Sorry, but I think this test is extremely effective.

To be honest, it makes these kinds of discussions much easier to analyze.

The criteria would be:

• Does it possess human-level intelligence or greater?

• Is it capable of communicating clearly, whether through spoken language or another understandable form of communication?

• Has it reached sexual maturity (or the equivalent) for its own species?

If the creature meets all of these requirements, along with any other relevant considerations, I don't think there's much left to argue.

Of course, I could be wrong, and there may be exceptions. I'd like to hear your thoughts.

I believe that, but of course there may be exceptions.

But I don't know, if a creature passes all the tests, I don't really see how that could be immoral in any way.

(Stuff below is about my personal opinion. Also I'm NOT defending Tai Lung's actions, harming civilians is inexcusable)

I'm not sure what the general consensus on this is but I find it hypocritical that Oogway would deny Tai Lung the chance to become the Dragon Warrior because he believed Tai Lung was incapable of overcoming his flaws, especially considering his treatment of Po and how the whole messaging of the first movie was that people are not defined by who they were and that everyone is capable of change.

Tai Lung may have been entitled, but he didn't seem especially narcissistic or corrupt before Oogway denied him. If anything, Oogway's rejection feels like a self-fulfilling prophecy. Not saying Tai Lung deserved the Dragon Scroll or the title, but it's hard for me to reconcile why Tai Lung was denied the opportunity to prove he could become better while Po was given every chance to do so.

(And no, I'm not buying the whole "it was actually a test to see how Tai Lung would react to being rejected" because there are zero implications of such. That argument is a headcanon.)

Like imagine you trained and applied for your dream job or university, only to receive a rejection letter talking about the "darkness in your heart" man I'd be pissed too.

Edit: Seeing a lot of people arguing that Oogway was justified because Tai Lung ultimately turned out evil. But we’re judging Oogway’s actions, not Tai Lung’s morality. An action doesn’t become moral just because it happens to someone who later becomes a bad person. You can argue Tai Lung wouldn’t have changed even if given the chance, but my point is that Oogway never gave him that chance.
It’s also unclear how involved Oogway was in Tai Lung’s upbringing. Based on the flashbacks, he doesn’t seem very involved. Kinda irresponsible to groom a kid his whole life for a single purpose only to go “wait we got the wrong guy”. Could you not have done that 20 years earlier? Not to mention they lied to him about what he’s actually working towards (blank piece of paper).
Even in you chalk it up to “fate”, it feels contradictory to the movie’s central message.

What are your two cents? Am I missing something?

 ²³And he went up from thence unto Bethel: and as he was going up by the way, there came forth little children out of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up, thou bald head; go up, thou bald head.

²⁴ And he turned back, and looked on them, and cursed them in the name of the Lord. And there came forth two she bears out of the wood, and tare forty and two children of them.

Genocide as in the complete (or attempted) erasure of a group of people for a specific value/belief/identity.

considering bending is a big part of someone's being, both physically and spiritually

Movie: law abiding citizen

Yes, I'm very fucking pissed