Marrietta's betrayal -Higher Moral Authority

[Steve]

No: HPFGUIDX 110901

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "huntergreen_3" <patientx3 at a...>
wrote:
> B_Boymn wrote:
> >>
> 
> If a soldier is ordered by his superior to commit what he believes 
> to be a war crime or crimes against humanity, then he has both a 
> moral and legal obligation to refuse. ...<<
 
> HunterGreen:
> But does this apply in this situation? Harry wasn't fighting against 
> crimes against humanity or segregation, he was simply teaching other 
> students hexes and curses. 

B_Boymn:

You need to separate my general statements from my specific
statements. The example of the soldier during wartime simply
illustrates that following rules/orders is not guarantee that you are
doing what is morally right. You can follow all the rules/orders to
the letter and still be held accountable for immoral acts. The general
point is that there is a higher moral authority than the immdediate
rules that govern us.

Also, this is wartime, and the war is not between Harry and Marietta,
or even between Harry and mean teacher. Fudge and Umbridge have indeed
become corrupted. They have lost their moral perspective and because
of it, their moral authority and imperative. They are no longer acting
in the best interest of the people they serve, they are acting in
their own selfish interest to the eventually extreme detriment of the
community at large. 

Since the impetus behind the various educational decrees was corrupt.
Since they acted against the greater good, and to the detriment of the
school and it's students, I think those decrees were, in a sense, null
and void. They may have been in effect at the time, but they never
would have held up under the close examination of a neutral unbias
review. In the end, that's pretty much what happened, when it was
proven that Voldemort truly was back, all those Educational Decrees
became worthless.

Umbridge by any reasonable account is a murderer. She didn't send a
couple of wizard goons to beat Harry up, and tell him to keep his
mouth shut. She sent a couple of Dementors knowing full well what the
consequences of that action would be. No matter how much she supports
Fudge, or is against Dumbledore, she has absolutely no moral
justification for what she did to Harry. And I don't think anyone will
convince me that Umbridge thought her actions were morally right. Her
actions were wrong and she knew it, but she didn't care as long as she
got what she wanted. 

You, or perhaps someone else, suggested that even higher moral
standards are still a matter of opinion. For example, what Voldemort
feels is right conflicts in the extreme with what the bulk of the
world feels is right. 

However, I'm not convinced that guys like Voldemort actually feel that
torturing and killing muggles, or indiscriminently using the
unforgivable curses is right. The truth is, I don't think they care.
They know killing is wrong, but the just don't care. They will do what
ever they want as long as it serves their greed and lust for power.
Evil people know that they are evil, they just don't care.

Just so we are clear, I don't think Marietta is evil.

> b_boymn/Steve originally said:
>
> >>So, a common and reasonable morality does take precedence over 
> common law. Obeying the law is the 'easy' choice, ...; the choice 
> of non-thinkers and non-doers. Those who think and do, make their 
> choice based on a deeper and more universal sense of right and 
> wrong.<<

> HunterGreen continues:
> 
> Well, Marietta didn't really take the easy way out. She was caught 
> between a rock and a hard place. On one side was possible expulsion 
> ..., and the other was betraying her friends. I think she made the 
> choice based on *a lot* of thought ..., and based on her own morals.
> From her point of view the government wasn't corrupt, and Harry was 
> telling lies and trying to cause trouble (its quite reasonable that 
> she would believe that).


B_Boymn:

Your are /supposing/ her point of view. I will first state that I
don't think Marietta did anything morally wrong; her errors were
social. And I said before that she was in a very difficult position,
but at anytime, she had the option to simply not participate in the DA
Club. True, her name was already on the list, but she never would have
been caught in the act.

Also, as already pointed out, we don't know what forces were brought
to bear on Marietta. It may have been intense pressure from her
mother. It may have been intense pressure from Umbridge, who we all
know can be quite intimidating. Umbridge may have even threatened
Marietta's mother's job or threatened Marietta herself. Or, it may
have been something a childish as a fight, disagreement, or annoyance
with Cho that lead her to betray them out of spite.

I think what she did was wrong and misguided, but at the same time, I
don't judge her too harshly since I can't see her undelying motivation.

Also, upon giving it a great deal of thought, if the DA Club is
reformed during the next school year, a belief of which I am a strong
supporter in my many posts on the subject, I believe the Marietta will
be allowed to continue to be part of the club; although reluctantly at
first. Some of that is based on my personal beliefs about how the club
will be reformed, but I've already spoken about that and it's too long
to add here.

Just a few thoughts.

Steve/b_boymn (was asian_lovr2 - was bboy_mn)