Why Hand of Reckoning should still do damage

I've heard the most terrible rumors, that hand of reckoning will no longer have a damage component. This is an outrage.

Let's just go through a few theoretical scenarios.

Scenario 1
A mob is flying and a paladin needs to pull it. A ret paladin. What are they going to do? KICK ITS ASS of course. Except if HoR does no damage, they can't get it to come down to die. Oh sure, they could use their taunt, but that's just weird. Why would a taunt be used by a non-tanking spec to pull?

Scenario 2
Bears.
There you are seeking out a fishing spot and right next to it is a bear. A BEAR. Think about that for a sec. There is a bear at your fishing spot. Normally you could just chop it in half, but you're fishing, you have a fishing pole. So a quick bit of damage from hand of reckoning, a judgement, followed by an exorcism and maybe a whack on the head and there you go. But without hand of reckoning, all you're really doing is taunting a bear while armed with nothing but a fishing pole, and that would be stupid.

Scenario 3
Imagine a rabbit. Imagine the most terrifying rabbit known to man, and imagine that you and only you know it's there. But how best to kill such a rabbit? It is at this point in our scenario that along comes hand of reckoning. It is a spell seemingly without limits, a spell for which the taunt always justifies the damage, and it is this spell which suggests that if the goal is a dead critter, the attack should not be a melee, but rather a spell. Three spells exist for such an attack: judgement, exorcism, and hand of reckoning.

Countless others exist and should be considered, but I leave you with these three. They are more than enough of a case. Though these are trying times, let us not be swayed by madness.