[HPforGrownups] Why not let Harry destroy the Prophecy from the beginning?

[Juli]

No: HPFGUIDX 132658



--- davenclaw <daveshardell at yahoo.com> wrote:

> I have another question about the Prophecy:
> 
> Since it was ultimately of little consequence that
> the orb recording 
> the prophecy was destroyed, why didn't the Order
> just have Harry go in 
> and destroy it from the beginning, rather than have
> people risk their 
> lives to guard it?  Can anyone think of a plausible
> reason for this?  
> Were they trying to prevent Harry from learning
> about the prophecy?  
> Was it really smart to risk people's lives instead
> of just letting 
> Harry in on the secret and foiling Voldemort's
> attempts to get the 
> prophecy?
> 
> - davenclaw

Good question. I've wonder often about it, as I see it
there are 2 copies of the prophesy, Dumbledore has one
and the MoM has the other at the orb. Curretly (before
the DoM battle) the Order is in posession of one copy
and is guarding the other, are they just to *greedy*
that they need to have both copies? I guess the reason
they didn't want Harry to go all the way to the DoM,
and take the prophesy in the first place is Harry's
safety: Harry (AKAWK) is only safe in two places:
Privet Drive and Hogwarts, and since Harry's well
being is their first concern I guess that option
wasn't really an option. 


Juli
Aol: jlnbtr
Yahoo: jlnbtr
MSN: julibotero at msn.com



		
____________________________________________________
Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs