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

[Kemper]

No: HPFGUIDX 139614

On 9/3/05, dumbledore11214 <dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com> wrote: 
> 
> 
> Well, first of all, I said several times that to me killing in self 
> defense is excusable.
> 
> Secondly, I did provide the evidence, but you interpret them 
> differently. It is your right, but it does not mean that I have not 
> provided it. To me everything that had been said in HBP about Tom 
> Ruiddle screams that killing is not OK.
> 
> 
> Does it mean that according to Potterverse rules any killing is not 
> OK? Yes, it seems very likely to me, not hundred percent likely, but 
> very likely.
> 
> Why? Because any killing which I had read about in potterverse so
> far 
> was not justified yet.

 ...

In fact, if you could provide an evidence of ANY killing in 
> Potterverse, which was deemed OK by the narrator, I would be very 
> surprised.
> 
> ... I can argue that there is no evidence in the books that 
> killing is OK. 
> 
> 
> And even though as I said earlier I would consider Harry killing 
> Vodelmort to be totally self-defense, I don't think that Harry will 
> kill him.

  Kemper now:
 Here is the evidence that the narrator argues (though 'suggests' would be a 
better word) that killing is okay. (OoP 844, US soft)
 ...Harry asked..."The end of the prophecy... it was something about 
...'neither can live...'"
"'...while the other survives,'" said Dumbledore.
..."so does that mean that ... that one of us has got to kill the other 
one... in the end?"
"Yes, " said Dumbledore.
 Dumbledore, our sage, suggests (if not advocates) killing... at least, 
killing Voldemort.
To add to the discussion... Is taking the life just physical? What about the 
victim's soul? Is destroying a soul evil? What about part of it?
 Dumbledore destroys Salazar's Ring that contained part (my guess is half) 
of his original soul given the Ring was the first Horcrux. Dumbledore 
destroys part of Tom Riddle's soul. Is Dumbledore wrong? He destroyed the 
Ring, but it wasn't in self-defense. Of course, it could be argued that it 
was a pre-emptive strike.
 Any thoughts?
 Kemper,
Who believes that each time a Horcrux was made it cost Tom/Voldemort half 
his soul... so after the 1st he would have 1/2 of his original soul in 
him... 2nd would leave half of that or 1/4 of original... and so on until 
his 6th which leaves him 1/64 of original soul left in body.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]