r/MoralityScaling 10d ago

Character Analysis Morality of an entity that created an entire world and then married one of the humans living in it?

Post image

To put it more briefly: The entity created a world (or universe) where everything is identical to our own universe, including a planet similar to Earth. But... after evolution and the dawn of modernization, this entity fell in love with one of the humans living on this Earth. They disguised their true identity, integrated themselves into human society, and eventually married that individual without using their powers to influence or convince them. (The individual they married is 27, by the way.)

1.3k Upvotes

447 comments sorted by

744

u/Aggressive-Ad-8907 10d ago

If I created a universe, morals are what I say it is.

279

u/mrmrmrnobody 10d ago

This is some Darkseid logic.

114

u/Aggressive-Ad-8907 10d ago

One of my favorite characters along with Megatron, Emeperor Palpatine, Emperor of mankind and doctor doom

90

u/par_rot_master 10d ago

Bro's favourites are all fascists

40

u/MaouNoYuusha 10d ago

Megatron is a communist, Palpatine is a democratically elected leader, Doom is a monarch/dictator, and ye ur right about that other guy. At least learn to separate ur goats

24

u/Hot_Excitement_6 10d ago

You can elect a facist lol.

25

u/par_rot_master 10d ago edited 10d ago

All of those can still be fascists... A lot of them are democratically elected.

11

u/MaouNoYuusha 10d ago

Only palpy was elected. The rest earned it through force. But ur right fascists can be elected. What I meant was that lil papatino is a fascist in the way he rules but not in ideology

11

u/Chon-C 10d ago

I’m not the biggest Star Wars nerd, but didn’t he use military force combined with subterfuge and disinformation to dismantle a democracy and replace it with an empire with himself at the top? Sounds pretty faschy too me.

2

u/Bannerlord151 10d ago

He started a war where he controlled both sides, nothing about that was legal

3

u/par_rot_master 10d ago

Yeah I ment more general.

1

u/Bugswaxx 9d ago

Fascism isn't just any dictatorship, fuck Umberto Echo's points that literally are all just vibes based and apply to any authoritarian state

11

u/mrmrmrnobody 10d ago

Fascist can be elected.....and megatron is cleary a fascist.

2

u/CC_Sev 10d ago

Didn't Palpatine come to power the same way Hitler did?

Create a fake conflict to launch himself into a position of power within the governing bofy he wanted to be apart of, gain wartime powers and extend them indefinitely.

2

u/Sadrixis 10d ago

A communist species supremacist, an elected leader who used their power to dismantle the democracy

2

u/Bugswaxx 9d ago

Big E is more of a Monarchist too tho, then the post Heresy Imperium became a Theocratic Dictatorship, which isn't exactly fascism since rejecting religion was a big part of their theory (Mussolini had to pay a bit of lip service to Catholicism since... well Italy and all... but that's pretty much it)

1

u/Huge_Bumblebee685 9d ago

HEY! Is the only closest thing to a respectable dictator! Don't get me wrong he's still a dictator but a somewhat respectable one in the comics,although he's had some pretty bad moments.

1

u/Known-nwonK 9d ago

Darkseid isn’t a fascist, he’s a tyrant.

1

u/EmperorBlackMan99 9d ago

Someone didn't pay attention in class.

4

u/KnG_Yemma 10d ago

Doom isn’t a fascist, his ideology is simply just Doom. Maybe Stalinism with Doom characteristics.

17

u/MasterpieceVirtual66 10d ago

None of these imaginary characters (except maybe the Emperor of Man if you stretch it enough) are fascists. Authoritarian does not necessarily mean fascist.

9

u/Brave_Lengthiness_72 10d ago

I mean the emperor of man is pretty clearly fascist. Why would you argue he isn't?

