Not Another Harry Potter Debate

[fides' Jack]

MissScripture: thanks for sticking up for me!  I think your assessment of the current situation is just right.

 

All: For some reason this morning I had a little tickle in my brain that urged me ever so gently to recite the act of charity (ignore the old-English style, if you must):

 

"Oh, my God, I love Thee above all things with my whole heart and soul because Thou art all good and worthy of all love.  I love my neighbor as myself for love of Thee.  I forgive all who have injured me and ask pardon of all whom I have injured."

 

With that out there, I realized that I might be being a little too harsh in my replies.  If I have offended anyone, I do sincerely apologize.

 

However, I also hold that folks who do seem to be offended still do not understand the article author's meaning.  The "hedges" he lists aren't bad things in themselves; they're rather areas of potential problems - kind of like the 7 deadly sins - they're not sinful in themselves, just potential sins.  But, it was unrealistic for me to think that I could get some serious discussion here without turning it into a "blasting anyone who criticizes Harry Potter on moral grounds" debate - as a couple people stated very early on.  Even though it wasn't the purpose of the thread, I did honestly answer those people about my personal opinions, and maybe I shouldn't have.

 

What I found very, um, off, though, is that I stated perfectly clearly that I currently believe that HP is inherently evil.  People read that statement and proceeded to tell me I should read it anyway.  So the "advice" I'm getting is to act in a way contrary to my own conscience?

 

So, to recap:

• Before reading the article, I thought Harry Potter was inherently evil and refused to read it/watch it
• I read the article, and though I still considered Harry Potter to be evil, I thought maybe I had taken it too far, and to use the article's suggested criteria (as well as one or two of my own) as points of possible moral pitfalls in all literature and movies, rather than black and white "inherently evil" kind of things
• I posted here to get the opinions of people I know don't have the same issues with Harry Potter to see if they thought the listed criteria made sense
• I get the response that the whole article is rubbish, ignorant, and shouldn't be taken seriously - basically that he's wrong on every single point (from most people)

OK, well, if the article is that bad, then I guess I was wrong to question myself - and I should stick to the idea that I shouldn't let my kids read Harry Potter or other books which contain magic that breaks the rules that I had in my head before this all started.

 

I need to take a break from this.  I'll be back in a day or two.

[Basilisa Marie]

Okay, well, at least my point was that the author is wrong on most of his points because he's too harsh, and isn't including all of the books in his assessment.  

 

It didn't make sense to me why you'd ask the opinion of people who supposedly like an "evil" thing if you weren't willing to change your opinion of that "evil" thing in the first place.  Even though I think the article is crap, I still think you should look into the books, or let your kids read them when they're older under your own guidance. 

 

You could compare the situation to Fifty Shades of Grey.  I haven't read the books, because I think they're immoral.  I think they're immoral because other people have told me that they glorify explicit sex. I know this is an accurate assessment because the people who like the books also agree that the books glorify explicit sex.  You could also compare it to Twilight. Some people think Twilight is bad because it glorifies an emotionally abusive relationship. People who like Twilight disagree, they think the relationship is romantic. Because of this supposed fundamental misunderstanding, I read the books to see for myself. I ended up deciding that the people who said it glorified an emotionally abusive relationship were more right, but that the people who say the books were the most terrible thing ever were being too extreme.   So in this situation, the question of whether or not Harry Potter is bad because of magic is more like the relationship in Twilight than the sex in Fifty Shades.  Which is why I keep saying that it's important to read the books and decide for yourself.  

 

And as a caveat: Do you know how hard it is to play nice when someone keeps calling a thing you really, really love inherently evil? Maybe that's part of the reason why you've had such a hard time trying to keep people on topic for the thread.  Just a thought. :) 

[Roamin Catholic]

Harry Potter books and movies are very over-rated. I plan on exposing my kids to better quality literature than this drivel 

[CrossCuT]

Okay, well, at least my point was that the author is wrong on most of his points because he's too harsh, and isn't including all of the books in his assessment.  

 

It didn't make sense to me why you'd ask the opinion of people who supposedly like an "evil" thing if you weren't willing to change your opinion of that "evil" thing in the first place.  Even though I think the article is croutons, I still think you should look into the books, or let your kids read them when they're older under your own guidance. 

