|
|
Post by mountaingirl777 on Jun 27, 2012 15:23:56 GMT -5
Yes I'm going there. Its been eating at me for a while now. I'm a christian and was raised that witchcraft and such was bad. One of the reasons why I wasn't allowed to watch or read HP, I was barely allowed to look at pictures or even commercials  . It also went onto Chronicles of Narnia and LotR. I had a lot of back and forth thinking with wanting to read and watch HP. First I didn't want to because it was going against my parents, but then I did because I wanted to see what all the hype was about. When I was introduced to HP, by other christians mind you, I was told that if you looked past all the magic that there are christian themes in it. Harry being like Jesus was one that I was told of. I just want to see your opinions of this. There can be a debate, but I don't want people going at each other's throats about stuff. If you do I will delete this thread. I just want a little more insight to this side of HP, if you can help me. |
|
sherza
Head Boy/Girl
Posts: 705
|
Post by sherza on Jun 27, 2012 15:36:18 GMT -5
I never could understand why the Fundies were freaking out.
I mean, really. So kids run around with sticks going 'alohamora' ... so WHAT? It's not real witchcraft, they're not worshiping the devil or making pacts with him, or releasing demons or any of that, so what the HECK was the problem?
|
|
|
|
Post by kumainpink on Jun 27, 2012 15:54:44 GMT -5
Exactly!
Personally, I feel as though the people who protest this sort of thing just like to protest imagination all-together. Sort of Dursleyish type people, only without being abusive and neglectful to their children for the most part.
|
|
|
|
Post by mountaingirl777 on Jun 27, 2012 16:18:58 GMT -5
yeah, my parents were like that. They kept me from fantasy because of what it "might put into my imagination". what they didn't know what that before HP, LotR and CoN, I was already thinking about mythical creatures and such. Plus they contradicted themselve in a way because they let me watch Disney movies (cinderella, snow white, ect.) that are chock-full of magic. When I look back on my childhood, I wonder.
|
|
|
|
Post by jessieanneh2 on Jun 27, 2012 16:53:22 GMT -5
Personally I have always chosen to not partake in any one religion over another. That being said Harry Potter has nothing to do with religion, or at least not just one or the other.
But we all have our own opinions. It is more to do about choice than any other. Good and Evil in my opinion have always been nothing more than mere labels people apply to their misdeeds. I mean no one ever says I am Evil do they?
That is one thing that always gave me the red ass in regaurds to her decision to say "Oh he is just evil lets leave it at that" When it isn't true. I always asked myself how many times was Tom bullied before he reached his breaking point? No one ever thinks of that when they condemn those who become Mass Murderers.
I always hated how Dumbledore acted as if he didn't even want to babysit Tom Riddle during his first trip to Diagon Alley. He just arbitrarily mind raped Tom then used his stealing as justification for not liking him.
