proof about negative views on Harry Potter

[irishpatrick]

But there is still a correct answer, and we should strive for the answer.

**==> Perhaps there is one correct ansser, but we have no way to know which is correct. The Church has not ruled on the matter, the Bible does not use the words “Harry Potter,” and every person must make their own choices based on many different data points. Some people will place HP and the BIble together and they will see potential harm, while others will see HP as a work of fiction that supports the faith far more than it detracts. Since there is no formal statement from the Church, there is no way to 100% no either way.

The truth is, life is literally filled with gray areas, and HP is one of those. When we face such situations, we must lean upon a well formed conscience to make the best choice. Some will choose to read HP, others will not because they feel it is a potential danger. Both people are trying to make informed choices–or at least one would hope they are.

**

:

 

[Baelor]

Perhaps there is one correct ansser, but we have no way to know which is correct.

That is not true.

Since there is no formal statement from the Church, there is no way to 100% no either way.

That is misleading. The Church teaches what is true, it does not proscribe the truth, so we can certainly arrive at the correct decision anyway. Furthermore, the Church would not make an infallible judgment on the matter anyway, which seems to be the only thing that would satisfy your 100% knowledge.

The truth is, life is literally filled with gray areas, and HP is one of those. When we face such situations, we must lean upon a well formed conscience to make the best choice. Some will choose to read HP, others will not because they feel it is a potential danger. Both people are trying to make informed choices–or at least one would hope they are.

I certainly hope so. And there may be some for whom HP is dangerous. But remember that the issue has a binary nature: either it is or it is not. Something is either dangerous for a given individual, or not – there is a correct answer for each individual.

 

[irishpatrick]

That is not true.

That is misleading. The Church teaches what is true, it does not proscribe the truth, so we can certainly arrive at the correct decision anyway. Furthermore, the Church would not make an infallible judgment on the matter anyway, which seems to be the only thing that would satisfy your 100% knowledge.

I certainly hope so. And there may be some for whom HP is dangerous. But remember that the issue has a binary nature: either it is or it is not. Something is either dangerous for a given individual, or not – there is a correct answer for each individual.

I disagree. Something that is potentially dangerous can be at least somewhat lessened with the proper knowledge and by using that knowledge in a productive manner.

For instance, drinking is not a sin, but intentionally getting drunk is in most cases. Alchoholism can happen to many people if they abuse alchohol, yet with proper knowledge, they might actually avoid those pitfalls.

God did create us to be static robots.

 

[Baelor]

I disagree. Something that is potentially dangerous can be at least somewhat lessened with the proper knowledge and by using that knowledge in a productive manner.

I agree.

For instance, drinking is not a sin, but intentionally getting drunk is in most cases. Alchoholism can happen to many people if they abuse alchohol, yet with proper knowledge, they might actually avoid those pitfalls.

Exactly. Yet drinking is, for a given person at a given time, either a near occasion or not a near occasion. There is a correct answer, and there need be, because placing yourself in the near occasion of sin is morally problematic, in line with Church teaching.

 

[irishpatrick]

I agree.

Exactly. Yet drinking is, for a given person at a given time, either a near occasion or not a near occasion. There is a correct answer, and there need be, because placing yourself in the near occasion of sin is morally problematic, in line with Church teaching.

Which is why I make the argument that these gray issues fall into the category of personal opinion. An HP supporter cannot prove that HP is 100% safe, and a person opposed to HP cannot 100% prove that it is dangerous. That means each person must form their own opinion on the matter.

 

[Baelor]

An HP supporter cannot prove that HP is 100% safe, and a person opposed to HP cannot 100% prove that it is dangerous. That means each person must form their own opinion on the matter.

You are missing my point. The point is that an individual’s own judgment on HP for themselves may still be incorrect or badly-argued.

 

[irishpatrick]

You are missing my point. The point is that an individual’s own judgment on HP for themselves may still be incorrect or badly-argued.

That is impossible for you or I to know. I cannot read minds, and I am fairly sure you cannot either. Plus, you cannot miss the fact that your argument goes the other way too–people who support HP might be wrong to do so.

 

[Baelor]

That is impossible for you or I to know. I cannot read minds, and I am fairly sure you cannot either.

Good guess. But you agree, then, that it is not in fact a matter of opinion, but of fact – whether this fact is knowable by us or not.

Plus, you cannot miss the fact that your argument goes the other way too–people who support HP might be wrong to do so.

Nor have I.

For the record, no one I have ever met has given me any reason whatsoever to believe that HP would be spiritually harmful to them.

 

[irishpatrick]

Good guess. But you agree, then, that it is not in fact a matter of opinion, but of fact – whether this fact is knowable by us or not.

**==> Nope. I am saying that it is not knowable, so we must “guess,” as I just did about you not being able to read minds. **

For the record, no one I have ever met has given me any reason whatsoever to believe that HP would be spiritually harmful to them.

==> Well, we have not met, but…

 

[Baelor]

==> Nope. I am saying that it is not knowable, so we must “guess,” as I just did about you not being able to read minds.

I think it is knowable, and we should all strive to know as much as we can about morality. The Church calls us to avoid near occasions of sin and other dangerous territory. It is imperative that we determine what that is, and the Church would not call us to avoid temptation, etc. if She did not believe we could know what that was.

Well, we have not met, but…

You have given me no reason to believe that HP may be spiritually dangerous for you.

 

[irishpatrick]

I think it is knowable, and we should all strive to know as much as we can about morality. The Church calls us to avoid near occasions of sin and other dangerous territory. It is imperative that we determine what that is, and the Church would not call us to avoid temptation, etc. if She did not believe we could know what that was.

