Spoiler: Sirius the 'Jerk'

[darrin_burnett]

No: HPFGUIDX 63939

Pip: 

> 
> I think it's more complicated than that. I've posted about this on 
> another list, so pardon me if you've read part of this before...but 
> Sirius's comment, though certainly kind, isn't exactly enlightened.
> What gives him  the right to consider  people his 
> inferiors? The fact that Hermione didn't catch this when Sirius 
> said it shows she's also not as enlightened as she thinks she 
> is.

Perhaps it wasn't the best choice of words, but "superior" and "inferior" can 
also mean "boss" and "servant."

And he was considering Winky Crouch Sr's inferior, which, notwithstanding 
the perhaps unfortunate choice of words, was accurate. He was her master; 
she her servant.  How he treated her was indicative of his true personality.

We have from Dumbledore that Sirius was kind to house-elves in general -- 
and he counted a werewolf as one of his closest friends -- which indicates he 
did have a more enlightened attitude than you are giving him credit for.

Kreacher and Sirius had a history. Sirius was catching it from all sides. Molly 
was calling him an unfit parental figure; Snape was questioning his courage; 
his mother's painting was shrieking; Kreacher was in his face and D-Dore had 
him locked down.
 
Sirius lost his temper, with a servant who was obviously goading him. It cost 
him his life, but since when is losing your temper justified as being a capital 
offense? 


He doesn't seem to have regarded 
> anybody as his equal except James. Sirius's  refusal to free 
> Kreacher sealed his doom. Yes, it would have been dangerous 
> to give Kreacher a choice about what to do. The Elf  might have 
> run straight to Voldemort. That's exactly the rationale Fudge used 
> for wanting Sirius Dementor-kissed. Freedom of choice includes 
> the right to make bad choices, and be judged by those, not by 
> one's abilities, or even one's previous actions.

So, if the Order captures a Death-Eater, the Ministry has no right to imprison 
him or her? 

Fudge was ultimately wrong, but all the evidence except that in possession of 
three 13-year-old wizards and a werewolf pointed to Sirius Black. D-Dore 
believed them, but no one else would.

Fudge had testimony, including that from D-Dore, that Sirius was the one. 

In the eyes of the law, Sirius was a criminal. I would hope the Ministry is 
allowed to punish D.E.'s who have broken the law.

And Kreacher had been very vocal about his choice and what he would do. 
The Order had every credible reason to believe he'd have run to V-Mort. 
Should the Order let someone betray their location?

I don't have the book with me, but didn't Dumbledore tell Sirius he couldn't 
free him? I mean, it's all fine and good to say that Sirius should have 
sacrificed the safe haven for the order - which WAS forced to operate 
undercover at the time -- for the good of a house-elf who would have run to V-
Mort supporters the first chance he got, but in a practical sense, was that 
Sirius' decision to make?

It's war. And in war, choosing a side means you pay for that choice. If you 
choose to openly support one side while in the other side's camp, perhaps 
one shouldn't be surprised to find oneself regarded with suspicion and dislike.

Kreacher chose to betray Sirius. 

Being free means taking responsibility for actions. Sirius didn't "make" him do 
anything.

Darrin