Well, it's Monday, so here's the new thread.

Rewatching this ep...I think it's one of the first moments that shows Buffy's need for control.  I'm just going right to the point where she thinks she kills a human (and just wanted to add, I know Joyce was kind of drugged a bit from Ted's "special" cooking, but damn did this ep make her look like an utter failure as a parent.  But again, she was drugged, so it's okay).  Okay, he hits her, but at this point, she's assuming he's a regular run of the mill prick of a human, right?  Her mother is yelling for her to stop, she's already gotten in her "hit me and I'll hit you back" licks, but she keeps going until he's falling backwards down a flight of stairs.  I felt that was, well, very violent.  And considering her super strength, unnecessarily so.  I don't know--but I have to wonder what the point of that scene was.  Okay, Ted had to "die" so we could see he wasn't human, but I think there could have been a better way to get to that conclusion.  Unless of course, it was meant to be shown in such a  manner--a slayer has darkness, yada yada bit.

Yeah...that's all I got for now.

I will watch "Ted" again to refresh - one thing that this episode has is probably the only time in all the first seasons, if ever, that a religious observance is presented on the series, outside of Riley's attending church services and Drusilla's confessional - Ted, that I can recall, is the only person that officially pays homage to Christian/Judeo figure.  Well, Cordelia does her prayer of hours but I don't count that one.

Another thing about "Ted" is that Joyce seemed like Buffy's projection of wanting Angel - Angel who also has a hidden other form living inside - like Ted, there is more to uncover in Angel.  That perfect Ted man, like Buffy's night of love and Angel's perfect moment will reveal the hidden monster behind the face -

I always think of the "Ted, meet the stairs" scene as Buffy losing her temper. She didn't like this guy. She didn't want to try to like him. (As much as I liked Ritter, I can't say I blame her. That character was obnoxious.) When her personal space is compromised, she's sick of pouting and whining like a typical teen, and she's incredibly frustrated. So she loses her temper and (worse) lets her instincts take control.  For a Slayer, losing control and giving in to instinctual responses means one thing: violence.

In some ways, "Ted" is similar to "Dead Things" ...and not just because of the "Buffy is possibly up for murder one" issue.  In both episodes, Buffy loses control in a violent fashion. (If you think about it, losing herself in violent rages was remarkably rare for our dear Slayer.)In both episodes, a Summers woman turns a blind eye to obvious problems for the sake of her own interests. Joyce ignores the problematic Ted/Buffy dynamic because she's lonely for male companionship. Buffy ignores (and fails to investigate) the bizarre circumstances of Katrina's death in her eager rush find a ticket out of her life situation (via the Police Station).

There's more I'd like to say, but I'll have to do it later. RL calls.

~myrabeth    (in case I'm not signed in)

First, I haven't seen "Ted" in a really long time, but I'd still like to add my two cents.  Thinking about this episode made me realize that it set a precedent, and not a good one either.  It set the precedent for the Scoobies to not trust Buffy or her instincts when her personal feelings are involved.  And even though every time she is proven right, they still fall back on the old standby of not believing her.  We see it again with Buffy's roommate in college.  Everyone assumes she's lying or overexaggerating her issues with her roommate...turns out, the roommate is a soul-sucking demon.  And everyone acts surprised that Buffy wasn't making it all up.
And that's what I see in "Ted."  It's as if everyone WANTED Buffy to be wrong (and not just because they were drugged).  I really don't have an explanation for that, maybe they just felt the need to feel superior to Buffy since she has extra abilities as the Slayer.  As if her destiny made them less, so they had to make her less in both their eyes and her own.  Now, maybe I'm being hard on the Scoobies (including Giles), but I don't think so.  I can excuse Joyce's actions, to some extent, because she truly believed Buffy's reaction to Ted was a jealousy thing.   But the Scoobies, ESPECIALLY Giles, I feel dismissed Buffy's feelings because it was easier than believing her.  And that came back to bite Buffy and Joyce in the ass.  If anyone else has any thoughts on this angle, or any others, I'd love to read them...because I don't know if I'm explaining myself as clearly as possible!  I'll probably come back and add to it, once I get some more thoughts organized.
-clarityfades

But the Scoobys - as far as I know, I'll watch the episode tonight - were drugged. I remember when Buffy thought she killed Ted, Xander and Willow were being supportive, and went to Ted's place to find something to save Buffy.