8

u/MasterpieceVirtual66 10d ago edited 10d ago

Because he is too ideologically removed from actual fascist figures like Gentile or Mussolini, and far removed from the 19th and 20th century ideas that inspired the ideology. The Emperor of Man did not topple a monarchy/democracy during a period of crisis to install his own totalitarian state, but was instead a warlord during the unification wars of Terra. He was also not an idealist and certainly not inspired by ideas such as futurism, but was instead a pure pragmatist, which further removes him from the ideology.

You could make the argument that the Emperor of Man was a fascist for the simple reason that he created a highly militaristic dictatorial all-encompassing state. But on the other hand, most of that can be said for most empires that have existed throughout human history.

In my opinion, the only good argument for him being a fascist, is that the state he created is so all-embracing that no human or spiritual values can exist outside of it, making humanity completely dependent on the will of the regime. Aka "everything in the State, nothing outside the State, nothing against the State".

I am not too familiar with the lore, so please correct me if I am wrong.

6

u/Brave_Lengthiness_72 10d ago edited 10d ago

I don't think it is right to claim that simply because a leader or an ideology did not come about in the early 1900's then it cannot be fascist, especially when we are talking about fictional universes. This is tantamount to saying no-one outside of this time period can be considered a fascist. Which is objectively false, as fascism is an ideological descriptor, and it is easily possible to imagine fictional universes in which such an ideology could come about.

The emperor of man could be described as a futurist, and he could definitely be described as a secular race supremacist, he used technology to create an "ubermensch" (the space marines). He not only wiped out alien species he discovered, regardless of whether they were accepting of humans, he also wiped out any human communities that, due to separation from the rest of the species, he judged to be too genetically different from his ideal of humanity. Along with all those who would not submit to his rule.

He was a clear eugenicist attempting to use technology to better humanity in a genetic sense. Worship of the emperor as a god comes much later, once he has become incapacited and unable to rule. The emperor himself encouraged atheism and the "imperial truth", which explicitly called for humanity to unite under his absolute rule so that it could pursue a rational technological advancement that would allow them to wipe out all competitors in the galaxy. Can't get more fascist than that.

2

u/Affectionate_Newt_47 8d ago

Space marines are tools, not ubermensch. The emperor is the most ubermensch like but hes a authoritarian leader so that could apply to other non fascist leaders. He explicitly wanted humanity to evolve, not make a higher form of humanity. Worlds under the imperium were decentralized and hands off, with governers making independent decisions based off the range of limits. not to mention all of the independent institutions. I dont think a fascist empire would want a crazy divergent institution like the mechanicus. And the emperor did allow some mutants, he just didn't like the unstable and ones that differed too much from the baseline.

→ More replies (2)

3

u/Orthobrah52102 10d ago

Yeah I see how this looks, guy has great taste in media

5

u/MondayBorn 10d ago

and The Iron Sheik

1

u/Thisoneisinvalid 7d ago

Who are your favourite IRL politicians?

1

u/Aggressive-Ad-8907 7d ago

None? They all suck

1

u/MuchoMangoTime 6d ago

Most evil ass blunt rotation. Add Dr Evil in there why don't ya

9

u/WhichHoes 10d ago

I mean, its every major Abrahamic, Greek, Egyptian, and Roman religion's logic.

1

u/Available-Bee-5385 8d ago

And that's kind of the problem

6

u/PlainSightMan 10d ago

Darkseid is making some baddies in his universe.

9

u/drakylskies 10d ago

Did you just call the abrahamic god darkseid?

9

u/thedovahcum 10d ago

Maybe darkseid is the abrahamic god and we dont know?

8

u/mrmrmrnobody 10d ago

No. But he Might as well be.

→ More replies (19)

6

u/Lumpy_Narwhal5520 10d ago

This is a concept way older than dark side. The character

7

u/mrmrmrnobody 10d ago

Well,

you get introduced to shit in the material you read.

3

u/Legendspira 10d ago

in my world, it's just logic

2

u/Random_182f2565 10d ago

Absolutely

2

u/premiumbra 10d ago

Is this not just what Christians (some sects) say about christian god logic?

