Moral Relativism/Parents love to their kids in the books

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 160968

> Betsy Hp:
> As you say in the bit I snipped, mothers are supposed to love 
their 
> children.  But it's still a good thing.  I mean, don't you think 
> well of someone who takes a risk to protect their child?

Alla:

How to put it? Okay, I guess I need to do small personal 
interjection. You know that I have a niece, whom I love dearly ( 
Alla snaps herself out of admiring antie mode :)). I also love 
dearly her parents ( my brother and my sister in law). I mean, I am 
not just saying it. My brother is well, my brother and I truly love 
my sister in law. She is that kind, gentle, truly amasing person. 
And they love my niece obviously. How can you not love this baby? 
Alla smacks herself again.

So, God forbid if anything ever happens to her, I would expect 
nothing less from them but to protect her and everything else be 
d*mned. Again, you can believe me or not, but that is how I feel and 
I am pretty sure that that is how they feel.

Now, would I think worse of them, if they do not protect my niece's 
life if her life is threatened? Not that I think they would do such 
a thing, but yes, absolutely I will.

Does it make sense?

Okay, back to books now. I guess I have to mention Potters deaths. 
See, even though JKR distinguishes in her interview between Lily and 
James sacrifices, I really and truly do not.

They both fought the monster to defy him an to protect their child.

I do think that Lily's sacrifice also has certain animalistic 
quality, not just James'. Parents are supposed to protect their 
kids, that is what they do in my view.

So, while I certainly think of Potters as heroes, I think of them as 
heroes because they joined the order to defy Voldemort and did it 
three times before Harry was born, NOT just because they died to 
protect Harry if that makes sense.

Now, if they say run away and let Voldemort kill Harry, certainly I 
would think of them as monsters.

I certainly do not have much respect for Merope, who as Harry says 
could not stay alive for her son.

Yes, yes, I know I am supposed to have pity for her, and I do have 
some ( maybe because I am so deeply disgusted by her actions that 
lead to the birth of Tom Riddle, I don't have much pity for her), 
she was weak, she tried, etc.

So, yes, I would think less of someone who would not protect their 
kid, but not much more of someone who does, unless it is in 
appropriate context.

Like, as you mentioned Bella, who is ready to sacrifice her sons to 
the cause - so Bella dear is a monster as I knew before and now she 
is even more monster, but while Narcissa is trying to protect her 
son as every parent should IMO she is doing it and trying to get 
Dumbledore killed too, not worthy of my respect, no.
 
> > >>Alla:
> > I am serious here. Show me who else Narcissa loves, who does 
not   
> > support *purebloods rule, everybody can drop dead** philosophy.
> 
> Betsy Hp:
> Why such a stringent hoop? 

Alla:

What does *stringent hoop* means?


> > >>Alla:
> > Heee, and we do know that she had no problem selling to 
Voldemort 
> > somebody to whom she **is** related by blood, so her love to 
her   
> > family looks quite limited to me.
> 
> Betsy Hp:
> But wait, I thought you were arguing that protecting your blood 
> isn't a good thing.  Sort of selfish because it's your blood? <eg> 
><SNIP>

Alla:

Not selfish, essential and what I am saying is that Narcissa does 
not even protect **all** people who related to her by blood, only 
selected few.

 
>> > >>Betsy Hp:
> > > First, have we seen Lucius kill or torture anyone?
> > > <snip>
> 
> > >>Alla:
> > We had seen him watching Voldie torture Harry for example, I 
also 
> > thought he was out for the blood in MoM.
> 
> Betsy Hp:
> But that's not torturing or killing someone.  Interesting... 

Alla:

We also know that he was accused of all these things and got out of 
it by claiming Imperius after V first reign, but no I do not think 
we had seen him doing it.

You think that means that he actually did  not?


 
> Betsy Hp:
> Yeah, you are. <g>  I mean, *Luke* kept saying "there's good in 
him, 
> I feel it" and Ben was all "you are *crazy*!" and Vader was 
> all "kill that puppy!  torture that kitten! [Endor]" and "maybe I 
> can turn Luke evil too, master!" and then Luke and Vader fought 
and 
> the Emperor was all "kill your daddy or suffer!" and Luke went 
with 
> suffer, and Vader finally had enough.  And he killed the Emperor 
and 
> told Luke "tell your sister *gasp* you were right! *gasp*" and 
then 
> he died and went to glow with Ben and Yoda.

Alla:

Well, yes, that is pretty much the picture I remember. Luke was 
feeling struggle of good and bad in Vader before Vader made that 
choice, no?

Yes, Vader was denying it, but it did turn out that Luke was right 
when Vader finally made that choice?

I need to rewatch it, hehe.

Betsy: 
> But Yoda was all "Meh, so you saved your flesh and blood.  Big 
> whoop." (Actually, I made that last bit up. <g>)
><SNIP>

Alla:

LOLOL