Why Avada kedavra is a bad spell WAS: Re: I HAD A DREAM OR HOW I REALIZED

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 167116

> Magpie:
> They are horrible by themselves, but they don't leech power from 
> actual depression at the same time. Tonks is not dealing with 
> Dementors in HBP, and yet she loses her powers. Merope lost her 
will 
> to live and died without meeting any Dementors. There are certain 
> qualities that are unique to Dementors--you can't cure depression 
> with a Patronus, for instance. But I think the Dementors are 
> creatures created around the idea of depression, which also exists 
> as itself in the WW. They don't entirely take the place of it.

Alla:

Exactly. I also believe that AK is the spell created around the idea 
of the murder, it does not entirely take the place of it.


 
> Magpie:
> But what's bad about it, besides that it is the intent to kill? Why 
> should it split the soul where murdering someone by shooting them 
> does not? How is it like regular murder and how is it not like it? 
> And if it is the spell itself that is bad, why would it be okay to 
> use it in self-defense?

Alla:

The intent to kill is what IMO makes the spell so bad. Ugh, it all so 
clear in my head :) I believe that the intent to kill is what powers 
the magic of the spell. but definitely NOT in the mechanical sense, 
strictly in the metaphorical one.

Just like Love, I believe will transform in the end in some sort of 
very sizable spell or charm or something to that effect that Harry 
will use, you know?

What would be behind it? The emotion of Love of course, but I believe 
that Harry will have something very material to use against Voldemort 
as symbol of that love, not just the emotion itself.

Same thing for me with Avada Kedavra. What makes it evil magic so 
powerful for me is that the intent to kill is behind it, nothing more 
mechanical than that.

And where did I say that shooting someone will not split their soul? 
I thought I said the opposite. I also was trying to say that JKR in 
the world of Potterverse if she wants to symbolise intentional murder 
would use AK sooner than anything else. Does not mean that any other 
means for murder do not exist there.

I also do not think I said that it is okay to use AK in self-defense. 
Sorry if I did say that. I was saying that IF JKR thought it was Okay 
to use that spell in self-defense, she would made DD drop some hints 
in his talk to Harry and she did not.

I think that she may go with self-defense killing as excusable( 
although I doubt she will).

 
> Magpie:
> I agree--but isn't the thing that it symbolizes also as bad? Like 
> with the Dementors, they are bad in themselves, but I think they 
> draw their power from depression and not vice versa. I don't think 
> Harry will be performing any AK's, but Snape's use of one seems to 
> be appropriate in this situation no matter what letters precede his 
> name.
>
Alla:

Well, yes, thing that symbolises it also as bad. 

And no, I do not believe that Snape use of AK would be shown as 
appropriate at all, no matter what letters precede his name.

But I can be wrong of course.