See, I disagree. … As far as I know, the book does not make a statement about whether or not the vampires are actually damned, but Edward thinks they are, and he changes Bella thinking this. To me, his choice is the epitome of selfishness.
That makes Bella a victim. However, she
did earlier express a desire to become a vampire.
I agree that the scene reflects Edward’s selfishness.
reality is that someone can chose to lose their soul to the Devil but one can not choose to be a vampire
In most (if not all) vampire genres, one
can chose to become a vampire. Whether or not the genre allows for victimization, and what that spiritually entails, is another matter.
Again, I reiterate that the two themes (losing one’s soul in real life and a fantasy story including a choice to become a vampire ) are strikingly similar. Both share the common ontological idea that there’s something attractive or to be gained by making a choice that is intrinsically against life.
Ideas have real power. Just because an idea is grounded in fantasy does not mean that the idea can’t have real implications or consequences.
A good example is Star Trek. Several technologies in Star Trek were fantasy when the series first came out, but now are reality - in no small part because someone had the idea and then found a realistic way of making an ontologically similar idea happen.
So, too, can a fantasy about choosing to become a vampire create the idea that there’s something to be gained about chosing darkness. It is that idea that is dangerous.
This can’t happen in real life, but this strongly pro-life theme is definitely not something to sneeze at
There’s nothing pro-life about becoming a vampire. By definition, in the fantasy realm, the vampire is undead and thus is anathema to the God of the living.
What is happening here is the same twisting of what are otherwise good virtues to mask the underlying darkness - something that seems to be a consistent theme in these books.
As to Edward giving her a baby, that is just confused story writing (which undermines even the pure literary value of the story). How can an undead creature, who is himself not alive, get someone pregnant? If he were not undead, then he would not be a vampire. The very nature of the vampire is that the vampire is dead - but somehow animated. Dead things cannot convey life, except perhaps by rotting and thereby providing sustenance to something that is alive.
Let’s speculate that fantasy vampires have immortal souls. By their very definition they are undead creatures. Therefore, they are not alive. If they are not alive and they have immortal souls, then by definition they are
eternally damned. In fact, this is the original concept in Braham Stoker’s Dracula.
If a vampire with an immortal soul is enternally damned, then Edward and all of his ilk are eternally damned, and therefore by definition evil no matter how sugar coated they are made to appear.
Therefore choosing to become a vampire is a choice for eternal damnation, which brings me back to my original point.
As for unwilling victims of vamprism, given the completely inalienable nature of spiritual choice and God’s protection, we can only speculate that a victim unwilling killed by a vampire actually dies. The soul of the victim goes to its judgement. The body is perhaps then animated by a demon - or perhaps by the damned soul if the victim was damned at judgement.
Of course, vampires are fantasy. However, once you have defined what a vampire is, one can logically deduce the rest.
And indulging in a fantasy that romanticizes intrinsically evil creatures is dangerous and not good, no matter how you sugar coat the story.
whether their relationship is dysfunctional is a matter of opinion
But opinions can be objectively right or wrong. Here we have a “person” that stalks the object of his desire. Edward places Bella in continual mortal danger simply by associating with her. Bella obsesses after an undead creature, which is by definition pretty unhealty for life.
The core was showing values where a lot of fantasy type of genres do not even try.
That’s what makes this storyline
more dangerous. Things that are obviously evil are easier to avoid. It’s the subtle stuff that really leads people away from the light.
"I did not know Edward was trying to kill her. I missed that,
He is dangerous because he has enemies that Bella cannot possibly fight; she must rely on his “protection.” In fact, part of Edward’s “allure” is that he is a dangerous man.
I disagree with you. The core was showing values where a lot of fantasy type of genres do not even try. I have to say that the vampire angle of this was inccidental, not the core in giving a lesson.
I addressed the values issue above, basically addressing “values” in the way done in Twilight is more dangerous than outright badness.
You are, of course, free to disagree - but I don’t see how you can refute the logic that: 1) vampires are, by definition, are undead creatures; 2) Therefore, they are not alive; 3) If they are not alive and they have immortal souls, then by definition they are eternally damned. If so, then any choice to willingly associate oneself with a vampire, knowing what they are, is evil.
I think the vampire angle is
core to the story - it’s the vampire angle that gives this story its drawing power. The lesson here is in choosing the self over the other, and masking the choice with the appearance of virtue.
If some people read or watch this story and take away the idea that chastity and life are good things to choose - then that is good. But the underlying themes are dark and repulsive.
Though I do watch them myself. 
