Killing tears the soul apart redux. WAS: Re: Snape's penance?

[houyhnhnm102]

No: HPFGUIDX 139473

houyhnhnm:

> <snip>   
> > 
> > BTW, with respect to "killing tears the soul", 
> > I still maintain that this is *not* canonical, 
> > if it means that any taking of life (regardless 
> > of motive or circumstances) damages the soul in some
> > irremediable way that lying, bullying, cheating, 
> > hurting, and hating (committed by so many of the 
> > characters in the HP books) do not.
> > 
> > I want to see quotations with page numbers.
 
 
Alla:

> Whole story about Tom Riddle creating Horcruxes 
> is a metaphor, which to me stands for "killing 
> tears your soul apart" 
> [...]
> I am talking about Harry not letting Sirius 
> and Remus kill Peter. 
> [...]
> Hary stops it because  he thinks that 
> Remus and Sirius should not be killers 
> ( or he thinks that James would have thought 
> so, whatever).

houyhnhnm:

It has been argued by you and others that Dumbledore could not have
told Snape to sacrifice him if it was the only way to save Harry,
Draco, and Hogwarts, because Dumbledore would not order Snape to do
something that would tear his soul.  "Killing tears the soul". I've
read that over and over on this board.

Not cold-blooded murder for gain or immortality (Voldemort) or
hot-blooded killing for revenge (Sirius and Lupin).  Any killing for
any reason, regardless of motive or circumstances.  A blanket statement.

I'm asking for evidence that this claim has been made anywhere in the
books or interviews.  You have not provided it.  You can't, because it
doesn't exist.