At the very beginning of the episode Xander and Willow are discussing the Captain and Tenille. (pardon the spelling) The exact words are: 
"Willow: Xander, he was obviously in charge.  Xander: He was a puppet! She was using him!  Willow: He didn't seem like the type of guy who would let himself be used.  Xander: Well, that was her genius! He didn't even know he was playing second fiddle! "

Does anyone else see this as deep foreshadowing about Spike and Drusilla, especially when Angelus returns soon?

Also, the dress Joyce was wearing at the beginning of the show really reminded me of the dress she modeled for her date in Season Five just before the Body ep. Later, though, her hair style is changed and she's wearing a lot more make-up and looks very 1950s. Maybe it's because I know about the drugging but Joyce's talk about how wonderful he cooks and going on about the sticky buns after her obvious style change in the kitchen made me think there was something suspicious there though I can't remember if I noticed that the first time I saw the episode, focusing more on how Ted was taking over the house and lectures to her daughter and the schizophrenic threat to Buffy.

This episode always creeps me out.  Maybe more so than any other.  Not sure why.  Probably Ritter's extremely creepy portrayal of Ted.  Anyway, with all the foreknowledge tucked away in my brain I can't help feeling some serious confusion as to why Buffy came down so hard on Faith's accidental killing of the Mayor's assistant when she herself beat her mother's boyfriend to death.  It wasn't like Buffy knew he wasn't human.  She lost control of her temper and she got hand held after the fact by her friends.  Faith got the repent repent repent treatment.  Not sure what to think about that.

My favorite moment in the episode - Willow admitting to keeping parts of Ted.  Weirdly funny.

Anyway, with all the foreknowledge tucked away in my brain I can't help feeling some serious confusion as to why Buffy came down so hard on Faith's accidental killing of the Mayor's assistant when she herself beat her mother's boyfriend to death.
Buffy definitely felt awful about doing it, though, and even though her friends were forgiving, I think if Ted hadn't turned out to be a robot, she would've accepted any punishment she was given. I think that's why she's so appalled at Faith's behavior - precisely because she has experienced what it's like to kill a human, and it was horrible, and she can't comprehend how Faith could be so cavalier about it.

Willow admitting to keeping parts of Ted.
OMG, I'd completely forgotten about that. Maybe she used Ted-parts to fix the Buffybot?

Buffy shows her anger earlier in the show when she beats a vampire to a "bloody pulp" and continues beating him long after Giles prompts her to stake him. 

The doubting of Buffy starts earlier.  Giles pooh poohs her warning that something is wrong with Xander in The Pack.  Giles really should know better because he knows she's getting the prophetic Slayer dreams. There may be an earlier instance than that. 

After Buffy kills Ted, Joyce cooks up a story for the cops to save her.   "He fell."  Buffy interrupts and says she hit him or whatever.  Buffy is extremely upset and ends up out in the park whistling for vampires.  Faith is also upset but crams her feelings down and pretends she doesn't care.  The more Buffy prods her, the nastier she gets.

Interesting that the Big Symbol of wicked patriarchy knows how to cook. 

One thing that seems very clear to me, is that irrespective of how strong The Slayer is - Buffy the girl is tragically unaware of her own mental and emotional condition and how "not in control" she is.  I like your connection to The Captain and Tennille, it does connected with Spike and Drusilla and Angel - even without Angel on the scene, Spike follows what Dru wants - if he had his way they would be leaving Sunnydale by her birthday nor would they be trying to assemble The Judge.

The reference to Captain & Tennille is also very clever way of speaking to not only Ted and Joyce but more importantly, IMO, to Buffy-Angel-Angelus, their sexual encounter and the Gypsy curse; but also Xander and Willow and their own choice act upon their sexual urges and desire also.  