I always thought Dumbledore was the one majorly responsible for Tom becoming Voldemort
|
|
sherza
Head Boy/Girl
Posts: 705
|
Post by sherza on Jun 27, 2012 17:44:33 GMT -5
That is one thing that always gave me the red ass in regaurds to her decision to say "Oh he is just evil lets leave it at that" When it isn't true. I always asked myself how many times was Tom bullied before he reached his breaking point? No one ever thinks of that when they condemn those who become Mass Murderers. Ummm ... Yeah. No. Psychopaths and sociopaths (which Tom is one of those two) are not unfortunate victims of bullying and/or child abuse. These are people who have something fundamentally wrong with them, such that they do not perceive right and wrong, or other people, the way that the bulk of society views them. Also? the whole 'but he had a bad childhood!' whine? Does Not Work. Unless there is something fundamentally wrong with you (like with psychopaths an sociopaths), everyone has a choice as to what decisions they make and how they react to the events of their lives. Look at Harry. He was mentally, verbally, and emotionally abused without cease for TEN YEARS. Plus instances of physical abuse, of unknown frequency and severity. Plus being underfed constantly ... when he wasn't being starved. Yet he managed to come out the other side without becoming a mass murderer or Dark Lord ... or even a bitter, vicious, cynical bastard (Hi there, Snape). That's one thing Dumbledore got right. It's our choices that define us. IF Tom wasn't a psych/soci opath, he had the *choice* to rise above, to not become a monster. Yet he chose to become one. Either way, I have zero sympathy for the bastard. |
|
|
|
Post by mountaingirl777 on Jun 27, 2012 18:45:43 GMT -5
That is one thing that always gave me the red ass in regaurds to her decision to say "Oh he is just evil lets leave it at that" When it isn't true. I always asked myself how many times was Tom bullied before he reached his breaking point? No one ever thinks of that when they condemn those who become Mass Murderers. Ummm ... Yeah. No. Psychopaths and sociopaths (which Tom is one of those two) are not unfortunate victims of bullying and/or child abuse. These are people who have something fundamentally wrong with them, such that they do not perceive right and wrong, or other people, the way that the bulk of society views them. Also? the whole 'but he had a bad childhood!' whine? Does Not Work. Unless there is something fundamentally wrong with you (like with psychopaths an sociopaths), everyone has a choice as to what decisions they make and how they react to the events of their lives. Look at Harry. He was mentally, verbally, and emotionally abused without cease for TEN YEARS. Plus instances of physical abuse, of unknown frequency and severity. Plus being underfed constantly ... when he wasn't being starved. Yet he managed to come out the other side without becoming a mass murderer or Dark Lord ... or even a bitter, vicious, cynical bastard (Hi there, Snape). That's one thing Dumbledore got right. It's our choices that define us. IF Tom wasn't a psych/soci opath, he had the *choice* to rise above, to not become a monster. Yet he chose to become one. Either way, I have zero sympathy for the bastard. I agree. If he wanted to, he would have changed. I mean, he doesn't have one ounce of love in his body. He was how old? He had to have come across love once in his life, everyone does. He made the choice to not take the love and to let hate over take his life. Harry even asked him for remorse, he gave him a second chance, but Tom didn't take it. Hate can blind people to almost everything. A hard heart, which Tom had, is really hard to soften when it is that hard. When you look at the flashbacks, even as a child he had an evilness about him. I actually think that he was born that way. I've been told that babies can sense thing even in the womb, maybe he sensed the anger and everything from his mother and he carried that ever since? |
|
|
|
Post by dracosfairmaiden on Jun 27, 2012 18:54:44 GMT -5
Me and my family are Christian. I'm lucky that my parents have open minds. I'm a religion major at college so that impacts my thinking. However, me and my sister love Harry Potter. It has nothing to religion. They don't worship the Devil and J.K. Rowling herself quotes from the Bible. I don't believe in the whole Harry Potter promotes witchcraft deal.
