, I thought about this since you brought it up OP, and I think where I'm at is that Batman is already morally two-faced (haha) by being a vigilante, and to a certain extent ethically useless. The question of whether he should kill is irrelevant because he's already a billionaire and if he has a moral responsibility to his city, it's to improve, including the systems he is circumventing, and the citizenry's involvement in their governance, so he's already a moral flop. If he was doing both, I would accept it, but just one (except in one comic run)? Gross.

Like I cannot imagine thinking beating up people and encouraging kids to traumatize themselves further to do so is morally sound.