He may be the king of [censored], but molag bal probably does not need to [censored] or have six to make someone a vampire, his shrine had blood coming out of it maybe drinking that could do the trick. Valerica and Serana did do the deed though since they were offered to Molag Bal.

But they DON'T have to... as others have said, they can be cured.

Even if they only want vampirism for immortality or a power trip, they can't be trusted with that power. As I've said, if a vampire could prove that they were not a threat to innocent people, let 'em be (but they CAN'T prove something like that). Otherwise, that power that you've chosen or been bestowed is too great. Cure or die.

EDIT: If you're looking at this from a completely relativistic stance, then you can say pretty much anything about anything. That renders discussions boring. If you want to cut that fat, and be a bit more utilitarian, we can evaluate this from the perspective of the greatest good for the greatest number of people.

Being killed/preyed upon is bad. There are more non vamps than vamps. Not all vamps chose to become, but that's irrelevant since they can be cured. They can't prove they aren't a threat to innocent folk. That power puts them at a great advantage over most mortals. They must prove they aren't a threat (again, don't know how), be cured, or die. These are the only three routes to removing that threat. Pick one.

The closest thing is the Imperials, they have the purest intentions though they do have some bad ones but not as many as the other factions and have the future of Skyrim on their backs even if it makes some of the Nords angry (Stormcloaks) and they (Stormcloaks) believe they don't need help to fend off the dominion which is making it hard for the Imperials to keep Skyrim safe.

Can you imagine how horrifying that would be? I mean, Molag Bal is a big dude, and probably one of the arguably darker Daedric Lords... Lets put it this way, I would think twice before making a character that worships him.

Well in my opinion, it's like the civil war you choose the lesser of two evils. Sure dawnguard want to kill people who have no choice but to feed on people but at the same time, the vampires want to block out the sun. So again it's the lesser of two evils

Animal blood is not poisonous, they can feed on animals just fine but prefer humans. Daggerfall is proof of that.

Self preservation is not an evil act (at least not in most Western Cultures and religions, there are some that might consider any act of killing to be evil even if it is to preserve life). Morality is based on culture and intention.

The Dawnguard are not evil. Some may be fanatical, but definitely not evil. A threat has risen up and they want to knock it back down. As for vampires of TES, people keep saying that Molag Bal [censored] Harkon and his family, but do not forget that they enacted the ritual. They sacrificed souls to Molag Bal and he came down to seal the deal. They do not speak of it like they were wronged, and even with Serana it is never a matter of "I wish I was never a vampire".

Vampires in general do not have to be evil, this is true. They can feed on wildlife and live with soceity in secret, as some NPC's in Skyrim do. The ones in caves and dungeons and Volkihar Keep choose to enthrall people and feed on others, nothing forces them to. On the whole, Vampires in Skyrim are evil, but Vampires don't have to be.

The Dawnguard are not evil, they founded the DG again so they could put an end to the vampire attacks recently occuring. In my opinion Vampires are evil one way or another, they know there is a cure and that vampirism is a disease yet they still don't cure themselves. Even if they think its a gift that doesn't justify them for accepting it. I'm not saying all vampires are evil but they do have a choice, and if they dont know of the cure then that is a sad life to live.

So in essence if a wolf kills another wolf its an evil abomination? What makes killing humans any different than that? It makes me wonder...

The vampire cure need a full Black Soul Gem in skyrim, which mean getting cured can be seen as more evil than being a vampire. I mean as a vampire you don't need to kill anyone in the game for blood but getting cured mean a human soul is damned to soul cairn.

I don't think they are evil. As I see it the Dawnguard is a response to an increasing threat posed by creatures whos survival is based on feeding on mortals lifeblood.

Predators will be predators. Molag Bal is evil by mortal standards, but he represents what he is. And he can't change either, because it is impossible.

And so the Dawnguard are not evil by trying to protect people from those predators. Vampires are malevolouent as a rule(there are of course exceptions) to mortalkind and when they start to become a major threat they have to b dealt with.

Mortals are food for vampires. Dawnguard torture their victims and not by nescessity for survival.

It may just be that I missed it, but I can't remember the Dawnguard torturing people. Care to enlighten me as to where you learned it?