On Children and the "Other" (was:Re: On the perfection of moral virtues)

[lupinlore]

No: HPFGUIDX 169552

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "horridporrid03" 
<horridporrid03 at ...> wrote:

> 


> The other way, is a rule of law where *everyone* is understood to 
> have the same basic rights, no matter their political beliefs or 
> quidditch team.  And no one, *no one*, is free to take the law into 
> their own hands.  I *think* that's the way Dumbledore is supposed to 
> be going.  (I'll admit that sometimes it's hard to tell. <g>)  But it 
> is the way the books will hopefully support in the end.


Hmmm.  Well, that would be pretty difficult to do in any unambiguous 
way.  First of all, DD is hardly the one to look for when it comes to 
abiding by set laws.  He takes the law into his own hands at nearly 
every turn, starting with taking it upon himself to decide Harry's 
future, to set up a resistance against Voldemort centered on himself, 
to flat out lieing to the Wizengamot in HBP.  He seems to obey the law 
until it conflicts with what he wants to do, and then out with the 
law!  His code is "what's right over what's easy," which means as far 
as we can see what DD thinks is right over what DD thinks is easy.  
What society as a whole thinks is right, as encoded in the laws of the 
WW, seem to be of DISTINCTLY secondary concern to DD, insofar as he 
seems to pay any attention to such things at all.

Secondly, Harry has to kill Voldy.  He isn't going to capture Voldy and 
bring him in for a trial.  He isn't going to read the man his rights.  
He, from everything we know, is going to kill the Dark Lord.  
Furthermore, Dumbly flat out told him he was going to have to kill the 
Dark Lord.  No talk of laws or rights or authorities.  No attempt even 
to bring up those issues.  Voldy is in the wrong, Harry can stop him, 
so it is up to Harry to take things into his own hands and get it done.
> 
> Otherwise, the woodchipper! <bg>
> 

Well, if you're serious about holding out for some kind of turn to a 
clear rule of law that would be unambiguously recognizable as such, 
I'll save some gas for you.  I assume this would be a regime in which 
no one takes it upon themselves to punish others or tries on their own 
to enforce any kind of moral authority, and like I say I don't see how 
that's going to happen.  Voldy is highly unlikely to get a trial or 
respect for his rights, nor is he likely to be brought low by anyone 
empowered by any clear ordinary laws that apply to everyone.  The laws 
enforced will be moral laws and those enforcing them will be acting on 
their own authority, or at most by the dead authority of Dumbledore who 
HIMSELF was acting on his own authority.  Any treatment of such an 
issue seems almost certain to be ambiguous and contradictory, 
considering what Harry has to do in the end.  He would be saying "I 
accept from henceforth that there are laws that apply clearly to 
everyone no matter what and no one, NO ONE, has the right to take the 
law into their own hands!  Now please excuse me while I, a seventeen-
year-old wizard with no formal authority or position at all, proceed to 
execute this evil person."

Like I say, I'll let you keep the mulch.


Lupinloreb