More specifically: Should a question with moral/ethical components be presented in a balanced non-judgmental way, or should it be heavily slanted to promote an individual agenda?
derides games in which "PCs become inured to murder and other antisocial activities". This topic is as old as roleplaying itself; Dr. Thomas Radecki (and his National Coalition on Television Violence) railed against violence in the TV medium back in the late 1970s and early 1980s, and added anti-D&D to his agenda.
Simplistic fantasy games (as well as first-person-shooter digital games) avoid the dilemma for the sake of fast and entertaining action-adventure. After the RPG industry matured, we saw a plethora of nonviolent games, so there are plenty of options for that. Meanwhile, there are still plenty of violent games.
In the question cited above, the author's ACTUAL question was "How can I give my PCs a respect for human life?" However, this is appended to a long anti-violence rant. The answer he chose as Best cites real-world ethical and moral situations, thoroughly mixing reality with fantasy gaming, and continues the anti-violence agenda.
I am moved to pose this in Meta because the cited question is extremely high-profile from one of the top forum members. Being an open sneer at certain gaming styles, is this one-sided tone appropriate for this site, or should questions of this sort be more balanced?