I think Voldy was the only one to accidentally make a Horcrux in the course of the series, since he blew away the shell protecting the newly-torn soul bit. I *speculate* that at some point in the WW's history, someone did make an accidental Horcrux, which is how they found out it could be done at all. Most people don't agree with my speculation.
I do think that very likely as most inventions are made that way, namely an accident or something giving someone an idea.
I don't think that every killing splits one's soul. Killing in self-defense, or in defense of others, or in the natural course of war, is not, in my opinion, the same as murder, which tears the soul. A lot of people did think that Harry and the other kids especially, but to a lesser extent all of the Good Guys, should not kill if they could possibly avoid it. Some thought Harry especially should not kill at all. The message it sends to kids, all of that, was much of the reason. Harry being pure of soul was another.
I agree with you here, but not being in HP I didn't know the general agreement was the good guys shouldn't kill at all. I personally don't think of Harry as being especially "pure of soul".
Literally, you wouldn't be responsible for the actions of a DE who got out of your bodybind. He understands that he got off light, and chooses to go back into the fray. He may be contemptuous of you for having used a mild spell against him, or he may not think of it at all. Morally, I think, only you can answer that question. If it was me, I would feel terrible and be kicking myself.
Well, maybe not in court - but I would feel that way if someone had to die because I put the purity of my soul above the safety of my friends and allies.
The book does make the distinction that the Aurors under Barty Crouch Sr. were questionable in using the Unforgivables in the heat of VoldWarI. Moody is held up as being above the rest because he didn't kill unless he had to. The same books show, then ignore, Harry using, or trying to use, Unforgivables from about Order of the Phoenix on. It seemed like a double standard to me: Support Harry and use Unforgivables with impunity (sp?); Support Voldy and use Unforgivables and be cast into outer darkness... er, Azkaban. Same act, same circumstances, different outcome.
I have no idea how you would stop people using deadly force themselves for good if not with AK - which I find a pretty merciful way of killing with regard to weapons like bombs and grenades used by muggles. And yes to what you said about double standards. That was bothering me all the time.
Re: Hello!
I do think that very likely as most inventions are made that way, namely an accident or something giving someone an idea.
I don't think that every killing splits one's soul. Killing in self-defense, or in defense of others, or in the natural course of war, is not, in my opinion, the same as murder, which tears the soul. A lot of people did think that Harry and the other kids especially, but to a lesser extent all of the Good Guys, should not kill if they could possibly avoid it. Some thought Harry especially should not kill at all. The message it sends to kids, all of that, was much of the reason. Harry being pure of soul was another.
I agree with you here, but not being in HP I didn't know the general agreement was the good guys shouldn't kill at all. I personally don't think of Harry as being especially "pure of soul".
Literally, you wouldn't be responsible for the actions of a DE who got out of your bodybind. He understands that he got off light, and chooses to go back into the fray. He may be contemptuous of you for having used a mild spell against him, or he may not think of it at all. Morally, I think, only you can answer that question. If it was me, I would feel terrible and be kicking myself.
Well, maybe not in court - but I would feel that way if someone had to die because I put the purity of my soul above the safety of my friends and allies.
The book does make the distinction that the Aurors under Barty Crouch Sr. were questionable in using the Unforgivables in the heat of VoldWarI. Moody is held up as being above the rest because he didn't kill unless he had to. The same books show, then ignore, Harry using, or trying to use, Unforgivables from about Order of the Phoenix on. It seemed like a double standard to me: Support Harry and use Unforgivables with impunity (sp?); Support Voldy and use Unforgivables and be cast into outer darkness... er, Azkaban. Same act, same circumstances, different outcome.
I have no idea how you would stop people using deadly force themselves for good if not with AK - which I find a pretty merciful way of killing with regard to weapons like bombs and grenades used by muggles. And yes to what you said about double standards. That was bothering me all the time.
Thanks!