|
|
|
|
Post by jessieanneh2 on Jun 27, 2012 19:13:31 GMT -5
Ummm ... Yeah. No. Psychopaths and sociopaths (which Tom is one of those two) are not unfortunate victims of bullying and/or child abuse. These are people who have something fundamentally wrong with them, such that they do not perceive right and wrong, or other people, the way that the bulk of society views them. Also? the whole 'but he had a bad childhood!' whine? Does Not Work. Unless there is something fundamentally wrong with you (like with psychopaths an sociopaths), everyone has a choice as to what decisions they make and how they react to the events of their lives. Look at Harry. He was mentally, verbally, and emotionally abused without cease for TEN YEARS. Plus instances of physical abuse, of unknown frequency and severity. Plus being underfed constantly ... when he wasn't being starved. Yet he managed to come out the other side without becoming a mass murderer or Dark Lord ... or even a bitter, vicious, cynical bastard (Hi there, Snape). That's one thing Dumbledore got right. It's our choices that define us. IF Tom wasn't a psych/soci opath, he had the *choice* to rise above, to not become a monster. Yet he chose to become one. Either way, I have zero sympathy for the bastard. I agree. If he wanted to, he would have changed. I mean, he doesn't have one ounce of love in his body. He was how old? He had to have come across love once in his life, everyone does. He made the choice to not take the love and to let hate over take his life. Harry even asked him for remorse, he gave him a second chance, but Tom didn't take it. Hate can blind people to almost everything. A hard heart, which Tom had, is really hard to soften when it is that hard. When you look at the flashbacks, even as a child he had an evilness about him. I actually think that he was born that way. I've been told that babies can sense thing even in the womb, maybe he sensed the anger and everything from his mother and he carried that ever since? The point I was trying to make was that if Dumbledore had removed him from the Orphanage and placed him with a Neutral or Light family Tom might have changed. While it is true that not all Sociopaths and Megalomaniacs were abused, alot of them WERE and Society isn't exactly kind to those in poor or working class families, Minorities, AND Orphans unless those orphans made something of themselves. True Harry was abused just as much and turned out good, But he also had real friends that he spent time with and was from a GOOD Light family where as the Gaunts had fell from Grace, and were a laughing stock. Not to mention he was descended from Salazar Slytherin so very few people gave him a real chance. And I wasn't saying poor Tom he made his choices but to say he was born evil is not right either that is like saying Minorities are lazy bums when it isn't true or that those from the poor side of town brought there situations on themselves. I just believe genetics and environment go hand and hand and that people have different berserk buttons. |
|
sherza
Head Boy/Girl
Posts: 705
|
Post by sherza on Jun 27, 2012 19:30:44 GMT -5
The point I was trying to make was that if Dumbledore had removed him from the Orphanage and placed him with a Neutral or Light family Tom might have changed. While it is true that not all Sociopaths and Megalomaniacs were abused, alot of them WERE and Society isn't exactly kind to those in poor or working class families, Minorities, AND Orphans unless those orphans made something of themselves. True Harry was abused just as much and turned out good, But he also had real friends that he spent time with and was from a GOOD Light family where as the Gaunts had fell from Grace, and were a laughing stock. Not to mention he was descended from Salazar Slytherin so very few people gave him a real chance. And I wasn't saying poor Tom he made his choices but to say he was born evil is not right either that is like saying Minorities are lazy bums when it isn't true or that those from the poor side of town brought there situations on themselves. Ok, there is so much wrong with this. I'll start where you ended. Saying that Tom was born evil is the same as saying minorities bring it on themselves. No. No it's not. It is scientific FACT that some people are born with ... abnormalities ... of the brain that make it difficult to impossible for these people to perceive the world in a so-called 'normal' fashion. The MILDEST of these malfunctions result in things like Autism, and goes up in severity from there to things like schizophrenia, OCD, and psychopathy/sociopathy. It is quite possible that Tom was born with such a malfunction, in which case he would be literally incapable of relating to the world normally, no matter WHAT anyone did. Secondly. Your comment that Harry had friends etc. Yeah. Not an excuse. Tom could very easily have made friends when he started Hogwarts if he wanted to. There is evidence that he, at the very least, collected allies during his tenure there. Neither he nor anyone else had the *faintest* clue he was related to the Gaunts when he first started, either. Merope evidently never gave her last name to the people at the orphanage before she died. And no one had the faintest clue he was descended from Salazar when he started, either. And thirdly ... all I'm going to say is ... LIFE ISN'T FAIR. Becoming a mass murderer because you were bullied or poor or your mommy didn't give you enough kisses as a kid is ... yeah. You're not going to get my sympathy. At all. |
|
|
|
Post by jessieanneh2 on Jun 27, 2012 19:39:46 GMT -5
eh lets just agree to disagree ok I won't ask you to change your opinions and beliefs as long as you don't ask me to change mine ok
|
|
|
|
Post by kumainpink on Jun 27, 2012 19:42:26 GMT -5
I'm with Shezra on this matter. Voldie made his own bad decisions and thus made himself the way he was in the books. While not 100 percent his fault, most of it does lie with him.
