I'll respond to your points in order:

1.) You really call being married to Ginny a happy life? Also, I wouldn't exactly call Harry's years in Hogwarts "happy". Especially after Book 3.

2.) This is not the greater good, this is common sense. Stopping child abuse is something that should of been done.

3.) If a criminal is hiding in the forest, and my solution is to burn down the forest. I may catch the criminal, but the forest is still burned down. So just because it works, doesn't mean it's the best solution.

4.) It's also amoral to keep a child in a family full of people who treat him like shit one way or another. So why not do something amoral that will do something positive?

5.) Well lets see, Dumbledore could of taught Harry to protect his mind. Imagine that?

I mean hells bells, in canon, Dumbledore tells Harry the Prophecy despite his mind is still unprotected, so my idea is at least more plausible in that aspect.

6.) By the end of Book 4, he is no longer a child. By the end of Book 2, if Harry doesn't realize he might want to bone up on some spells because crazy stuff happens around Hogwarts then he is an idiot. If I got attacked by a serial killer who's behind some guys head, and then a 50 foot+ long snake, I think I'd want to just maybe train a little.

 

And what would the purpose of that be? Had Harry been more competent he probably would have died and the war lost (as he would have struck out on his own rather than follow Dumbledore's plan due to a higher independence born of competence, and got wtfpwn'd for it). Because at the end of the day, in order to survive the removal of the soul-fragment in him, Harry had to be willing to die without a fight. Had Harry confronted Voldemort and fought him and then lost, he would have been just dead.

See my main answer: this would involve Dark magic (the Imperius).

Disagree. The Order was right not to let Harry and the others join. Not because he wasn't willing to die for the cause, but rather because he wasn't willing to kill for it.

Well, clearly then Harry is an idiot, and you are not Harry.

Actually, yes. He does look rather happy in the Epilogue.

Lol, I think it's more the fact that the thread has got completely derailed...

 

You're spewing Indi!Harry catch phrases. Motivated? To do what, fight? Harry is a teenager. Mediocre at everything. If he'll really try he'll be... above average. Even his DADA skills aren't that impressive, compared of the feats of other wizards.

Also, training would probably make him a bigger asshat. "Look at me, I'm 13 and can do 15 year old magic, send me to the battles fields, nowz!!!!" seems like something Dumbledore would want to avoid.

 

I'm talking motivated in general. You know, like being willing to do shit. Motivated to do anything. If it weren't for Hermione, he would of never had gotten anything done with Ron.

He's Mediocre because of Hermione, without her, I can't imagine.

Also, you're assuming the training would go to his head. That's something more of Indy!Harry.

 

Canon Harry sees it this way. Bashing Ginny won't make me immediately agree with you

Fighting evil with evil... right... in any case, I don't think the Dursley's actions were so horrible that their free will needs to be taken.

But you'll do it anyway if that's the only option that works.

Placing a child with his legal gaurding =/= taking free will - slavery.

You don't just wake up one morning and say, "Maybe Harry Potter and Voldemort have a mind connection?". There was no need for it.

He didn't think Harry will have to meet Voldemort so soon. He rushed his plans because that he was going to die, and by then he did what he could.

Disagree. Harry didn't even grasp the idea of war in his 5'th year.

 

1.) If I forced you to live in a cupboard under the stairs where this is a perfectly good bedroom for you to use, what would you think? Never mind everything else they did.

2.) All the other options weren't even explored. Harry was rushed onto the Dursleys doorstep with the intention of being left there.

3.) Again, you're not taking away their free will at all. It's similar to what Wizards have with their muggle charms. Whenever they are going to hit Harry, they have the sudden urge to go elsewhere. Unless you want to agree that Wizards in general take away Muggle's free will. Also, I'm pretty sure Sirius Black was his legal guardian, even though canon never specifically stated it. I mean, he was his Godfather, so it would make sense.

4.) I'm talking getting training for protection of his mind so he can learn the secrets without giving them up.

5.) That's Dumbledore's problem sometimes, he doesn't think.

6.) Because Harry is a dumbass. Again, if it weren't for CanonHarry! being a idiot, we wouldn't have this discussion. He didn't even know about Death Eaters until Book 4.

7.) You said motivated as if I were referring to Harry training. I'm talking in general, being more motivated. Harry is as lazy as can be in Canon. If it weren't for Hermione, can you honestly say Harry would of gotten as far as he did?

8.) You are not Harry Potter, so your experience doesn't mean it's the experience for all teenagers. Especially if he were a bit more mature. But again, this is CanonHarry! *Sigh*

 

So.. if canon were different, it would be different?

<_<

 

Now in English.

He had to make a choice, there are no resets. Maybe he made the wrong choice [though I don't believe that] but it was a viable choice.

You're assuming that such a charm exists.

Again, Dumbledore thought he had more time.

Why do you think a 15 y/o should fear for his life constantly?

Motivated. To. Do. What?

As far in what?

[/quote]

Correction: Being able to kill changes EVERYTHING. It's in our instincts. It takes years of acknowledging that fact to somewhat accept it.

 

If CanonHarry! wasn't an idiot then yes, his actions would of been different.

1.) I'm assuming there is, yes. However, given there is already something similar in existence, and the fact Dumbledore is one of the smartest Wizards ever I'm sure something could be done.

2.) After book 4, he was already fearing for his life constantly. I mean there was a serial killer out there who had tried to kill him THREE TIMES, FOUR if you count the diary at this point.

