Could he really have protected them some other way? Could he have investigated the paranormal without putting them in similar positions and exposing them to what he exposed them to?

I believe he could have found someone to take care of them while he was on the road.

I believe he could have found someone to take care of them while he was on the road.

He could have. But I don't think he would have believed they would be safe. Truth was, at nine, Dean knew more about how to protect them than some kindly neighbor lady.

And then there's ends justifying the means, which is backwards but maybe valid. When you look at what these boys were destined for, what was at work their whole lives, how else would they have been prepared for what happened to them without John raising them that way?

Did Walter need to do what he did to Peter?

That's a sticky question. I think a lot of what Walter did was out of selfishness and grief, but I also haven't watched the final episode of S2, so.

I believe he could have found someone to take care of them while he was on the road.

Could that someone have (theoretically) have protected them from demons? I think when push came to shove (and this is where the potential fail comes in) he'd rather raise Dean to be someone he trusted to protect the two of them than find someone new to trust instead.

Turns out demons got to Sam anyway, but not for lack of John trying.

I think a lot of what Walter did was out of selfishness and grief

Same can be said of John, seriously. He was motivated by Mary, not the boys.

(And I will argue way more here than anywhere else because I can trust people to realize that we can all love the show and see it differently. Plus sometimes I can argue the logic of one side or another without being emotionally committed to said side.)

He was motivated by Mary, not the boys.

I think he was motivated by the boys too. Admittedly this is influenced by grey canon, but I do think he did the dodgy things for the wrong reasons.

I think when push came to shove, Walter wanted to save Peter's life. And that's admirable. What happened next...gets really murky. But given Walternate's persona? Best of a bad deal, methinks.

Same can be said of John, seriously. He was motivated by Mary, not the boys.

I didn't even know you were keeping up with Fringe! Awesome.

I think the difference, for me, is in terms of collateral damage. Which ... I'm not sure how to explain what I mean without spoilers, and this isn't the right thread anyway. But you're right in the sense that John's vengeance was completely selfish and motivated by grief, too.

(And I will argue way more here than anywhere else because I can trust people to realize that we can all love the show and see it differently. Plus sometimes I can argue the logic of one side or another without being emotionally committed to said side.)

That's why I stay here, warm and safe and cozy. And run my mouth.

Even if they'd been raised by somebody else, Sam still would have died in "All Hell Breaks Loose". But Dean might not have known about the crossroads.

Can we be careful of the fringe spoilers ? I am only partway through season 1, and want to cat h up this summer.

Thanks.

I was pleased that both lists gave Ben Sisko due props for being the best father in the Star Trek cannon.

Sorry, Perkins!

Even if they'd been raised by somebody else, Sam still would have died in "All Hell Breaks Loose".

I don't think that's true. I think an eventual destiny overrides the steps taken to get there.

Sam dying wasn't actually Azazel's plan in the first place, and if Lucifer and the rest of the angels are to be believed, he was always going to end up in Detroit, giving Lucifer a metaphysical piggyback ride.