'Dragon Age: The Veilguard' Creative Director Calls People On The Right "Small And Weak People, Puffed Up By Their Own Cruelty"
John Epler, the Creative Director for Dragon Age: The Veilguard, called people on the right “small and weak people, puffed up by their own cruelty.”
In a post to BlueSky, Epler, who is now the Narrative Director at Full Circle Studio, reacted to a Wall Street Journal article about Florida Republican Representative Kat Cammack and her ectopic pregnancy that she had in May 2024. For those unfamiliar with an ectopic pregnancy, the National Library of Medicine explains that it “occurs when a fertilized egg implants outside the uterus, most commonly in the fallopian tube. Prompt recognition of this condition is essential, as in the United States, approximately 1% to 2% of pregnancies are affected, and an estimated 2.7% of pregnancy-related deaths are caused by ectopic pregnancy rupture.”
In the article, Cammack detailed how medical professionals did not want to treat her due to Florida’s six-week abortion ban bill believing they might lose their licenses or go to jail despite Cammack allowing hospital workers to read the bill. She blamed the left for this fear telling the WSJ, “It was absolute fearmongering at its worst. There will be some comments like, ‘Well, thank God we have abortion services,’ even though what I went through wasn’t an abortion.”
She also revealed how she terminated the life of her child using methotrexate.
READ: The Quartering Exposes YouTube's Censorship Campaign As Algorithm Destroys Anti-Woke Channels
Epler reacted to this writing, “One of the defining features of the modern right is that it’s never their fault when their policies have bad outcomes. It’s the fault of The Left for not warning them enough. A complete abdication of personal responsibility. There’s always someone else to blame.”
He added in a follow-up, “It’s dangerous and it’s transparent but more than that it’s pathetic. These are small and weak people, puffed up by their own cruelty to appear big and strong. It’s why solidarity matters, and it’s why centrism fails. Oppose them and they back down. ‘Compromise’ and they’ll run you over.”
READ: Elon Musk Spreads Fake Narrative That Woke Is Dead
To be clear, Florida law states, “This act does not prohibit a physician from taking such measures as are necessary to save the life of a mother whose life is endangered by a physical disorder, physical illness, or physical injury, provided that every reasonable precaution is also taken, in such cases, to save the fetus’s life.”
However, just because something is legal does not mean it is moral. In this case, the morality of an ectopic pregnancy should be evaluated under the principle of double effect. Catholic Answers explains:
The action must be either morally good or neutral.
The bad effect must not be the means by which the good effect is achieved.
The intention must be the achieving of only the good effect; the bad effect can in no way be intended and must be avoided if possible.
The good effect must be at least equivalent in proportion to the bad effect.
Given an ectopic pregnancy risks the the life of both the mother and the child:
Removing a part of the body that is about to rupture and cause the death of the individual is a morally good action.
The death of the child is not the direct intention of the procedure. The removal of the fallopian tube is intended to save the life of the mother and not intended to cause the death of the child.
The death of the child is not willed and would be avoided if at all possible—if, for example, re-implantation in the womb were reasonably possible.
The life of the mother is, of course, equal to the life of the child.
As for the use of methotrexate that Cammack used, the National Catholic Bioethics Center argues it does not meet the criteria of double effect. The Center shares that methotrexate “targets the most rapidly growing cells of the embryo, especially the placenta-like cells which attach the early embryo to the wall of the tube. Some have suggested that methotrexate might preferentially target these placenta-like cells, distinct from the rest of the embryo, so that it could be seen as "indirectly" ending the life of the embryo. Others, however, have noted that these placenta-like cells are in fact a part of the embryo itself (being produced by the embryo, not by the mother), so that the use of methotrexate actually targets a vital organ of the embryo, resulting in his or her death.”
In another essay the Center makes it clear that the use of methotrexate crosses “the line into the intrinsic evil of direct abortion in the opinion of the NCBC.” However, it adds, “Some ethicists claim that methotrexate acts primarily on the trophoblast, or embryonic placenta, and not directly on the main body of the preborn child, so it might be permissible. This is an area where a definitive pronouncement by the Magisterium of the Church would be very helpful to the faithful and health care professionals.”
What do you make of Epler’s comments?
Projection. He talks about personal responsibility, while having none. I bet he wouldn't take any for the catastrophic failure of Veilguard.
He can't see his own contortions he describes as logic.