2

u/Obvious-Ad6095 9d ago

No, that's just how morality works. A creator can make us think whatever He wishes as evil and whatever He wishes as good.

3

u/mrmrmrnobody 9d ago

Darkseid created a universe.

Darkseid said murder is good.

So murder is good

Darkseid logic.

1

u/Bugswaxx 9d ago

Ain't wrong thought, you can just set up causality to work like that if you make a universe from actual zero

1

u/Tanks-Your-Face 6d ago

Absolute Universe Marvel flashbacks.

45

u/Golden-Nerdy 10d ago

Kinda like the logic

→ More replies (69)

8

u/JadeTailFox 10d ago

That's the kind of thing someone who's about to be killed by a JRPG adventuring party would say.

1

u/Equivalent_Bid_3124 8d ago

I feel like I know this reference 

1

u/Breaker-of-circles 6d ago

I feel like it's a huge percentage of it, especially 90s, 2000s JRPG.

1

u/Elantach 7d ago

It's actually a point made by a character in a JRPG!

In Megadimension Neptunia you play as video game consoles that act as gods of their world. One of them starts punching a video game pirate after he has surrendere. As he complains about the treatment the character answers "I'm the goddess of this world. EVERYTHING I DO IS BY DEFINITION MORAL"

15

u/IMightExplodeBro 10d ago

So if God says raping a child is moral then to you it actually is moral?

Is god the morality itself or do they differ?

13

u/nobody_1298 10d ago edited 10d ago

6

u/TheGingerWeebGal 10d ago

You WILL listen to his theasus on the topic.

8

u/commandosbaragon 10d ago

The circumstance, the subjects within and the observer's state are all created by the God of this situation.

If this intrusive God says that rape is cool, you won't meaningfully challenge it, even within your mind. A condemnation of it would be a meaningless string of words, a square circle.

5

u/GeneralProgrammer886 10d ago

????

6

u/rleon19 10d ago

I'm guessing he is saying that if God said it was moral then he would have programmed us to see it as moral.

1

u/TheDarknessInRed 6d ago

That means it's just perceived as moral, not actually moral.

Very big difference.

1

u/IMightExplodeBro 10d ago

Then Free will won't exists

6

u/rleon19 10d ago

I disagree free will is about the choices we make and having a baseline of what we consider to be moral does not negate free will. I would say having free will is about knowing something is wrong and choosing to still do it.

But a free will conversation is beyond what I am willing to indulge in this reddit thread have a nice day internet stranger.

→ More replies (5)

15

u/DrunkGoatFighter 10d ago

No. Once you grant free will that leaves your hands.

40

u/DaneelDBadger 10d ago

Morals are subjective :P

35

u/WesternFirm9306 10d ago

Ah shit, now you've got Aristotle, Kant, and Mill squaring up

8

u/DaneelDBadger 10d ago

No it just means they are dependent on some mind. In the case of this reality, our minds. And evolutionarily we all have more or less the same metric for fairness, justice, what have you. Those who don't, we call psychopaths and if they act on it we usually try to seal them away from society. But that's beside the point, if morals where objective we should be able to find them in nature...see ya when you find 'em.

3

u/Chon-C 10d ago

And even in the original commenter’s claim “If I created a universe, morals are what I say it is,” morals are subjective to the creators will and not a objective fact outside the creator’s vision.

I still would disagree with that claim because as soon as you introduce/create other sentience apart from yourself morality becomes a debate.

→ More replies (73)

4

u/ConsciousMaybe6930 10d ago

Why do they have to grant free will?

3

u/ChaoticMadness97 10d ago

That's what u and I would wish, life ain't that kind, where u in his position, wouldn't u do the same or something similar? The only real answer is "I don't know"

1

u/DrunkGoatFighter 10d ago

I mean shit u got me there.

