@Sammsy:
no i'm not saying death is bad. I'm saying the intentions are bad.
Vivi chose to stay not to protect her people from anything that could happen if she left, she chose to stay because she WANTED to, she loves her country more than she wants to be a pirate and sail with them.
If you shoot an innocent person in the head or 1000 innocent people in the head its the same thing. Luffy has asked a couple of people who have been in a situation like AL. First we have the guy in the chest. He was asked to join, but chose to stay because he loved those animals and WANTED to stay and protect them from pirates/poachers/ect.
Vivi was asked to join and refused because she wanted to lead her people that she loves in her country more than joining strawhats.
It's all about their wants, their decisions weren't based on morals or doing the right thing. They wanted to stay because of their love for something. Its hard to tell how Hancock feels about her island, she definately isn't no Nyon in looking out for her country by all means necessary(which by the way I should mention LEFT her country) So when situation arrives and Luffy may ask her to join, it all comes down to what she WANTS, not what you think is right. Does Hancock want to stay and protect her people and love her people more than going with luffy.
I guess we have a fundamental disagreement because i think killing 1000 innocent people is exponentially worse than killing one.
Lets say Vivi came with the straw hats, you are saying that if something happened to arabasta it would be as much Luffy's fault as Vivi's. I understand what your trying to say, but this is like calling hitlers parents evil because of nazi germany; while you could technically put them at fault (due to how they raised him or whatever), I would have trouble saying that they are in the wrong, meaning they had acted negligently and without consideration for others (at least in my paradigm).
basicly im saying theres a difference between being at fault and actually being neglectfully or selfishly hurtful, or evil if you will.
For example, it is Luffy's fault that blackbeard doubled his crew size with prisoners from impel down…. but is Luffy in the wrong for that? i would say no.
@Sammsy:
So druglords are completely innocent and perfectly moral people? its up to the individual person using it right?
they are just making a substance, they aren't forcing anyone to take it. I'm a good moral person if I go out and start making meth or coke or anything else i can think of. i'm not responsible at all for whatever happens to anyone that takes my drugs right?
The right thing to do is not make any drugs, or Luffy not to ask them. But he did, and thus is responsible for all the drugs he makes or whatever befalls anythign due to that person leaving.
the reason druglords are bad is not because they sell drugs. A drug lord is evil for blackmail, murder, lying, cheating, etc.
If all a drug lord did was sell drugs, they would be a pharmacist, and if a pharmacist prescribes you oxy for your backpains and you get addicted, you could say it is their fault, but you couldnt say they had acted wrongly.
i would say someone who cooks up meth is super lame, but not evil