 With each episode we see Buffy and Angel engaged in heavier and heavier necking - and you just knew Buffy would succumb to her sexual urges and that Angel would follow.  Buffy is in the throes of her love and sexual urge and fears and Angel, while he acknowledges that they should stop, also goes with his passion and urges, and I will even add love.  It is true that Angel does not know about the conditions of his curse,  but he should at least have question what and how the curse acts on his nature.  He is clearly shown reading Nausea and interested in philosophy and Sartre.   Sartre investigated  meanings of existence and choice of action as part of his work, Nausea is one of the books that deal with this, and Angel is connected several time with Sartre - Buffy and Angel both make the choice to engage in the sexual act and will face the consequences.  Art and Art of Torture is yet another connection to Angel/Angelus and Sartre, in Nausea the main character decides that Art might be a way to find meaning in his life of despair and emptiness, Angelus as we know saw his act of torture and killing as an art form.
  
Captain and Tennille Titles that I think reference this episode and Surprise:

"Love Will Keep Us Together", "Come In From The Rain", “The Way I Want To Touch You”, “You’ve Never Done It Like That”,

There are many connections to past and future episodes in "Ted" -  One obvious is that Ted is found in Buffy's room in the dark shadow, he also handles her dairy and reads it, Angel also handles the dairy but does not read it, Buffy and Her mom wear similar jackets, the obvious connect to Dead Things and an out of control Buffy, Nausea has many connections to Angel particularly, and to all the characters, the novel even has a character named Anny and Sartre uses Bad Faith as part of his vocabulary of descriptions in his work. 

Quark:

"Anyway, with all the foreknowledge tucked away in my brain I can't help feeling some serious confusion as to why Buffy came down so hard on Faith's accidental killing of the Mayor's assistant when she herself beat her mother's boyfriend to death.Anyway, with all the foreknowledge tucked away in my brain I can't help feeling some serious confusion as to why Buffy came down so hard on Faith's accidental killing of the Mayor's assistant when she herself beat her mother's boyfriend to death."

I agree with Eowyn315, Buffy would have accepted whatever punishment might have been given out, it was as Giles said, she was already punishing herself, but it is complicated by her guilt regarding her mother, the darkness that she is forced to see in herself, maybe just like in Dead Things, who she really is pissed off at is her father and mother for taking away their family life together (that is why Ted is Mr. Perfect Homemaker) and as she can't attack her mother, she attacks Ted, same as she attacked Spike.   Eowyn315 makes a great point about Buffy's Ted experience is remembered when Faith kills the assistant, and also Angel will also help Faith with the same theme of "knowing what it feels like to kill and taking a human life" which can all be connected to Sartre and his total freedom of choice and actions, the idea of you make your own life.

I think that the important thing for Buffy and the series, is that a pattern of Buffy's anger has developed but we also see that Buffy has so much potential for love in her as well - She is so strong in either face, but another of her faces is that of hiding things away and lashing out with utter viciousness - in Dead Things, Spike acts exactly as her mother does in "Ted" she tries to protect Buffy from the police, and in great irony, with "Ted" Buffy is actually wants to kill and hurt Ted, with Katrina, the true accident, she wants to kill Spike. 

Great Series, gotta feel the love for The Buffyverse -

in Dead Things, Spike acts exactly as her mother does in "Ted" she tries to protect Buffy from the police
I think there's a very significant difference there, though. Joyce tries to protect Buffy solely because she doesn't want to see her daughter go to jail. She recognizes the wrongness of the act, and in fact is the one directly hurt by Buffy's actions. Spike on the other hand tries to justify and excuse the killing - "one dead girl doesn't tip the scales." It's so starkly obvious that Spike doesn't understand Buffy in that moment, doesn't realize why she's doing what she's doing. In some sense, Spike is right - turning herself in won't solve anything - but acting like the death isn't important goes completely against everything we've seen from Buffy, starting with her reaction to killing Ted.

she wants to kill Spike.
I don't think she wanted to kill Spike at all. (If she wanted to, he'd be dead.) In fact, I think she was only half-aware that it was even Spike she was beating up. Her anger is directed toward herself - Spike is just the punching bag.