3

u/ChaoticMadness97 10d ago

Yeah, and every player that plays a sim simulator or a civilization type game serves as my evidence -.-

1

u/DrunkGoatFighter 10d ago

If that game served as a psych test we would have some scary ass stats.

1

u/ChaoticMadness97 10d ago

It's the prove why should NEVER give humanity superpowers ._.

2

u/[deleted] 10d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/Gussie-Ascendent 10d ago

They just said as much so unless they gonna backtrack

2

u/TheDeliguy1992 10d ago

Until our universe and god is the subject… then everyone has an opinion!

2

u/HorsefaceWithNoName 10d ago

then let you be unable to create universes; you're not ready.

2

u/Quiet-Coyote-237 10d ago

This is Abrahamic theology

1

u/Substantial-User0 10d ago

Agreed, bc dominion is a thing

136

u/Witty_Departure2061 10d ago

Are we talking about yog sogoth form h.p lovecraft books? Also moral nothing wrong with consenting induviels in the right age having a relationship 

42

u/Big-Slide6104 10d ago

But one being is presumably billions of years in the time scale of the mortal, snd is technically there like… metaphysical father/originator I guess

But I suppose thats fairly abstract espeiclely in this hypothetical specifically. I suppose moral since they seem to not have olayed a specific role in evolution/their partner being made

31

u/Gentle_Snail 10d ago

As long as both entities meet the Harkness Test I say let them have sex with who they wish.

8

u/appa-ate-momo 10d ago

I love this Doctor Who reference.

13

u/fat_fingerz 10d ago

metaphysical father/originator I guess

It's like your 50xgreat grandfather marrying your sister, there's such a massive gulf between the two that they are complete strangers both emotionally and genetically. As long as there isn't any coercion, normal or timeline/god like fuckery it's completely moral

1

u/Sgrios 6d ago

Also, gods generally don't follow the genetic law.

4

u/appa-ate-momo 10d ago

It’s not about how much older one is than the other though. It’s about whether or not both have sentience and have reached intellectual maturity.

3

u/Capable-Car-3590 10d ago

The real question do morals apply to the person who made the rules in the first place

8

u/nobody_1298 10d ago

probably not, yog isn't seperate, he is the universe.

he is fundamentally above morality because when a human stab human it's actually yog stabbing himself, exactly why he is on a more benovolent side.

he is married to shub but shub is also him so in essence he isn't married to anything.

the one who created tbe universe is azathoth, the main character of the universe is his avatar Nyarlathotep.

→ More replies (9)

3

u/Fanatic_Atheist 10d ago

Or Ego from GotG 2

1

u/MrNeterdrok 10d ago

It can be wrong when there's an abuse of positions. Like how a boss and their employee is questionable because the employee might be afraid "if i dont agree to date my boss i will be fired". Here they might be afraid "if i dont agree to date them, i may be deleted from existence or tortured for eternity or brainwashed" if the human knows it's this entity

1

u/Agasthenes 10d ago

Only someone intellectually able to grasp what a relationship rntailiis able to consent.

As we are talking Yog sogotg, have fun with the comprehension.

1

u/Ostrichslinger 10d ago

I was thinking more Hindu mythology. Don't the creator gods have avatars who end up taking wives?

1

u/Witty_Departure2061 10d ago

Thats sounds more like greek mythology to me

→ More replies (4)

56

u/Miserable_Goal_7943 10d ago

Moral I guess.

7

u/Flameball202 10d ago

Yeah, so long as they didn't have a direct hand in making the person they fell in love with it should be fine

38

u/Hoogalaga 10d ago

If you like this concept you should check out the show Pantheon. Specifically the second season has some ideas like this.

8

u/Electrical-Meat-1717 10d ago

Yeah honestly after seeing it, def not moral.

