you CAN'T hurt a BABY!!!

[vmonte]

No: HPFGUIDX 109925

ballerinalaura wrote:

She says, "you can't hurt a baby" and then something like 'there
was no time to argue the suggestion' follows.

Has this particular part stuck out to anyone else???

vmonte responds:

Well, his body may not have been a baby's, but at that moment in time 
his head/brain was a baby. Wouldn't Harry be just as bad as Voldemort 
if he injured what was technically a child? I mean Voldemort did go 
after baby Harry who was an innocent child. 

I think that JKR was trying to make a point here. This scene reminds 
me of a conversation I had with my brother about time-travel. He 
thinks that if Dumbledore was really using TT he would just go back 
in time and kill Tom Riddle as a child. 

I don't think that it's that simple though. Could you (if you are not 
a maniac) kill a child that easily? Hermione often makes Harry think 
about his actions. And Harry often imagines what Hermione would think 
or do in certain situations.

I think we are being set-up for another situation like the one above. 
Whether through the dreaded TT, or another DoM scene. Harry will be 
put in a situation where he will remember what Hermione has said to 
him, and he will act in the proper way.  

Has anyone come up with the theory that perhaps Voldemort will be 
vanquished but that somehow a new (baby) Tom Riddle will survive and 
be given a second chance at life?  

vivian