 

You could compare the situation to Fifty Shades of Grey.  I haven't read the books, because I think they're immoral.  I think they're immoral because other people have told me that they glorify explicit sex. I know this is an accurate assessment because the people who like the books also agree that the books glorify explicit sex.  You could also compare it to Twilight. Some people think Twilight is bad because it glorifies an emotionally abusive relationship. People who like Twilight disagree, they think the relationship is romantic. Because of this supposed fundamental misunderstanding, I read the books to see for myself. I ended up deciding that the people who said it glorified an emotionally abusive relationship were more right, but that the people who say the books were the most terrible thing ever were being too extreme.   So in this situation, the question of whether or not Harry Potter is bad because of magic is more like the relationship in Twilight than the sex in Fifty Shades.  Which is why I keep saying that it's important to read the books and decide for yourself.  

 

And as a caveat: Do you know how hard it is to play nice when someone keeps calling a thing you really, really love inherently evil? Maybe that's part of the reason why you've had such a hard time trying to keep people on topic for the thread.  Just a thought. :)

You hit the  nail on the head.

 

When a primary source agrees with a secondary source, Id say we are well equipped to make a decision with sufficient knowledge and understanding on questions of morality in books, movies, or what have you....anything really.

 

But when a second hand account is in great contrast with the first hand account, that is when reading it yourself is important...that is why we have been suggesting it.

We are trying to explain that even though someone TELLS you 2+2=5, doesn't mean its correct. When someone tries to explain that they have first hand experience with the fact 2+2=4 then I think it would behoove you to either recognize the source of the information OR make an honest attempt to turn yourself into a primary source by reading it yourself.

 

 

If all we ever did in the world was listen to other peoples thoughts and opinions...what does that say about us? We are educated adults that are 100% capable of not only reading/doing things for ourselves, but it serves a lot to your merit to go search out an understanding on your own.

 YOUR opinion in a debate is worth much more than the regurgitated opinion of someone else. 

 

I totally understand what Misscripture has said, but I think it goes to show you where listening to too many secondary sources will bring you. :(

She said she thinks Harry Potter is anit-christian only because she has not read the books and is therefore unable to see that they are not. But she has believed the words of others which (as we have been attempting to show everyone) is simply not accurate.

[MIKolbe]

I think this 'argument' may neatly fall right inbetween 2 logical thought processes...

 

1) I hate waterchestnuts.  I have never had them, though.  I tried them once, they're ok.  I had to try them to see if I liked them.

 

2) I don't like adultery.  I do not need to commit it, nor have my wife commit it, for me to 'see' if I like it. 

 

 

some people, as it concerns HP, are closer to # 1.... others # 2.

 

 

 

[CrossCuT]

Harry Potter books and movies are very over-rated. I plan on exposing my kids to better quality literature than this drivel 

 

And that is totally fine! Everyone's preferences are different whether its books, movies, music, food, clothes, etc!!! :)

But this thread isnt debating where Harry Potter ranks in its qualities of Literature, its about the overall morality and its worth reading based on that.

 

You could think Harry Potter is just as moral of a book as anything else but still  not enjoy it as literature.

 

Charles Dickens is considered one of the literature masters of all time and I dont enjoy his stuff...they make me too sad!!!

 

Nicholas Nickleby....still makes me want to sob just thinking about it  :cry:

Edited April 26, 2013 by CrossCuT

[CrossCuT]

I think this 'argument' may neatly fall right inbetween 2 logical thought processes...

 

1) I hate waterchestnuts.  I have never had them, though.  I tried them once, they're ok.  I had to try them to see if I liked them.

 

2) I don't like adultery.  I do not need to commit it, nor have my wife commit it, for me to 'see' if I like it. 

 

 

some people, as it concerns HP, are closer to # 1.... others # 2.

:winner:

[Roamin Catholic]

So, if he doesn't want to read them, then why is everyone so dead set on him reading them? I read the first book because everyone was so ga-ga over it and I thought it was stupid. But, that's beside the point.
 

 

 

We're suggesting the he read the book himself (or at least watch the movies) because he's getting his information second hand and it just so happens that the second hand information is pandering and biased. This is why it's important to get first hand experience with things like this, so that you can actually have all the proper information before forming an opinion and passing judgement.

 

If this is truly how you live your life, never looking into things for yourself and trusting what everyone around you says, then I think you are very naive. In this thread is evidence of exactly why getting solely second hand information is not a good idea.

 

 

 

I totally understand what Misscripture has said, but I think it goes to show you where listening to too many secondary sources will bring you. :(

She said she thinks Harry Potter is anit-christian only because she has not read the books and is therefore unable to see that they are not. But she has believed the words of others which (as we have been attempting to show everyone) is simply not accurate.

 

I'm starting to think Raz and crosscut don't actually read the posts in this thread. At least that is how it appears given their responses....

 

 

Also, I'm serious when I say that I'd like to see where MissScripture called harry potter anti-christian. 

[CrossCuT]

I'm starting to think Raz and crosscut don't actually read the posts in this thread. At least that is how it appears given their responses....