3/4.) Motivated to think more, to train more in Book 5, to not just rely on Hermione for everything. For example, who got the idea of the DA going? Who was with Harry throughout Book 7?

5.) I was 15 3 years ago. I had the mindset at that point, if someone was trying to kill me and my family, I'd do everything in my power to stop them. Even if that involved killing the person. (I'm using the example of a break-in, Manson style people.) Honestly, I wouldn't want to kill them, but it would be necessary.

 

Sure, but here's the thing: in terms of power, you (Harry Potter) is an ordinary average Joe. You're probably a plummer. The guy trying to kill you (Voldemort) is the President of the United States.

Learning Karate isn't going to help you, and it's foolish to even try.

 

Again, this is why the whole Elder Wand bullshit was needed by Book 7. In any sort of even fair duel, Voldemort would of wiped the floor with Harry in about three minutes, and gone on to what he was doing.

Something similar to this actually:



Canon annoys me to no end when I'm reminded of things like this.

 

I would have been more annoyed if Harry had won in an even duel, personally.

Even if you were to make Harry a magical prodigy, 60 year old magical prodigy > 17 year old magical prodigy, so he still loses.

Deux ex machina is the only "realistic" way for Harry to win.

 

Read the books again. In OOTP Harry wants to play quidditch and doesn't want his friends to be prepared for the days to come. Once again, don't say what you would have done, but what canon Harry would.

 

Just because you (and nearly everyone else on DLP) hate Ginny and ASP doesn't mean Harry does. People do have different opinions from you, so you shouldn't spout yours off as the God-given truth.

OT: I oppose torture because I think it's wrong. I don't give a damn if it saves New York City, I think it's still goddamn wrong. The fact that it's unreliable is even further support for the belief that it shouldn't be used at any time.

 

I'm going to draw a comparison here to Ender's Game (it fits, oddly). Here's a quick summary for those that haven't read it:

A boy named Ender grows up in an unhappy environment. He suffers much psychological and physical abuse from his brother. Now, at this time, a war is going on between humanity and an alien force. We find out that Ender's sad upbringing gives him the perfect outlook to defeat these aliens. He is further conditioned, nearly breaking him. But, he defeats the aliens.

The people who planned for Ender to become what he became get off free. Why?

"Mistreatment of children, negligent homicide...I did what I believed was necessary... and it worked... The exigencies of war." - Ender's Game, p.305, 1991.

Dumbledore did what he needed to do. Who are we to say what may have happened if any part of his plan changed (assuming that he had a plan)? Even if Dumbledore did not plan it, his rationale of getting Harry to grow up humble instead of arrogant seems to have worked. By allowing Harry to grow up neglected, he made the values of friendship and loyalty (and yes, love) seem greater to Harry, assuring that Harry would never abandon the righteous cause. Thus, Harry was able to sacrifice himself and destroy the Horcrux inside him.

Canon!Harry did not value power. He wanted friends. Ergo, dead horcrux and determination not to quit, ever.

OT: I do not condone torture in any way. I think it is wrong. Once we begin to believe that it is the norm, then society will not be worth living in. But it does bring up an interesting question. If a person knew how to prevent the destruction of an entire continent, let's say, and would not tell anyone - should the information be tortured out of him/her?

 

Oh, come on Taure. I have nothing to say on the rest of the debate n this thread, but I just can't let this pass.

When did the Order ever kill anyone? They had more than the opportunity, there were competent wizards in it, and they knew who several death eaters were. Probably they couldn't hold up to Voldy-cakes himself, but that shouldn't have stopped them from pruning the mooks.

 

Mad-Eye Moody killed Evan Rosier when he "refused to come quietly".

The Order doesn't go out with the intention of killing people, no. They're not assassins. But neither does it shy from killing either, when it is necessary.

In DH Remus Lupin berated Harry for not using lethal force, because the situation was desperate enough to demand it.

Snape, who was loyal to Dumbledore, gave out the location of one of the Order's own member's - Vance - to Voldemort, as well as Amelia Bones. So the Order is also willing to sacrifice their own side to achieve tactical victory.

They're not pansy-arsed pacifists like many fanfics like to portray them as.

 

You know, I've just finished reading through the whole argument we've got going on here, and I've got to say...

It's would have or should have, Scrittore. There's no such phrase as would of or should of. You're badly misinterpreting the sounds of the contractions would've or should've, and this is irksome.

 

...lol.

<filler>

 

My interpretation of that conversation was that when Moody killed Rosier, Moody was acting in his capacity as an Auror, not an Order member. Otherwise, wouldn't Dumbledore have already known all about it, seeing as the Order is Dumbledore's little band of ragtag misfits?

I believe "desperate" is the operative word there. I would assume Remus to be pretty wound up at that time, what with almost everyone he cares about (especially Tonks) having just impersonated Harry and stepped directly into Voldemort's line of fire, which of course resulted in Moody's death. I think anyone (other than Jesus H. Christ, and the "H" apparently stands for Harry) would be ready to toss a few Killing Curses in that situation.

I don't remember canon evidence that it was Snape who gave up Vance and Amelia Bones, but neither do I have HBP here to verify or contradict. In either case, yes, the "good" guys were willing to make sacrifices. That in itself means little. What I'm saying is that being willing to die is not the same as being willing to kill. In that sense, Harry is a textbook Order member.