|
|
|
|
Post by mountaingirl777 on Jun 27, 2012 19:45:08 GMT -5
The point I was trying to make was that if Dumbledore had removed him from the Orphanage and placed him with a Neutral or Light family Tom might have changed. While it is true that not all Sociopaths and Megalomaniacs were abused, alot of them WERE and Society isn't exactly kind to those in poor or working class families, Minorities, AND Orphans unless those orphans made something of themselves. True Harry was abused just as much and turned out good, But he also had real friends that he spent time with and was from a GOOD Light family where as the Gaunts had fell from Grace, and were a laughing stock. Not to mention he was descended from Salazar Slytherin so very few people gave him a real chance. And I wasn't saying poor Tom he made his choices but to say he was born evil is not right either that is like saying Minorities are lazy bums when it isn't true or that those from the poor side of town brought there situations on themselves. Ok, there is so much wrong with this. I'll start where you ended. Saying that Tom was born evil is the same as saying minorities bring it on themselves. No. No it's not. It is scientific FACT that some people are born with ... abnormalities ... of the brain that make it difficult to impossible for these people to perceive the world in a so-called 'normal' fashion. The MILDEST of these malfunctions result in things like Autism, and goes up in severity from there to things like schizophrenia, OCD, and psychopathy/sociopathy. It is quite possible that Tom was born with such a malfunction, in which case he would be literally incapable of relating to the world normally, no matter WHAT anyone did. Secondly. Your comment that Harry had friends etc. Yeah. Not an excuse. Tom could very easily have made friends when he started Hogwarts if he wanted to. There is evidence that he, at the very least, collected allies during his tenure there. Neither he nor anyone else had the *faintest* clue he was related to the Gaunts when he first started, either. Merope evidently never gave her last name to the people at the orphanage before she died. And no one had the faintest clue he was descended from Salazar when he started, either. And thirdly ... all I'm going to say is ... LIFE ISN'T FAIR. Becoming a mass murderer because you were bullied or poor or your mommy didn't give you enough kisses as a kid is ... yeah. You're not going to get my sympathy. At all. He could have even made friends in the orphanage, but he tortured them instead even when they didn't do anything to him (that we know of) |
|
|
|
Post by G. Novella on Jun 27, 2012 19:46:08 GMT -5
My dad's a Christian, and my mom's a hindu. None of us are highly religious, oh we have our phases, but both my parents are too liberal to be conservative in their religions.
My liberal I mean, we watched Juno for family movie night and those kind of movies, and no one flinches or anything (And this was when Juno came out, so when I was 12) They're pretty pro-anything and everything, nothing is condemned.
BUT my dad is crazy protective and sheltering of his 'little girls' so anything that has violence was deemed too inappropriate. It took him several years to chill out, so things like Harry Potter with wizards fighting (that's about all he understood of it) were a no. Star Wars, was a no.
Thankfully he's relaxed considerably since I entered high school, mostly because by that age I'd started sneaking in whatever I wanted to read, and started describing it back to him when I was done.
As for the whole nature vs nurture argument...
Put it this way.
Tom is a sociopath. There are no two words about it, BUT sociopaths don't necessarily choose homicide. That's the nurture appeal.
