Lily being spared

[lui]

No: HPFGUIDX 189819

June:
> Dumbledore said that it was Lily's sacrifice to give her life
in place of Harry's that caused the protection and Harry even
in Order of the Phoenix at the beginning after finding  out that
it could just as easily been Neville was wondering himself if
it had been Neville would Neville's mother have been able to
protect him the way his mother did so that the protection would
have been given to Neville. Don't forget too Dumbledore knew
every thing. He himself said that even he can be wrong about
things but he was aware of every thing that went on around Harry
and he knew all about Snape and what he was up to and if the
protection set by Lily's actions had any thing to do whatsoever
with Snape, Dumbledore would know that and what he told Harry
was that it was Lily's love for him that set the protection. <

luirhys:
I hate to be repetitive here, but we already KNOW that it was
Lily's sacrifice that triggered the blood protection. The point
is  that it was a set of unique circumstances that made it that
way. Let's take a look at the list of events:

1. LV decides to kill Potter boy
2. Snape begs him to spare the mother
3. He AGREES
4. LV goes off to kill baby
5. Potter husband gets in the way, he kills him
6. Potter mother gets in the way, he GIVES HER THE CHANCE TO STEP AWAY
7. Potter mother says to kill her INSTEAD
8. yada yada,
9. she's so noisy, LV decides to kill her
10. He tries to kill Potter boy- the curse bounces

Now lets take a look if it was the Longbottoms LV decided to stalk
1. LV decides to kill Longbottom boy
2. SNAPE KNOWS ITS THE LONGBOTTOM BOY THAT LV WANTS TO KILL
3. NO DEATHEATER CRONY IN LOVE WITH THE MOTHER TO MAKE HIM SPARE HER LIFE
4. LV goes off to kill baby
5. Longbottom husband gets in the way, he kills him
6. Longbottom mother gets in the way, she shields her son
7. He kills her
8. he kills Longbottom boy
9. No blood sacrifice triggered

YES, it was LOVE that triggered it. BUT if it was another mother,
shielding their child from LV. It would not have the same effect
because they were not given the CHOICE TO STAND ASIDE.
I have finally found that **** interview. JK explains it better
than I do, anyway.

[Lily] could have lived and chose to die. James was going to be
killed anyway. Do you see what I mean? I'm not saying James
wasn't ready to; he died trying to protect his family but he was
going to be murdered anyway. He had no - he wasn't given a choice,
so he rushed into it in a kind of animal way, I think there are
distinctions in courage. James was immensely brave. But the
caliber of Lily's bravery was, I think in this instance, higher
because she could have saved herself. Now any mother, any normal
mother would have done what Lily did. So in that sense her
courage too was of an animal quality but she was given time to
choose. James wasn't. It's like an intruder entering your house,
isn't it? You would instinctively rush them. But if in cold blood
you were told, "Get out of the way," you know, what would you do?
I mean, I don't think any mother would stand aside from their
child. But does that answer it? She did very consciously lay down
her life. She had a clear choice -

ES: And James didn't.
JKR: Did he clearly die to try and protect Harry specifically
given a clear choice? No. It's a subtle distinction and there's
slightly more to it than that but that's most of the answer.
MA: Did she know anything about the possible effect of standing
in front of Harry?
JKR: No - because as I've tried to make clear in the series, it
never happened before. No one ever survived before. And no one,
therefore, knew that could happen.
MA: So no one - Voldemort or anyone using Avada Kedavra - ever
gave someone a choice and then they took that option [to die] -
JKR: They may have been given a choice, but not in that particular
way.

(sources: US hardcover editions, PS 8-17 & 55-57; CS 332-333;
   PA 204-207 & 358-375; GF 652-653; OP 835-836 & 841)