I don't think she wanted to kill Spike at all. (If she wanted to, he'd be dead.) In fact, I think she was only half-aware that it was even Spike she was beating up. Her anger is directed toward herself - Spike is just the punching bag.

If you are talking about the alley scene in "Dead Things" I'm going to have to disagree.  She was very aware at that point.  Granted, she might have been angry with herself, and from a psych standpoint I'm sure there's all sorts of self-loathing evidence in the act, but ultimately she was very aware it was Spike she was turning into hamburger.  If Xander had followed her into that alley he wouldn't have gotten the same treatment.   Earlier the Trio was screwing with her head, but she was cognizant enough to say goodbye to Dawn, do the evil soulless thing mantra while pounding Spike into the pavement and ultimately to pay attention to what the policeman was saying when she walked into the station.  I think you are right, she had no intention of killing Spike, or he'd be dead, but during that scene I don't believe she was thinking so much as pouring out all of her pain and frustration on someone she felt could not only take it, but might even deserve it and ultimately didn't matter because he wasn't real.  At least in her mind.

Buffy definitely felt awful about doing it, though, and even though her friends were forgiving, I think if Ted hadn't turned out to be a robot, she would've accepted any punishment she was given. I think that's why she's so appalled at Faith's behavior - precisely because she has experienced what it's like to kill a human, and it was horrible, and she can't comprehend how Faith could be so cavalier about it.

That's just it - I don't think Faith was cavalier about it so much as freaked that she wasn't more moved by killing a human being.  I totally get where they were going with the storyline and how they needed Faith to "go bad" and all, but it wouldn't have hurt to have Buffy say a line or two to acknowledge her previous experience with Ted, and/or vocalize her role in the death of the Mayor's assistant.  The whole Faith's a murderer storyline was seriously stretching things when it was clearly an accident whereas Buffy's beating of Ted wasn't and they were all supportive of her despite that.

Ted turning out to be a robot seemed to wash away all of Buffy's guilt and it was never addressed that she let her temper control her enough to lash out on a human enough to kill him.  It would have been nice to have Giles talk to her or something in the next episode or two.  Instead it was sort of like they gave a collective shrug and it was never addressed.  As a Watcher shouldn't Giles have been worried? Concerned? Something?

Good Points Eowyn315 -

You bring in important issues of intent with Joyce and Spike, but the actions are the same - in either case, don't both Joyce and Spike say that an accident was the cause of death?  Are the ethical question really different, concealment of a wrongful death was the ultimate goal in both cases, both Joyce and Spike know that a death occurred and are willing that concealment be achieved.  Spike does try to justify what has happened, and goes even further and hides evidence, which is something Joyce would not have done, but if Buffy had not added her part of the events - Joyce would have also joined Spike in hiding evidence by not giving information pertaining to Buffy. 

Complex issue of ethics and moral judgements - does love excuse Spike just as does love excuse Buffy when she is willingly going to  feed and possibly have Faith drained by Angel in the name of love?  Suppose that Ted had been human?  What then?  To me, both Joyce and Spike followed where their hearts demanded they go.  Joyce's it was an accident seems very much like Spike's it was an accident and many have you saved are  - to me Spike arguments are motivated more from a desperate attempt to save Buffy from jail and to try and make Buffy see that is was an accident.  Granted, Spike's hiding the body was a very bad thing, totally poor judgement but a desperate act.  Joyce hiding the truth of Buffy fight with Ted is, in results of action, similar.  What adds even more to all the tragic circumstances is that Buffy, with all her deep emotional distress, ethically is in the more correct position. 

With regards to killing Spike, you are right, if she had wanted a physical death of Spike, it would have been a done deal - but she was wanted to kill Spike and herself both - Spike for all the evil that he represents in her life, and herself for the nightmare that, in her perceptions, she has become. 

I agree--Buffy knew who she was dealing with in that alley, and that been anyone else (I'm willing to go so far as to say Warren, if he just happened to come along and verbally taunt her for her "misdeed," before she realized he was the real perpetrator), she wouldn't have done that.

