NECESSITY of killing?

[truthbeauty1]

No: HPFGUIDX 141846

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "a_svirn" <a_svirn at y...> wrote:
>
> I don't know whether the killing of Voldemort would or would not rip 
> Harry's soul, but I `d like to point out that for Voldemort it's 
> also the matter of utmost *necessity* to destroy Harry. One after 
> all can't live if the other survives. Even though Voldemort does not 
> know the whole text of the Prophesy its first part is quite 
> sufficient to make Harry's killing the first priority for him. If 
> *necessary* killings is "permissible" and do not result in soul-
> ripping, then the killing of the Potters should have leaved 
> Voldemort's soul intact. 

 
I don't know about the Potters, but Harry, yes. Voldemort could have 
stunned James and Lily and then finished Harry off. He didn't even 
consider saving James, which makes me believe that it may have 
actually been him that he was intending to make a horcrux with. Now, I don't know the morality of horcruxes, but it seems that maybe killing a defenseless child would split your soul no matter who it was.  Perhaps in this line of thinking, if Voldemort had allowed Harry to grow up on his own and then killed him in battle, it may not have split his soul. I definitely do not believe that Harry's soul will be split by killing Voldemort. He is kind of balancing out the universe by killing him. (no man should become immortal?) Hope this makes some sense.

truthbeauty1