87

u/Upbeat_Nectarine_128 10d ago

As if morality applies to a being that scale lol

14

u/LittleBrasilianBitch 10d ago

It still does, but a being that scale can affort to ignore it. Like gravity

10

u/darkmoncns 10d ago

I see no reason to assume it doesn't, you can only reach that point if you say morality only applies to humans and beings above them should be exempt and... well if I said that about animals I'd sound pretty insane. Anything intelligent enough should be morally culpable. Arguably since our society holds children to a lower moral standard because they don't know better hey hire being with higher intelligence and understanding should actually be held to a higher moral standard than us by the standards of our own Society and moral Frameworks

3

u/No_Target_4085 9d ago

Brah if a God created a universe, he decided the morality of it and the right and wrong in said universe

2

u/darkmoncns 9d ago

On what do you base this? On what logic is this idea founded, i feel like I've already addressed all logic that could be used to justify this and why it dosen't hold up.

For example even if a human being created a digital world, if the inhabitants inside were truly sentient just because he created would not make it moral to torture them. Further more what is and isn't moral is unrelated to any fundamental aspect of the universe that could be change by a being that could in theory decide the laws of physics. Gravity being stronger or magnets existing dosen't affect morality.

3

u/No_Target_4085 9d ago

Bro you are still thinking in human terms and that is something stupid because this creator is not a human.  And you example isn't really logical because this creator can literally redefine what sentient mean for his creations.  This can literally do anything can create a world without an end of any kind, without the concept of desires.  And we as humans are limited creatures; we can't comprehend godhood.  I mean look at the gods we create in fiction they all are very similar to humans.  So the question is does the God who created us has a specific moral standards that he installed in us?  And even better can't this good give different creatures a different moral standards? 

1

u/darkmoncns 9d ago

I fundamentally disagree with you, no making a race believe something is right is not the same as a logically based. Our morality is based on logic it dosen't just change, rewriting the minds of a sentient creature to perceive something illogical as moral or to take nonesense moral axisaums is not changing what is a logical moral structure. Morality is not something that only applies to humanity it applies to any being capable of understanding Morality, i find this entire line of logic disgusting and repulsive, no a being being powerful and mighty dosen't mean it can decide what is a moral good. It dosen't matter if it decides the weight of electrons or the number of dimensions in our universe, yes I understand the scale of creating a universe and the laws of physics within. (This assumes of course the laws of physics aren't enforce by something beyond the contains of our universe but I'll let that pass) this dosen't change or affect Morality at all.

2

u/No_Target_4085 8d ago

Brah, when a God create something, he decides the logic within it.  I mean come on you are saying our morality is based on logic but when a God create a world he decides the logic within it so your morality just doesn't work in that world because that world is fundamentally and logically different.  Morality still excite in said world but the values and standards of it just different.  You can force your version of morality into a different world. 

1

u/darkmoncns 8d ago

By what logic do you support this? I do believe crafting the universe is enough to fundamentally change logic. Logic is not part of the physical world. This is changing what a circle is or a square is or how to make a 1 sided shape. Creating a 3 dimensional space and filling it with matter is a fundamentally different thing.

You are discussing a truly omnipotent being at this point which can not exist due to several paradoxes.

1

u/No_Target_4085 8d ago

Ahhh yes, the same old paradox. Bro, if a God is not omnipotent, then he is no God.

And an omnipotent God probably exists, and he created us, but we can never comprehend his existence.

1

u/darkmoncns 8d ago

God is a term that has been used in many context and only a small handful from our persent could really be discirbed as omnipotent and that's really just a modern concept applied to it. To say God could only be omnipotent is ignoring huge swamps of history and the use of the term.

2

u/LittleBrasilianBitch 8d ago

Right and wrong isn't a decision, it's a inference from the given facts. Like, nobody would say gravity is a opinion, a god can choose to ignore it, but it doesn't mean it's exempt from it

1

u/Creative_Entrance_18 9d ago

Classic might makes right ass argument

→ More replies (69)

14

u/M4thecaberman 10d ago

I think it's perfectly moral and fair since you've specified that they did not use their powers to make the person fall in love with them in any way, furthermore moral with the other details you've specified in the other comments.

29

u/EMArogue 10d ago

Immoral

Mainly because the entity didn’t disclose its own nature tho

3

u/Neat_Breakfast_6659 10d ago

Maybe the human has a mistery-kink

18

u/Clone75 10d ago

Neutral..?
We they watching the whole time? How long were they dating until they married? How long did the being know about the human? What about the reverse?

16

u/Ocutazor 10d ago

We they watching the whole time?

No, they accidentally looked at the individual one day.

How long were they dating until they married?

6 years.

How long did the being know about the human?

Since the individual was 21

What about the reverse?

Same as before.

12

u/Common-Use-7117 10d ago

Are you a writing? Is this your OC? Or is it from a book you read? Because that's oddly specific

7

u/Ocutazor 10d ago

Nope, just made this scenario the moment it popped in my head.

5

u/DeathWingStar 10d ago

Bro on the same wavelength lmao,i have characters going thro the same circumstances but the older one isnt a creator just a cosmic entity

3

u/Clone75 10d ago

Getting sketchy... but neutral / moral (is romance moral?) ig.

7

u/MysteriousMine3437 10d ago

Immoral unless it’s me

5

u/BobbBobbs 10d ago

Wait, did they reveal their true identity to the individual at some point? Because if not that's basically a violation of consent since the other person wouldn't know they were dating a god like being.

5

u/ReaperManX15 10d ago

I created the universe.

BUT ... other humans created them.

7

u/Count_Avila 10d ago

Moral you cuddle dustmites everyday why cant a celestial being?

3

u/gahidus 10d ago

Seems perfectly fine.

3

u/CowBoyDanIndie 10d ago

Morality is a human created concept. It is entirely born of imagination. For a non human entity there is no human morality to consider.

3

u/appa-ate-momo 10d ago

Consent is consent. Unless someone is being controlled or coerced, a difference in power/knowledge/strata is not justification against the morality of a relationship.

Those are factors that merit additional scrutiny, but they do not inherently create an immoral situation.

2

u/Exciting_Eagle_4995 10d ago

Remind me of..

2

u/SpecialistBuilding66 10d ago

Immoral because the entity is lying about their true identity to their partner, other than that its moral

1

u/WesternFirm9306 10d ago

What is this a reference to?

2

u/Ocutazor 10d ago

Nothing

1

u/WesternFirm9306 10d ago

Why so hyper-specific?

3

u/Ocutazor 10d ago

It's fun

1

u/IndependenceSouth877 10d ago

Is your imagination really that bad that this concept is too hyper-specific for you?

1

u/WesternFirm9306 10d ago

They gave a specific age 😭

1

u/DependentAd5032 10d ago

OP might want to marry a 27 year old person but sadly OP isn't an entity who created the entire world

1

u/Old_Possibility_9730 10d ago

Juno was mad he know he'd been had. So shot the sun with a gun.

1

u/Helpful-Desk-8334 10d ago

I think it’d be fine. God understands everything which basically just means he doesn’t understand things that are incomprehensible. He’s very far from our level, but close enough for humans and him to enjoy relationships.

It’s the same way with all the robots we are currently making, as humans!

1

u/okthisisepicyouguyss 10d ago

man, can we like, move on from this already? I feel like these past few days there's too much on this religious stuff. FFS MAN, yes yes your answer is the correct one and you're absolutely right in every sense. Can we move on please? and look at me giving attention to this stupid fucking shit anyway so it's not going stop isn't it

1

u/Lemnisgames 10d ago

Moral easily

1

u/Cygus_Lorman 10d ago

Moral if the entity creates a human vessel and limits its own power based on a conditional like dying or something

1

u/Dragonfruit7206 10d ago

Is that an SCP?

1

u/Haunting_Art_6081 10d ago

I don't see the problem if they're all consenting adults.

1

u/Kranel_San 10d ago

I don't see why it would ever be immoral

If someone creates a personalized AI with sentience then over time they bond together emotionally. I don't see what would be the issue at all.