==> Okay, so here is an area of disagreement. I do not believe it is knowable. We can only do our very best with the data and knowledge we hold. The Church will not making a statement (at least not a formal binding one) about a work of fiction. The reason, I believe, that it will not make such a statement is because the work is fiction–it does not claim to be reality.

You have given me no reason to believe that HP may be spiritually dangerous for you.

**==> Nor will I because that is not my purpose here. **

 

[Baelor]

Okay, so here is an area of disagreement. I do not believe it is knowable. We can only do our very best with the data and knowledge we hold. The Church will not making a statement (at least not a formal binding one) about a work of fiction. The reason, I believe, that it will not make such a statement is because the work is fiction–it does not claim to be reality.

I am very worried that I am not being clear, because what I am saying seems not to be registering with you. Let me try a different approach. Nothing I have ever said is dependent on the Church making a statement about Harry Potter.

True or false: For a given person at a given point in time, HP is or is not problematic to read.

Nor will I because that is not my purpose here.

Then why mention what you did earlier? My statement very obviously still stands.

 

[irishpatrick]

I am very worried that I am not being clear, because what I am saying seems not to be registering with you. Let me try a different approach. Nothing I have ever said is dependent on the Church making a statement about Harry Potter.

True or false: For a given person at a given point in time, HP is or is not problematic to read.
**

==> True (if you change “a given person” to “any person.” **

Then why mention what you did earlier? My statement very obviously still stands.

**==> I was being lighthearted…my mistake. **

 

[Angela_Tate]

Topic on the table is PROOF about negative views on Harry Potter. If you have proof, present it. If not, move on to another discussion thread.

 

[Baelor]

Topic on the table is PROOF about negative views on Harry Potter. If you have proof, present it. If not, move on to another discussion thread.

Irishpatrick, do you have any proof whatsoever for the negative views on Harry Potter?

 

[irishpatrick]

Irishpatrick, do you have any proof whatsoever for the negative views on Harry Potter?

I have what I feel are very good reasons. Plus, I do not believe that there are “proofs” for either side. I think they very topic of searching for proofs is non-answerable because proofs do not exist for either side…imo. I believe the very challenge to provide proofs is a false construct for this given topic.

Since the moderator has essentially told me to move on, I will do exactly that.

Thanks for the chat.

 

[rocklobster]

You see, all of you are doing nothing but dodging the question. And some of you are slandering JK Rowling. This is just sad. You won’t accept her into your fold because she’s not writing fluffy stuff about Amish farmers and such. In other words, if she were writing boring fluff populated with Mary Sues, you’d love her for it.

 

[LoyalViews]

As someone who was until recently a teenager I disagree. I read the Harry Potters, I grew up with them. I am the same age as the main actors (give or take a year). I understood them as not-real throughout my teenage years.

Very well. I am wrong.

I only thought this because my cousin is a fan, and she’s very obsessed with matters of the occult, she constantly expresses that magic is real, that there are two types of magic good and evil, etc…this started because she started to read Harry Potter, but like I said, she very wrongly mistook it’s message, thinking it was expressing that there is good magic and what not. What I was trying to express is that Harry Potter is nowhere near the problem, it’s just the occasional reader who takes it out of proportion.
Please forgive me, I nevver meant to offend you or anything

Before we continue on, might I remind people that ONE person --Loyal Views–linked to a WEB SITE article. It was the WEB SITE ARTICLE which apparently contained some slanderous views. . .and Loyal Views acknowledged being ‘half-asleep’ when posting and also only linked because of being curious about what a self-professed witch might have to say.

NOBODY HERE on the thread so far has said ANYTHING derogatory or slanderous about Ms. Rowling or her works. At all. And the one person who posted a link to the WEB SITE which did apparently say such things did not support what was said personally OR say anything derogatory on this thread. about Ms Rowling.

And that’s the reason that I at least, and probably others, have been puzzled at the charges of ‘defamation’ and ‘slander’. . .because there has been nothing said on this thread of that nature, except through a ‘link’ which people don’t even have to look at!

I didn’t link to that page my friend, that was someone else! Though, I did admit to being half-asleep…in another post

 

[nickybr38]

I think I’d be more concerned about children reading pro-homosexual relationship stories then Harry Potter.

I have no proof to perpetrate the negative view on Harry Potter. I have read all the books and all I saw in those books was fantasy, fiction, and some moral ideas that were both good and questionable.

I didn’t care for the blatant disrespect for authority that the main characters had BUT don’t most teenagers hate authority?

There are novels out there that should be more worrisome to parents, Harry Potter is like small fries compared to some literature that’s available to children (don’t EVER let your kids read fanfiction. EVER).

I do wonder why people spend so much time attacking a fictional story when there are far more dangerous things out there that we should be attacking. Like the promotion of pre-marital sex on TV, the promotion of relativist world views in pretty much every medium out there (print, television, radio even), the blatant disrepect and hatred for religion that is growing more and more in our youth…

Harry Potter is the least of our worries.

 

[LemonAndLime]

Very well. I am wrong.

I only thought this because my cousin is a fan, and she’s very obsessed with matters of the occult, she constantly expresses that magic is real, that there are two types of magic good and evil, etc…this started because she started to read Harry Potter, but like I said, she very wrongly mistook it’s message, thinking it was expressing that there is good magic and what not. What I was trying to express is that Harry Potter is nowhere near the problem, it’s just the occasional reader who takes it out of proportion.
Please forgive me, I nevver meant to offend you or anything

I didn’t link to that page my friend, that was someone else! Though, I did admit to being half-asleep…in another post

That’s ok. How old is your cousin?