I also agree that lying for Buffy to the police would be the equivalent of hiding (or attempting to hide) a body.  Joyce, being a human, and a pretty much upstanding one, would not try to hide a body.  Hiding evidence, or claiming it was an accident was as much as she could have done in such a situation.  Joyce's standpoint is that she is my daughter, and yes, I had emotional ties to the deceased "man," but he is not more important than her.  Spike, on the other hand, didn't even know the dead young woman, but either way, she would never be more important than Buffy.  The fact that Joyce could have been implicated in the crime should the police have found out what had actually happened to Ted that night (had he'd been a real boy) would have had her thrown in prison.  Spike, not being a legal anything, did not hold such risks, but looking at his actions, compared to Joyce's, technically, she'd have more responsibility for just a lie, where he'd have none.  So it kind of finds a balance.

I also agree that Buffy's violent streak is not looked  closely into once we all find out that Ted is a robot--all of her other actions are washed away.  Yes, she feels remorse and wants to be punished, but she never really is, even if it wasn't a real murder. In fact, she doesn't even dwell on them beyond the...one day we believe Ted is a human.  Ted wasn't real, and therefore her actions were completely justified in hindsight.  This seems to echo humongoulsy, in my opinion, later on.  The fact that he "wasn't real" washes it away.  He doesn't really exist, so what she did to him, doesn't matter.  And by he, in this instance, I'm referring to Ted...though it does apply elsewhere.  At any rate, one of her parents (Joyce or Giles) should've talked to her about anger management.

As for Faith, yeah, they all, well Buffy, does keep harping on "you killed a guy," as opposed to saying "Faith, it was an accident.  We don't have anything to hide--at least from Giles and the others.  They'll understand, and they'll help.  And hey--I already lied to the cops!  Let's handle this responsibly."  She did come across as Faith needed to come clean for penance and possibly jail time.  I mean, not verbally, but that was the vibe.  She enters Faith's crappy motel room, all dressy and neat and prim (attempting to separate herself from Faith as much as humanly possible, as opposed to trying to relate to her), and seemingly, above Faith, and full of chastisement.  I can almost understand Faith's "bitch please" reaction.  Almost, but not quite.  I think she needed proper support (from Buffy) from that first instant.  Buffy did throw Alan Finch onto the ground first for the staking.  True, she realized he was human, but she is partly accountable for the events of his death.  But the whole distancing herself from Faith in those early moments helped Faith fall, though yes I am aware that ultimately, it was Faith's decision to carry out her "bad seed" status.

Granted, she might have been angry with herself, and from a psych standpoint I'm sure there's all sorts of self-loathing evidence in the act, but ultimately she was very aware it was Spike she was turning into hamburger.
Maybe "aware" was the wrong word. I'm not suggesting that she was confused about the situation or didn't know what she was doing - she definitely did. But emotionally, she's not in control of the situation, and the anger she's exhibiting has nothing to do with Spike, even if she would've held back if it were someone else.

I don't think Faith was cavalier about it so much as freaked that she wasn't more moved by killing a human being.
I definitely see that, but I do think Buffy saw it as cavalier. I think Buffy saw Faith's "whatever" attitude (which definitely feels like she's covering up panic) and was like, "Why aren't you wearing Overalls of Woe??"

in either case, don't both Joyce and Spike say that an accident was the cause of death? Are the ethical question really different
I think it's different to Buffy. It's different because Joyce never tries to tell her that Ted doesn't matter. She never tries to tell Buffy that she shouldn't feel guilty. The death horrifies her, but ultimately, her daughter is more important. Spike shows none of that concern, which is disturbing to Buffy, because how could you not care about a human being whose life you just took?

does love excuse Spike just as does love excuse Buffy when she is willingly going to feed and possibly have Faith drained by Angel in the name of love?
I don't think it's love that excuses Buffy. I think it's that Faith is a psychotic killer that excuses her. Sure, if Angel hadn't been sick, Buffy probably wouldn't have given up on trying to help Faith so quickly, but I can't imagine Buffy sacrificing anyone else to save Angel. If it had required that he drain a regular human, I can't see her dragging in some innocent off the street for Angel to drink. Faith, by her own actions, has become expendable.

