If they Others do have rules and morals, its not a total sham, why on earth is it okay for Locke to get rid of his past by killing his father, but not okay for kate to get rid of her past by killing her father?

Excellent point, Getbackjs! I thought it was rather bizarre that Ben would demand that Locke kill Anthony. Especially since he is so adamant that they are not killers.

If they Others do have rules and morals, its not a total sham, why on earth is it okay for Locke to get rid of his past by killing his father, but not okay for kate to get rid of her past by killing her father?

Well, we heard that they have a rule against killing one of their own. Also, clearly they have no qualms whatsoever against killing people who aren't one of their own. (All except for Alex.) I think they might be intimidated by someone who would kill on their own initiative -- not the sign of someone who follows rules and orders well.

The Others definately have their own set of morals. It really makes me wonder what was to be accomplished by having Locke kill his father. It almost reminds me of the emperor in Star Wars telling Luke that it was his destiny to kill Vader so that he could take his place at the emperor's side. Seems like Ben wants Locke to kill his father and fulfill his "destiny" of being Ben's right hand man.

If they Others do have rules and morals, its not a total sham, why on earth is it okay for Locke to get rid of his past by killing his father, but not okay for kate to get rid of her past by killing her father?Umm does this involve an assumption that it is the killing of her father that upsets the Other's view of Kate even though they have no qualms about killing those outside of their group? It could be some other factor such as her attitude towards them or her attempts to invade their territory or her attempts to leave the island that biases them against her.

If they Others do have rules and morals, its not a total sham, why on earth is it okay for Locke to get rid of his past by killing his father, but not okay for kate to get rid of her past by killing her father?


People who think they are morally superior often have double standards. I think the others morals are based on the ends justifies the means.

If they Others do have rules and morals, its not a total sham, why on earth is it okay for Locke to get rid of his past by killing his father, but not okay for kate to get rid of her past by killing her father?
The Others believe in an eye for an eye. Cindy told Jack something to that effect when Juliet was on trial. Cooper tried to kill Locke by pushing him through a window. So by Other standards, Locke had to right to take revenge. Wayne never tried to kill Kate that we know of.