Unforgivables - from a different angle

[Barbara Key]

No: HPFGUIDX 174464

I snipped all of the comments because I wanted share
something my son, Kristofer, who is in the Army and
was in Iraq and in combat, said about the Unforgivable
Curses.

He has only listened to the last one but knows about
the other books.

He said that in war and battle, if a soldier has an
option to take out the enemy who is trying to kill him
or his friends, then the soldier would be an
"unforgivable" idiot not to use them.

He said that he would not use the Crucio due to the
obvious torture nature of it, but he would use the
Imperious and the AK. 

It is rather like the prohibition against stealing and
murder. It is wrong. However, if you are a Jew hiding
in occupied France during WWII and you are starving
and there is food in the store, then you take it. It
is stealing but the timing and the nature of the
offense can be discussed with God and the government
once the danger is past.

As for murder, within the same scenario, if you find
out that a person is going to reveal your family's
hiding place to the Nazis (which would mean you and
your children's deaths), then there is a very good
chance that you might murder this person.

Sometimes, the situation determines whether an action
is unforgivable or regretfully necessary.

However, all that said, I don't see that Harry's use
of the Crucio was either necessary or reasonable.


My (and Kristofer's) two cents.

YMMV

Barbara