Morality and Rationalism

[Goddlefrood]

No: HPFGUIDX 168952

> Katie (In parts):

> I resent wholeheartedly your insinuation that sacrificial 
love, redemption, CHOICE, and other so-called "Christian" 
themes in Harry Potter are Christian at all. My objection 
is two-fold:

> 1 - There is an assumption by Christians that values that 
are in the Bible are somehow singularly Christian. Simply 
because you put it in the Bible does not mean it is owned 
by Christianity. 

> 2 - I was part of that "groundswell" of other religions a 
few years back. 

> Why? Because sacrifice and suffering makes a good damn 
story. 
    
> Harry Potter is not about religion.

Goddlefrood:

It's interesting that this is bought up. First, might I say
that it rarely advances an argument to say that a contrary
view is resented. I'm not myself overtly religious, but if
pressed I would say I was an agnostic.

The argument that the Bible is somehow the repository of only
Christian values and beliefs is not one with which I would
personally agree. If it were to be narrowed to just the New
Testament, then perhaps a case could be made. The three largest
monotheistic religions each take the Bible seriously.

My viewpoint was in the last paragraph quoted by Geoff in an 
earlier post, this:

> I certainly do not think that the books are in any way 
> subversive, neither are they trying to undermine society 
> in any way. They are enjoyable, amusing and a grand diversion 
> from weightier issues, but ultimately they will not change 
> the world, IMO.

Perhaps I should also have added that it is a simple fact that
anyone can take whatever they choose from the books. It would
be rather dull if everyone agreed about everything all the time
and would lead to rather short discussions, or rather, none at
all.

That there are ways of making arguments for many different points
of view from the available text is a matter that should hold
no controversy.

In my earlier post I made some links that are valid and could
advance one way of looking at the books, it is not necessarily
my way of looking at the books. I've probably just been a 
lawyer too long and appreciate being able to argue a point from 
many sides.

To conclude then, I can appreciate the many opposing viewpoints. 
I have never thought a great deal about the alchemical theorists
because many lead to a conclusion that Rubeus would die, and of
course I do not agree, but for no really better reason than that
Hagrid is my personal favourite. If he does die it needn't
validate the alchemy based theories either.

For what it may be worth to anyone.

Goddlefrood