As thou didst sayeth, \"the revival of city allies by animists so that a victoy [sic] may be won,\" is certainly \"strengthen[ing] the guilds [sic] relationships with other cities and guilds. \"
Splitting up the Animists into chapters does indeed do a good job of evening out ACCESS to Animists. I myself rarely use the services of Animists, therefore, Astlebe (for example) refusing the same service to my enemies evens things out.
Of course, thou, Maiya, hast a problem with this because it is the weak that depend on Animists, and desire to control and use them more than anyone else.
In answer to some of thy questions, liberty does indeed include freedom of whom to offer services. An Animist's desires are allowed to control his own fate as anyone else in Avalon.
Thy comparison with doctors is misleading at best. Doctors offer a service for which they are compensated. When was the last time thou didst pay an Animist for thy many ressurections? Or even thank him?
Thou dost a fair job of obfuscating the issue with big words and meaningless rhetoric, but the real issue is the freedom of the Animist. If he wishes to be an \"accessor[y] to war\" that is his choice, and certainly a natural part of life.
It is certainly less of an idealogical conflict than a Pacifist raising an army.
\"... if ... life-giving is encumbent upon an objective measurable value that is variable from animist to animist... \" then it is not an objective value at all, is it? The \"sacred unity that is compassion\" (what bullshit, by the way) has nothing to do
Life giving is not the same as compassion, which in turn is not necessarily the realm of an Animist. Life giving may be discompassionate, and a compassionate person may refuse to give life.
The history of the Animists has little meaning here. The Animists like all guilds are dynamic, and open to change with time.
I challenge thee not to argue this matter in the public forum. I will consider myself well and thoroughly rebuked.
Written by my hand on the 10th of Mournsend, in the year 1101.