Buffy did throw Alan Finch onto the ground first for the staking. True, she realized he was human, but she is partly accountable for the events of his death.
Maybe that's why she comes down so hard on Faith to confess. She's felt the guilt of killing a human, and she wants to blame it all on Faith so that she doesn't have to feel that guilt again. By putting it entirely on Faith, she absolves herself of any responsibility. Also, it's potentially frightening for Buffy - one killing of a human could be considered an accident, but two starts to look like a pattern. Even though the circumstances are opposite (she thought Ted was human and he turned out not to be, she thought Finch was a vampire and he turned out to be human), they both highlight Buffy's own recklessness in slaying, and it's not something she wants to deal with, so she pushes it off on Faith.

nmcil - Liked your point that Buffy is redirecting her anger at Joyce to Ted.  She's blaming Ted for keeping her parents apart, when she knows they wouldn't get together if Ted wasn't in the picture. 

It is true that Angel does not know about the conditions of his curse -  If Angel doesn't know why does Darla taunt him about telling Buffy about the curse?  Angel S1:

DARLA:  I'm not afraid of you. I bet she is, though. Or maybe I'm underestimating her. Talk to her. Tell her about the curse. Maybe she'll come around. And if she still doesn't trust you, you know where I'll be.

Which episode do we find out about the curse?

I'm fairly certain it's in season two, when Jenny's Uncle comes to town.  At least, that's the first I recall hearing about it.

I don't think it's love that excuses Buffy. I think it's that Faith is a psychotic killer that excuses her. Sure, if Angel hadn't been sick, Buffy probably wouldn't have given up on trying to help Faith so quickly, but I can't imagine Buffy sacrificing anyone else to save Angel. If it had required that he drain a regular human, I can't see her dragging in some innocent off the street for Angel to drink. Faith, by her own actions, has become expendable.

Buffy, neither as normal human or as The Slayer, is given the position of Judge and Executioner, as Willow clearly states, that is the way of a Fascists world - From my perspective there is nothing that will justify Buffy's willingly offering up Faith as a sacrifice to  the cure of Angel - She is on the same playing field as Spike when he is  offering up Angel to cure Drusilla - and this is the primary WTF conditions of Ethics Applied to Buffy.  Same Actions, different moral judgements and moral applications.  We have just entered Faith into the "their life does not matter category" - If Angel is not to be held responsible for his life as Angelus based on his having a soul - Faith, with a soul, cannot simply be offered up as a sacrifice either - Faith can be held to rule of law by human courts, but not by the Personal Agenda Court. 

My personal opinion of Buffy for the first three seasons is that what we are presented with Buffy in the  Underworld and Jungian Inner Demon Nightmare Dreamscape - more than anything Buffy at this phase of her life and Slayer Life are undergoing trials and preparation to eventually Become a Slayer Heroine - as I think that Angel is being  run through trials as well - and while the Buffy-Angel Lover story is presented, that is only the one very limited layer.  I also suggest that for many viewers, the Buffy-Angel-Lovers arc after Acathla, had it been allowed to continue as the primary focus of the series would have eventually lost many of the older viewers - Giving Angel his own series was perfect for the Buffyverse - it allows other characters to enter and it gave Buffy freedom to explore other themes while it bring a whole new realm for the viewers to follow with Angel in LA -

The Faith cycle is coming up soon and we can all watch again and see the series with greater knowledge and distance of time to help us with our understand and perceptions of the series - this going back to earlier seasons has really be beneficial to me - and I am very much enjoying my time with Buffy all over again -

Had a fun surprise today when I watched The Jane Austen Book Club - neat references to Buffy and Buffy Scholars Convention is the first part of the film - one of the main male leads is big into SciFi and Fantasy and knows all about Buffy - As I am a huge Austen fan, I enjoyed the film very much - Marc Blucas has a small, but nice role. 