 

 

Also, I'm serious when I say that I'd like to see where MissScripture called harry potter anti-christian. 

 

 

 Why on earth would we all need to read books that are anti-Christian to know that they are bad?

:(

In the context of what she said it seemed like she was implying a reference to Harry Potter because she doesnt mention the other books till later on in the paragraph. If it was NOT her intention to imply that Harry Potter is anti-christian then I apologize for the confusion, she didnt explain what she was referring to very well.

 

 

Unfortunately I feel like you are not reading any of the posts either.

Mr. MIkolbe jumped into the conversation quite a ways in and he already picked up on the point we were try to make.  :idontknow:

[Guest Raz]

I'm starting to think Raz and crosscut don't actually read the posts in this thread. At least that is how it appears given their responses....

 

 

Also, I'm serious when I say that I'd like to see where MissScripture called harry potter anti-christian.

 

Yeah...  I never said that MissScripture called HP anti-Christian. I just said that her belief that second hand opinion is all you need isn't an intellegent way to live life. And if you actually read what I wrote, you'll see that I said "if" which means of course that there was still room for conversation.

 

Since apparently you don't read posts, here's what was posted.

 

Personally, I think the attitude of "You have to read the books so you know if they are evil or not" is dumb. And yes, that was strongly implied in this thread by some people. Why on earth would we all need to read books that are anti-Christian to know that they are bad? How is it not okay for someone to read them and pass on the information? Should we all read His Dark Materials, too, to make sure that it's really anti-Christian? Should we all read The Da Vinci Code to make sure that's really full of stuff that is anti-Catholic?

 

and then...

 

We're suggesting the he read the book himself (or at least watch the movies) because he's getting his information second hand and it just so happens that the second hand information is pandering and biased. This is why it's important to get first hand experience with things like this, so that you can actually have all the proper information before forming an opinion and passing judgement.

 

If this is truly how you live your life, never looking into things for yourself and trusting what everyone around you says, then I think you are very naive. In this thread is evidence of exactly why getting solely second hand information is not a good idea.

 

get it?

Edited April 26, 2013 by Raz

[MIKolbe]

Mr. MIkolbe jumped into the conversation quite a ways in and he already picked up on the point we were try to make. :idontknow:

 

 

In my defense, I am super duper smart.

[Guest Raz]

In my defense, I am super duper smart.

 

I'm inclined to agree.

The defense rests.

[MIKolbe]

Interestingly, however is the Vatican's (the Vatican's Newspaper) condemnation of Harry Potter...

 

Article here: http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/harry_potter_wrong_model_of_a_hero_vatican_newspaper_says/

 

Key paragraph therein:

 

L'Osservatore says. "Despite several positive values that can be found in the story, at the foundations of this tale is the proposal that of witchcraft as positive, the violent manipulation of things and people thanks to the knowledge of the occult, an advantage of a select few: the ends justify the means because the knowledgeable, the chosen ones, the intellectuals know how to control the dark powers and turn them into good."

 

"This” –the article continues- “is a grave and deep lie, because it is the old Gnostic temptation of confusing salvation and truth with a secret knowledge."

 

 

 

 

 

 

Not to be outdone by glowing praise years later...

http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles_of_faith/2009/07/vatican_gives_t.html

 

The Vatican's newspaper, L'Osservatore Romano, has given a warm review to "Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince,'' praising the film for its “clear line of demarcation between good and evil, making clear that good is right, and that in some cases this involves hard work and sacrifices.”

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest Raz]

"And this is exactly what happens in Harry Potter," L'Osservatore says. "Despite several positive values that can be found in the story, at the foundations of this tale is the proposal that of witchcraft as positive, the violent manipulation of things and people thanks to the knowledge of the occult, an advantage of a select few: the ends justify the means because the knowledgeable, the chosen ones, the intellectuals know how to control the dark powers and turn them into good."

 

Well that's some pretty unfair critisism. I guess they didn't consider Aragorn raising the dead to fight for him in the Great Battle to be "the knowledgeable, the chosen ones, the intellectuals know how to control the dark powers and turn them into good." Inconsistency from the Vatican.

 

Interestingly, however is the Vatican's (the Vatican's Newspaper) condemnation of Harry Potter...

 

Article here: http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/harry_potter_wrong_model_of_a_hero_vatican_newspaper_says/

 

 

Not to be outdone by glowing praise years later...

http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles_of_faith/2009/07/vatican_gives_t.html

 

Once again, some more inconsistent behavior out of the Vatican. This was just one year later.
 

Edited April 26, 2013 by Raz

[Winchester]

Bro, do you even fiction?