User blog comment:Gemnist/The Good, The Bad, The Cyclops/@comment-3406131-20131115073552/@comment-2031194-20131115102002

As weird as it would seem not calling Wolvie good, I'd be up for that. His intentions are good, but not always his actions, so it would make sense.

Although then you could argue that someone like (in the past) Magneto could be called neutral. His intentions were to help the mutants survive and thrive, so that justifies his actions, right? You have to look deeper though. He didn't want to just help mutants, he wanted to eradicate humans. They can obviously both exist at once, albeit sometimes not pleasantly, so that puts him in the category of "bad". He didn't have to kill humans to help mutants. This is why Professor X is "good".

This is getting a lot more philosophical than I intended. When you think about it even more though, almost everyone falls under the category of "neutral", depending on what specifications you use to judge good and bad. This is because every human to ever live has both in them. At some time or another everyone does something good and bad. So in a way you could say everyone is good, OR everyone is bad. This basically makes the whole system of chosing an alignment useless... So to wrap this unexpected rambling up, it best not to think about this too hard, at least for comics. Rating them on the majority and importance of their acts is the easiest way.