Amortentia and re The morality of love potions/Merope and Tom Sr.
festuco
vuurdame at xs4all.nl
Sun May 21 12:48:08 UTC 2006
No: HPFGUIDX 152598
--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" <foxmoth at ...> wrote:
> Pippin:
> ::raises eyebrow:: You're telling me Tom was hard done by because
> he had no opportunity to frame his wife for adultery?
>
> Pippin:
> > > The marriage was made as soon as the partners gave free consent
> > > in a recognized way...and the law in 1926 did not recognize
> > persuasion by
> > > means other than force as coercion.
Which is what Merope did. She used force.
>
> Gerry:
> > Again, Mufflre law. Wizarding law undoubtedly would.
>
> Pippin:
> Undoubtedly? Fridwulfa seems to have deserted her husband. We
> have no idea what wizard family law is like or even if there is any.
> In any case, I doubt the wizengamot would have taken over the
> financial responsibility for Merope and baby Tom if they could
> get the gold from Tom Sr. They'd have a case against Merope for
> causing harm and distress to a Muggle, but I don't know that
> they'd have invalidated the marriage because she used a love
> potion. They seem to be in pretty common use if Fred and George
> can sell them openly.
Not to use on Muggles and certainly not to keep feeding them with
them. That is misuse of magic, which is a crime as we know. And it is
a violation of the International Statue of Secrecy. Quite possibly
they would have granted the divorce and obliviated Tom. The financial
responsibility of the baby would lie with Merope, who as a witch in a
society that was far more emancipated at the time would have been
expected to find a job.
> Pippin:
> "You see, within a few months of their runaway marriage, Tom Riddle
> reappeared at the manor house in Little Hangleton without his wife."
>
More than three, less than six. And it takes only once to get pregnant.
> > >
> Pippin:
> Molly does not point out, though she might have, that she and Arthur
> had known each other for seven years or so at Hogwarts.
So? Why would that be relevant? There is a big difference between
knowing someone for years and loving someone for years.
> People were still very sure that allowing people to divorce because
> they were unhappy or had made a mistake would impugn the
> sanctity of marriage and be the ruin of the country.
This would not have been a divorce because of unhappiness, but because
the marriage was due to force. Tom did not marry Merope out of free
will, but because he was either drugged or cursed. She is a criminal
and a society that knew this kind of crime was possible would have
made laws to protect people against it. That is why my point is that
in Muggle Britain Tom would have been legally responsible, but only
because Muggle Britain was not equiped to deal with these situations.
I expect they would have been under the jurisdiction of the Ministry
of Magic. In these kind of situations it is no use to keep talking
about Muggle law. Muggle law would condone people who killed while
being under Imperius to death in those days. So should a person to
which this happened been executed?
Gerry
More information about the HPforGrownups
archive