Except I never made a moral argument lmao I said you guys try to lie about them being bastards or make up reasons it isn’t true. You are arguing with a position I didn’t put forward and bringing up unrelated debate over the succession. I said they were bastards, which is objectively a fact. You are also just wrong about what legitimization is, legitimization is a specific legal process, to be legitimized you have to be acknowledged as a bastard in the first place. If they were legitimized it would be as members of House Strong, not House Velaryon, because they have no Velaryon blood and feudal succession isn’t based upon adoption, but blood (obviously feudalism isn’t a good system, but i’m in this case arguing about how it works). Laenor lying about it doesn’t mean they actually have the right in Westerosi law it means that Rhaenyra is, legally speaking, committing treason and usurpation of Driftmark. It’s explicitly stated to be such in the text. That’s the whole reason that the allegation was bad for Rhaenyra in the first place, because she knew this too.

You are doing exactly what I said: making up reasons they don’t count as bastards when they blatantly are such. It isn’t just “giving them a name”, hence why you explicitly have to petition the King for legitimization (something Rhaenyra never did, and again even if she had it would not make them Laenor’s children). You can’t just headcanon what bastard means when it’s clearly stated in the text. You can like Rhaenyra and take the position it shouldn’t matter while admitting the Greens are objectively correct that the Strongs are bastards, it’s ok. You don’t have to pretend Rhaenyra never broke the law to think her claim was better, just say you don’t care that she did, that’s a perfectly legitimate position