world - From my perspective there is nothing that will justify Buffy's willingly offering up Faith as a sacrifice to  the cure of Angel - She is on the same playing field as Spike when he is  offering up Angel to cure Drusilla - and this is the primary WTF conditions of Ethics Applied to Buffy.  Same Actions, different moral judgements and moral applications.  We have just entered Faith into the "their life does not matter category" - If Angel is not to be held responsible for his life as Angelus based on his having a soul - Faith, with a soul, cannot simply be offered up as a sacrifice either - Faith can be held to rule of law by human courts, but not by the Personal Agenda Court

This is interesting.  Angel, being her maker (and destroyer--depending upon one's perspective) is responsible for Drusilla, though he is not the one who made her physically ill--just mentally.  Sure, Angelus did the work, but neither Drusilla or Spike is concerned with splitting hairs on that.  In fact, Angel tries to apologize for the wrongs he committed against  her, but she tells him to bite his tongue. Faith on the other hand, purposely poisons Angel.  And...it is Faith who says she (and Buffy) by nature, are above human laws, rules and courts, so technically, she excludes herself from it's safe havens at the same time.  By poisoning Angel, and by openly saying she is not in the realm of the human society, she by default offers herself up for revenge and sacrifice.  I think her soul status is irrelevant--I don't think that should give her some type of clemency.

But Faith is not the issue of question, the moral question is for Buffy, the morality of the person doing the action is the question - quid pro quo killings?  The point is not whether Faith deserves it, the question is does Buffy have the right and moral grounds as a model of The Slayer.  They not taking of human life is stated repeatedly by Buffy, the very reason that she automatically offers herself to human law in Ted and Dead Things - What she is doing with Faith is essentially human sacrifice.

Another interesting and vital question regarding human laws and the mirror world contrast and convolutions - Angelus created the crazy Drusilla, the very hand of his attempted murder via sacrifice - her life exchanged for his - the inversion of her initial death by his hands - Angelus has also again by human law having created a person legally insane has also cast her as "innocent by reason of insanity"  Revenge is not the primary motivation in either exchange of life by sacrifice, it is the attempt to save the life of a loved one by exchange of life -

Scarlet Ibis:
"she by default offers herself up for revenge and sacrifice.  I think her soul status is irrelevant--I don't think that should give her some type of clemency."

Buffy is not motivated by justice or moral law, her motivation is to save Angel - would not her first and moral choice, if there was to be an exchange be to offer up her own body?  If my child or husband is on the brink of death, do I have the right to take another life in-order to save that of my child or loved one?  Suppose a murderer has The Vital body part or blood that will cure my loved one - can I simply take what is needed for the cure?  That person can agree to give up his life or what is needed, but I cannot by our social moral and justice code of laws take anything.  Even by consent, the legality is in question, and Buffy outside of her Slayer duty lives in the world of humans and their laws - otherwise the taking of a human life would not be of particular import.  It's a complex issue and having left themes in this ambiguous state,  creators force the viewers to think through the problems and come to their own conclusions. 

This theme of Sacrifice and Exchange is beautifully handled in AtS when Angel must go through the trials of exchange to cure Darla - The Vital trial to pass, which he does, is one of exchange for his agreement of self-sacrifice, his life for hers - those are the conditions for the cure.

Which episode do we find out about the curse?
I'm fairly certain it's in season two, when Jenny's Uncle comes to town. At least, that's the first I recall hearing about it.
The "curse" is that Angel was given a soul. We find out about that in the episode "Angel." Darla specifically calls it a curse; Angel calls it a punishment in explaining it to Buffy.

The happiness clause isn't the curse - it's just one component of the curse. We don't learn about that part until season two when Jenny's uncle explains it.

In the episode where we "see" Angel get the curse, doesn't a gypsy guy tell him the details? 

I think you're referring to "Passion."  I don't think all the details (the cure specifically) was given though--I think the Gypsy man just says Angelus will remember all the lives he's taken and he'll feel pain and yada yada.  What I mean is...they give the details, and we know the reason why he was cursed, but I don't think (nor do I see the sense in) the Gypsies telling him or Darla how to reverse the curse (which is why we later see Darla kill him, after Dru and Spike has massacred what's left of his family on Angel).

Oh, yes, they definitely don't mention the loophole.

CM