Question about the prophecy and a thought about Ginny

[Zara]

No: HPFGUIDX 171062

<snip much argument with which I agree>

> Dana:
> If LV had given the assignment to one of his DEs to kill every boy 
> that was born at the end of July instead of going after the boy 
> himself, then the second part of the prophecy would not have been 
> fulfilled in these attacks but baby boys would still have died as a 
> result. 

zgirnius:
Interesting point, I had not thought of it. Though I suppose 
Dumbledore might not believe the 'right' baby could die at the hands 
of a DE ('either must die at the hand of the other').

> Dana:
> Everyone working for the Order does so at great personal risk, it 
> never was up to DD to sacrifice any of their lives and they could 
> walk a way at any time they had chosen to do so. 

<snip>

> Dana:
> DD never sacrificed anyone in canon and him asking Snape to kill 
him 
> on the tower is not canon either but just a theory of why Snape 
> killed the only man that trusted him and the same goes for Snape 
> taking the vow. 

zgirnius:
Just stepping in here, to point out that *if* Dumbledore chose to 
sacrifice his own life on the Tower by *asking* Snape to kill him (he 
did say please <g>) rather than attempt a rescue, this was surely not 
a cold, calculating, evil decision, but a noble act of self-
sacrifice. And Snape could have walked away if he wanted to, like any 
other Order member. In other words, the Tower scene meaning what *I* 
believe it means in no way makes lizzyben's view of the prophecy 
events more likely.

> Dana:
> It is canon that DD states he would never lie to Harry and that 
> should be enough evidence that DD did not tell a lie to Harry about 
> Snape and what DD believed Snape heard. 

zgirnius:
I disagree, it is canon that Dumbledore said so, but not that it was 
the truth. I *believe* it was, just as you do, but there is 
no "proof" that we are right (for the next three weeks). If a poster 
believes Dumbledore would set Voldemort on the Potters for the 
greater good, surely she can also believe that the same Dumbledore 
would lie to Harry for that same greater good. 

> Dana:
> Also why would Snape only 
> tell LV about the prophecy in part? Would that make Snape look 
> better? 

zgirnius:
Only to someone that thinks this would have been a justifiable 
decision by Dumbledore. 

> Dana:
>And to me it is therefore not okay that Snape only got remorse 
> about what he had done when the people it involved suddenly got
> faces and names he knew because no one should only have these 
> moral values when their personal emotions come into play they 
> should always be there regardless if you know them personally 
> or not.

zgirnius:
Surely what matters most is not why Snape changed, but *that* he did 
(assuming he did, naturally)? If Snape truly ceased to serve 
Voldemort for whatever reason lo these 20 years ago, and switched to 
helping the Order 'at great personal risk', those actions/choices of 
Snape's are good rather than evil. One can disapprove of his reasons 
and think it preferable for him to have more noble ones, but if he is 
risking discovery and death to help the good guys, that's 'good' 
enough for me.

>Dana:
> To me Snape's actions and his so-called remorse are therefore
> totally false because he himself could after 20 years still 
> not let bygone be bygones because he was tricked in doing 
> something that could have gotten him killed and yet he expects
>  everyone to forgive him instantly because he got remorse about
>  knowing the people LV was planning to kill and actually did 
> kill and if he told only part of what he actually heard then 
> he tricked LV in to doing something that could have gotten him
> killed at the coast of a young boy and his family and their
> friends. 

zgirnius:
I really wish the above paragraph were not a single sentence; it 
would make it easier to address your points individually. <g>

-  Where does Snape say that he expects anyone to forgive him?

-  There is an important difference between Dumbledore's story of 
Snape's remorse and Dumbledore's acceptance of it, and Snape's 
actions regarding Sirius. Snape regretted his action and tried to 
make amends, or at least, so Dumbledore believes. Sirius, the same 
twenty years after the fact, still has no regrets, so far as Snape 
knows. (Snape overhears the conversation in which Sirius states 
he 'deserved it').

-  Regarding the point that there is little virtue in doing something 
because you don't want to hurt 'people you know':

Do you believe that a person who has done evil things can ever make a 
choice to change? I find this hard to believe in light of your 
eloquent exposition on the theme of choice in the series (snipped, as 
I agree).

If you do grant the theoretical possibility of such a change in a 
hypothetical person who has knowingly acted in an evil manner in the 
past, in practical terms, how do you think this happens? It seems to 
me there has to be a catalyst, an event which motivates him to 
change. I suppose it is possible for a person to have a moment of 
insight on a purely theoretical level that all men are brothers, 
morality is important, yadda yadda, but I find that psychologically 
unconvincing. I find it far more likely that the catalyst for such a 
change is likely to be more personal in nature - something happens 
that forces the wrongdoer to face the fact that they have acted 
badly, and suddenly makes it matter to them. I have no problem with 
the idea that learning the identity of a victim could be such a 
catalyst.

In Snape's case, he knew all along what he was doing was wrong, I 
would assume, he just told himself he did not care. Also, after a 
certain point, he probably told himself he could not help his choices 
anymore, because one cannot quit the DEs - it is a lifetime of 
service or death. Then, one day, he could no longer tell himself he 
did not care, because he really did, very much, care about what he 
had done to the Potters (for whatever reason, I know what I think the 
reason was <g>). Enough that the risk to his life choosing to change 
entailed was suddenly worth it to him. Or not, if Dumbledore was 
fooled. But I find the above story quite plausible.