Tom could grow up in a world with a loving family, with lots of friends, and he'd still be a sociopath. He'd go from killing people with his wand, and hearing them scream as he crucio's them, to something else. Maybe bank embezzlements, drug dealing, fraud, or just plain old power search through becoming minister and alter the laws so people are tossed into jail for anything, or starting a war with France because that's what sociopaths do. Tom was a power-hungry sociopath who chose homicide as his path and branched into genocide.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kitty279 on Jun 28, 2012 2:09:17 GMT -5
Being against LotR for religious reasons is a bit funny when one knows that Tolkien was a devout Catholic  And the CoN are so strongly religiously influenced that a friend of mine once called them "prose catechism". Never really understood why HP was crucified as "leading children to occultism", myself. Just because I do like a story like that doesn't mean that I believe in occultism, worship the devil or whatever these fanatics insinuate. And then there was that priest who even supported HP until JKR let slip that she imagined Dumbledore as gay, which made the man say that now he can't let his children read the books because they'd be damaged forever Honestly, here we had a kindergarten where some parents years ago demanded that a certain book had to be removed. That was "Die kleine Hexe" (The little witch) by Otfried Preußler - no idea if it is known outside of Germany. Basically, it's about a nice little witch who was admonished by the older witches for not being a "good witch". She was given a year to improve and used her magic to help the non-magicals to prove she was good. Then the older witches said that was bad, under "good witch" they understood her using her magic to torture and hex people. That was when the little witch found a way to get rid of all the bad witches. That caused such an uproar - if *that* is damaging children, what about the fairy tales? Grimm? They are much worse, after all. IMO, this story even helps children to overcome their fears of bad witches caused by the fairy tales - which no one ever questioned. Luckily, in the end the sensible ones prevailed and the book is still read there. |
|
|
|
Post by bkaddictjk on Jun 30, 2012 11:47:22 GMT -5
Wow... I'm a Christian, but we're kind of loose... I mean, we don't like pray at every meal and like think that watching movies about witches and magic is a sin I know people that are like that, but what's the point? How are you against witchcraft... if it doesn't exist??? Just pointing that out Even if you "brew a potion" and "cast spells" it's still mixing random ingredients in a black bowl and waving a stick and saying weird words right? I thinking that the people that are against reading Harry Potter, Narnia, LotR, and a lot of others... are really being silly and about the Voldemort thingy... I'm mutual. He had something wrong with him mentally... but the experiences added onto that. I think the mental thing was the abnormal fear of death... we're all scared, but who on Earth wastes their life trying to become immortal? But I think his childhood made him emotionless - he never could confide in anyone, and the lone part, same reason; the only reason he liked power was because he didn't like being under power, right? I think that his... mental illness was there, and the neglect and abuse were fuel, they all drove him to what he became? Tell me if you find any flaws in my theory! I'm really curious; Voldemort is a really interesting (in a sick way) character! |
|
|
|
Post by AllyJackson on Jun 30, 2012 15:40:33 GMT -5
Not to mention, he'd obviously been told he had mental problems, or at least had guessed it. When Dumbledore arrives, Tom is already freaking out, telling him he's not mental, that he doesn't need to be taken away, that he's fine. That's not a happy kid.
|
|
|
|
Post by bkaddictjk on Jun 30, 2012 20:13:51 GMT -5
Oh! That's good!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by AllyJackson on Jun 30, 2012 20:19:30 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by physicssquid on Jun 30, 2012 20:24:32 GMT -5
Honestly, I just try and ignore all the religious connotations in the story. I'm not religious and the only times I've ever been to church were during funerals and when I was a Girl Guide.
The same with Narnia, which is full of religious references, like when Alson goes to the White Witch's camp and lets her and her followwers shave him and kill him, but then he comes back to life.
|
|
|
|
Post by AllyJackson on Jun 30, 2012 20:27:14 GMT -5
Yeah, I just read the story. Regardless of religion, it's a great series.
|
|
|
|
Post by chikina on Jul 5, 2012 8:55:43 GMT -5
O.O As an atheist from atheistic family (and country) I have absolutely no idea what are you talking about. Your parents actually forbade you read HP because of witchcraft? That's something...
|
|
sherza
Head Boy/Girl
Posts: 705
|
Post by sherza on Jul 5, 2012 13:35:53 GMT -5
O.O As an atheist from atheistic family (and country) I have absolutely no idea what are you talking about. Your parents actually forbade you read HP because of witchcraft? That's something... Unfortunately, chikina, some people are complete idiots. And by this I mean the folks that got all frothy at the mouth over HP and its perceived encouragement of witchcraft and worshipping the devil. *eyeroll* |
|
|
|
Post by Kaiserin on Jul 5, 2012 14:24:21 GMT -5
I do thing that parents should monitor the reading of their children, in part because often children will absorb anything and everything from the world around them including books and they should make sure that the lessons the child is learning are in line with your views.