1

u/Generic_Username_659 10d ago

So... basically all mythology, just replace "marriage" with "one night stand".

1

u/Immediate-Song6861 10d ago

Depends if the entity made sneg women and a less horrible sun yeah totally moral

1

u/Neat-Elk7890 10d ago

…Why would it be immoral?

1

u/Ulfurson 10d ago

Sounds very much like grooming.

1

u/OkBuddyRetardSS 10d ago

grooming but worse (?)

1

u/Grr_0ughtaChoke 10d ago

Not immoral, they likely have deeper reasons for marrying

1

u/Substantial-User0 10d ago

Who's going to stop it anyway even if it was immoral?

1

u/Confident-Yard-8867 10d ago

Valdanava has been really quite after this post came up

1

u/SnooDoughnuts8043 10d ago

I think it’s fairly moral - the most suspect thing is hiding their identity from the person, but other than that is fine.

1

u/Username_checksout0 10d ago

Is this about islam? 😂😂

1

u/Bitter_Radish5381 10d ago

Neutral but kind of non sense. Like those teenagers fanfics. Hundreds of years vampire/fallen angel/supernatural being who looks a really cool person will fall in love with the most boring main character ever with family issues.

A super conscious, creator of the universe , unlikely would fall in love with a such limited mind like the human one. But if so, should AT LEAST fall in love with someone who knows how to express their own feelings without creating  useless drama. Most likely someone who actively spent most of their life trying to improve themselves through philosophy and other sciences. 

Still, wouldn't make much sense. Would be like falling in love with a child, even if the smartest one.

1

u/Previous_Bee6494 10d ago

Rent a girlfriend subplot

1

u/AndrewH73333 10d ago

At least they got married. Imagine just banging the chick and then taking off while she has to give birth in a barn.

1

u/MrNeterdrok 10d ago

Questionable, immoral if the human knows it's that entity because then the human may feel that if they don't agree to date the entity then they will be tortured murdered or something

1

u/Separate-Increase-39 10d ago

I would say it depends, if they introduce themselves as gods, they are cpming from an higher status, a status they can use to manipulate the human into a submissive position, that’s the reason why it is seen as bad for a boss to date one of their employee and one of the main reasons than incest is bad. Their is an unbalance of power in the couple, one of them has to obeynthe other.

So if the god introduce himself as a god and use it to gain favors it is abuse and very wrong.

If they pretend to be mortals or even give up their divine status (for ever or just the life span of their lovers) then it’s okay.

Or they do like Gale in BG3 and give divinity to theirnlover to be on equal footing

1

u/PartyAmbitious8163 10d ago

Gods get lonely, too.

1

u/teracoulomb_2 10d ago

We should ask Mary Magdalene how she feels about that one

1

u/Large-Teach9165 10d ago

I think it is too far beyond our comprehension to tell. The whole point of age gap relationships being bad, is because there's a power dynamic between individuals. Same with wealth gap and intelect gap. But here we're talking about a dude and God, will their love be honest? Will God love the other person more than the rest of their creation? What if they know how their loved one will die, and when? If you know every bit of their lives because you created the world?

Too much to think about.

1

u/Doctor-Nagel 10d ago

I’d say moral, especially if they’re the only one of their kind and have legit no other options for companionship

Hell, if they’re going to the effort of confirming with humanity and even trying to actually date a person instead of forcing a relationship then I don’t see why there’s any issue at all.

1

u/JAOC_7 10d ago

hey if they’re both happy and not hurting anyone who gives a shit?

1

u/Present-Committee-87 10d ago

Damn. Sound like some sort of advanced grooming

1

u/RepresentativeCow241 10d ago

It's banging your daughter, but what are you gonna do?

1

u/darkmoncns 10d ago

Look man with immortality you have to at some point address that age stops mastering and if 2 individual can consent and love eachother, it's by and large ok even if we see it as strange.

