Originally Posted by
Lax
He put it down because he was already wounded, Aquaman couldn't handle it, it was trying to kill him, his girlfriend, the rest of his allies, and showed it wasn't going to stop even after he burned it's tentacles off.
After Superman burned it's tentacles off to protect his friends, the creature then tried to kill him.
It showed no signs of being intimidated.
What is the value of being a "perfect man" in a world that will alter itself specifically to make the impossible possible? He isn't rising above the challenge, the challenge is tailoring itself to be overcome with zero fallout.
You say "putting Superman in a situation similar to ours" as if our world isn't the basis for the one he lives in. As if "a situation similar to ours" is a writer rigging the game against Supes as oppose to exploring a question the character is often shielded from having to answer.
I find that the people who get "strung up" are the ones who don't want him to kill. They are the ones with this standard of perfection for the character. They are the ones who create "Hear we go again" threads when their standards aren't met.
I've said it earlier in this thread and I'll say it again "I suppose I don't feel comfortable holding him to a different standard than everybody else just because he is Superman. Logically that opens up a big can of worms."
I'm not looking for perfection, I'm looking for a good man.
Violence.
This is a man who routinely hurts people to protect himself and others. He, as a perfect man, should be able to "find a way" to save everyone without hurting anyone right? It doesn't matter how unrealistic or impractical "finding a way" is, he's Superman, he can do the impossible.
Logic is okay when it's time to inflict the horrible pain of burning a creatures tentacles off, but logic is out of bounds when it's time to possibly kill said creature. The brutalization is fine but the logical extension of that brutalization isn't.
I'm going to cut to the chase.
The realism vs fantasy angle is a smokescreen topic fogging up the real discussion. The core issue is with killing and how people feel about Superman preforming the act. It's a moral line that some fans arbitrarily draw for what is acceptable for the character, then act as if the character is ruined or otherwise wronged when that arbitrary line is crossed.
If Superman found a way to stop that sea creature, or Zod, or Doomsday without killing them I'd be fine with that. However, if he can't neutralize the threat without ending it, or if trying to do so created more problems then it solved, I'd expect him to do what is just, because that's part of being a good man too.
If there is blame to be had, it doesn't lie with Superman.