Example
parent reads a chapter ahead and when child reads about harry being left on doorstep, tell child that is never right and people can get arrested for it.
Silly example but easy.
Its the parents that look for a way to just say well, these books are ok these are not. Go read that keep their kids from reading something in their age range.
|
|
|
|
Post by G. Novella on Jul 5, 2012 14:33:12 GMT -5
I find it strange when parents let kids read comics like Batman, Spiderman, etc and then complain that Green Lantern is gay. Especially since Green Lantern is DC, and their comics tend to be so much more mature. They have blood, a few scenes of torture in some extensive scenes and tons of darker themes, but the message that even gay people can be heroic is bad? It baffles me that people in this day and age can have an issue with one picture of two men kissing, but bigots exist and we can't do anything about it.
|
|
|
|
Post by physicssquid on Jul 5, 2012 14:59:22 GMT -5
Bigotry is wrong, but unfortunately exists, which is part of why there are so many problems in the world.
|
|
sherza
Head Boy/Girl
Posts: 705
|
Post by sherza on Jul 5, 2012 15:17:13 GMT -5
It really doesn't help that, depending on the writer, Batman in particular can come off as outright paedophilic with Robin. I mean, holy heck. And Joker makes it rather painfully obvious he wants Batman's ass. Literally and sexually.
|
|
|
|
Post by physicssquid on Jul 5, 2012 15:24:11 GMT -5
Another reason people might not want young children to read the Harry Potter books, is the fact that Voldemort seemed to have an unhealthy obsession with Harry.
Book 7, when the Order is moving Harry, Voldemort screams 'Mine' after Harry's wand somehow destroys Lucius' wand, that Voldemort borrowed.
|
|
|
|
Post by kumainpink on Jul 5, 2012 15:51:53 GMT -5
Oh man, don't get me started on the obsession Voldemort has for Harry. Now that I'm older and have reread the books, I've come to realize how disturbing it can be. Goblet of Fire's graveyard scene comes off as especially...awkward. It almost seems as if Voldie is "getting off" on touching Harry's forehead. I'm sorry, but there has to be something more going on. It's just too creepy. Then again, I usually assume the worst with the HP series as a whole.
|
|
|
|
Post by mountaingirl777 on Jul 5, 2012 17:28:28 GMT -5
O.O As an atheist from atheistic family (and country) I have absolutely no idea what are you talking about. Your parents actually forbade you read HP because of witchcraft? That's something... it is actually interesting. I couldn't read Chronicles of Narnia, Harry Potter nor Lord of the Rings ( I didn't even know about them until they started making them into movies); but, I could read and watch Snow White and the seven dwarves, Cinderella, Sleeping Beauty, 101 Dalmations, Mary Poppins, and Beauty and the Beast. I couldn't watch Pocahontas or Little Mermaid though for some odd reason. I can tell ya that I was very happy when I was allowed to have a TV in my room. I could shut the door and if my mom came to check on me I would flip the channel as quickly as I could. I watch a ton of stuff I wasn't supposed to. I watched Power Rangers, parts of HP, Poltregeist 3 and a bunch of other stuff. Some of it my parents found out about, but there is a lot they don't know about and I will probably take it to the grave. |
|
. It also went onto Chronicles of Narnia and LotR.
And the CoN are so strongly religiously influenced that a friend of mine once called them "prose catechism".