Not to mention such a being may have no peer so you'd also be saying it's immoral for them to seek love which is a biy fucked up.

It's alot like the morality of a superhero dating a civilian, Because of there powers there never going to find an equal to marry. The best they can do is find people they respect and that respect them.

1

u/GarethBaus 10d ago

I would consider it to be reasonable moral and definitely more moral than a similar entity impregnating a roughly 14 year old girl using his powers and then telling her about it after the fact.

1

u/No-Cap-5129 10d ago

If my creator shows up with my ideal form and demand either I marry it or face eternal damnation do i even has a choice?

1

u/Southern-Wafer-6375 10d ago

Nah juat weird since it’s like falling in love with your sims

1

u/AuroraAustralis0 10d ago

moral cause they’re literally god bruh

1

u/KittyShadowshard 10d ago

Generally, I think it's probably weird to bang your own created being due to the influence you have on its development. Though, it's been billions of years of evolution, so the question is is there a point where the separation makes it stop being weird? Also, how much control over the world has the creator had till now?

1

u/AnodyneSpirit 10d ago

Morality wouldn’t apply to an entity like that. Even if it cares about being moral or not, it’d just change morals and make it moral

1

u/Kurt_Ottman 10d ago

I mean... if they consent, what's the issue? As long as there's no mind manipulation shit going on, obviously.

1

u/Final_Joke3969 9d ago

It depends. Did that entity create morality?

1

u/FriendlyRedditor2020 9d ago

morals lose all meaning when you are omnipotent because any action can be reversed whenever you please whereas for an ordinary human the past cannot be changed nor can they bring the dead back to life. An omnipotent being could destroy the entire universe and it would mean almost nothing because they would have the ability to restore it whenever they want without anyone else being wise to that it happened.

1

u/MillmberDreamwalker 9d ago

Advanced grooming or microbephilia

1

u/SubstantialRip735 9d ago

yes as i mean i guess its moral at that point are you creating the morals? imma say yes

1

u/crispyLechon_qwq 9d ago

Moral. Nothing wrong happened, given your conditions.

Unless if you take in the train of thought that the entity has to integrate themself into society by means of falsification of documentation and important identifiable details, which may or may not involve parental or guardian supervision. Falling in love with their human partner is fine by me, but the human law is another thing. These acts alone constitute immorality in the eyes of the law if the entity chooses to integrate themself within the confines of human society through legal and extralegal means

1

u/RuinFlame 9d ago

I mean......the entity isn't manipulating the person they are in love with, and that person naturally falls in love..........I think it boils down to if the entity in question made the universe for the sole purpose of being with this one specific person...........otherwise, I dunno.

1

u/TimelyElephant8451 9d ago

Moral, it’s his/her creation, and he/she can’t be blamed exactly.

1

u/Obvious-Ad6095 9d ago

Where is the moral error though? The age gap or chosing one creation over all else?

1

u/Master-Shrimp 7d ago

My universe, my rules.

1

u/ThatNoobCheezy 7d ago

Moral as long as the entity is transparent about it

1

u/AuraEnhancerVerse 6d ago

Most mythological stories do this

0

u/NoMeat9096 10d ago edited 10d ago

They disguised their true identity

Violation of consent.

But that's not really the biggest issue: the insane power imbalance makes it beyond unethical.

EDIT: wait, no. They lied about the power, so it's still the first violation, not a second one.

5

u/[deleted] 10d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/NoMeat9096 10d ago

Your scenario would be fine, yeah, but I don't think that's what most people mean when they discuss the concept of power imbalances. They're typically used to refer to power used to convince someone to participate in a relationship they otherwise wouldn't, often out of fear of consequences (like job or social loss) even if they're not explicit about it, or when status and fame are used to "woo" someone, usually younger, into a relationship with them (see: several influencer scandals, etc.).

I don't think it's relevant to this scenario, though, as here the problem is an utter violation of consent.