NationStates Jolt Archive

I've had a lot of debates with a lot of people about Harry Potter, and often the outcome was terrible, ending friendships, burning down small villages, and giving a disgrace to the other person's family. So, what do you guys think about Harry Potter?

Harry Potter would make a great PM.

Oh goodness.

I have a strong dislike for Harry Potter.:gundge:

I do however like you name :)

Why thank you!

I don't like Harry Potter. I haven't read the books because I'm no longer a preteen. I have watched one of the movies in it's entirity. It kind of sucked. The only redeeming trait the Harry Potter franchise has is that it turns kids away from Jesus and introduces them to Satanism (according to some Chrisitians). That's always a plus.

When it comes to Harry Potter, Catholics can be some real pricks. It's just for fun! Kinda like how everyone said that the DaVinci Code was a sin to Catholicism, AFTER DAN BROWN SAID IN FRONT OF A COURT THAT THE BOOK WAS OBVIOUSLY FICTIONAL!!!

Meh, Harry Potter, over-hyped. I read a lot, but never touched one of those books, anything that popular has to be absolute crap.

Harry Potter would make a great PM.

Post Moderator?

Post Moderator?
Prime Minister, but that too :)

Meh, Harry Potter, over-hyped. I read a lot, but never touched one of those books, anything that popular has to be absolute crap.

Rebel, much? This is the only thing that I went with the crowd, and I still love it. I am a rebel, I don't even eat ice cream because everyone else does it, but books are different. I was in first grade when I started reading it, so the first three were already out...

Oddly enough, my mother who has said... actually SAID that Dungeons and Dragons is satanic was the one who recommended the Harry Potter novels to me.

The first one was an easy read. Obviously. It's aimed at eleven year olds.

But it was still a very satisfying story. Left a lot of room for the imagination to play. More interestingly, each book since has 'grown up' along with the characters, becoming incrementally more advanced and aimed at older and older readers. I think that's probably the most impressive part of the novels considering that J.K. Rowling never wrote anything before.

The movies are decent, but with each movie, it gets harder and harder to pack longer and longer books into a decent length film.

I loved the books and i haven't been a teen (let alone pre-teen) for some time

Rebel, much? This is the only thing that I went with the crowd, and I still love it. I am a rebel, I don't even eat ice cream because everyone else does it, but books are different. I was in first grade when I started reading it, so the first three were already out...

Rebellion has nothing to do with it. People just have no taste.

Oddly enough, my mother who has said... actually SAID that Dungeons and Dragons is satanic was the one who recommended the Harry Potter novels to me.

The first one was an easy read. Obviously. It's aimed at eleven year olds.

But it was still a very satisfying story. Left a lot of room for the imagination to play. More interestingly, each book since has 'grown up' along with the characters, becoming incrementally more advanced and aimed at older and older readers. I think that's probably the most impressive part of the novels considering that J.K. Rowling never wrote anything before.

The movies are decent, but with each movie, it gets harder and harder to pack longer and longer books into a decent length film.

My thoughts exactly...if I weren't lazy I would have read close to the same thing.

I think the first one sucked because they had to introduce all the characters...

All the books besides that one are perfect.

The movies are great except for the third one. I think when JK wrote the sixth book she slipped something in there, when Snape caught Harry in his muggle clothes on school grounds, and they had those throughout almost the whole movie, and I think that made her a little angry.

Rebellion has nothing to do with it. People just have no taste.

On the contrary, they taste like pork.

Um...perhaps I've said too much....

*bolts*

Rebellion has nothing to do with it. People just have no taste.

OK, so you basically have the same opinions with books that I do with music. If everyone else is listening to it, it must royally suck? That's what happened with Green Day, I hat Green Day because EVERYONE listens to it, I only like the song Basketcase because not everyone else on Earth have listened to it.

I thought it was chicken

although it really does depemnd on what sort of sauce you use

On the contrary, they taste like pork.

Um...perhaps I've said too much....

*bolts*

Seriously? *takes bit out of own arm, swallows* Oh my god! They do!!!

although it really does depemnd on what sort of sauce you use

Oh seasoning is everything! The right spices can really change the flavors.

Oh seasoning is everything! The right spices can really change the flavors.

Is A1 any good? *dripping steak sauce on thigh, mouth full of the dark meat*

Hmm... how do humans taste? With our taste buds, of course!
Oh, and Soylent Green is people!
As for the original topic of debate... well, I consider Harry Potter to be the Star Wars of the book world. It's not the greatest piece of literature in the world (and, fittingly, Harry Potter romances are just as predictable as Star Wars romances, albeit with slightly better dialogue), but the books leave lots of room for imagination and are (mindless) fun to read.

That said, the Harry Potter movies have consistently sucked. *sigh*

http://forums.relicnews.com/images/smiley/snipersmilie.gifhttp://glass.andromeda.qc.ca/smilies/harrypotter.gif:sniper:

The movies are great except for the third one. I think when JK wrote the sixth book she slipped something in there, when Snape caught Harry in his muggle clothes on school grounds, and they had those throughout almost the whole movie, and I think that made her a little angry.

John Kennedy wrote Harry Potter???:confused:

Of was it Johny Kalker? :eek:

Anyways, I reckon the books are a good read. It won't win the Nobel Prize for Literature, but it is fun to read.

I thought the movies weren't that good, but that it probably the result of the old "the book was better" syndrome.

And Il Ruffino: NO, he would not make a good PM. Look at the Netherlands, for crying out loud!!! He IS PM there and see where it got them....

Meh. The books (that I read) were ok... aimed obviously at a particular level of reading, nowhere near as morally or intellectually complex as some of my favourite novels. I only ever watched one of the movies because movies suck in general, and this one was no exception. Worse, however, was the number of people for months afterwards who continued to comment, "Has anyone ever told you that you look a lot like Harry Potter?", simply because I also happen to have rather messy black hair and glasses. *sigh*

This was especially obvious around the time between the releasing of the first and second movies, when treating my renewed outbreaks of acne left large scars across my forehead. I still wear headbands to this day, although said scars are long gone now.

I read better fantisy in 5th grade then Harry potter

I enjoyed the books. I enjoyed some of the films (particularly the third one - very nice cinematography and directing, even if the actor's performances were lackluster). I'll be reading the final book when it comes out.

Overall: Harry Potter is cool. I've read better. I've read worse.

I read better fantisy in 5th grade then Harry potter
True. There is plenty of much better stuff out there; for instance, Lloyd Alexander's Chronicles of Prydain were some of my favourites in fifth grade.

I still think they are wonderful books.

The books are very average. Enjoyable, yes, but nothing amazing. The characters can be rather flat sometimes, and the world isn't well developed in the novels. Though what irks me the most is that the story so far is very black and white, good and evil, with almost no grey areas.

The movies are all between not good and okay.

The books are very average. Enjoyable, yes, but nothing amazing. The characters can be rather flat sometimes, and the world isn't well developed in the novels. Though what irks me the most is that the story so far is very black and white, good and evil, with almost no grey areas.

The movies are all between not good and okay.

Now that's the poll option I wanted!

Meh, Harry Potter, over-hyped. I read a lot, but never touched one of those books, anything that popular has to be absolute crap.

Soooo.

The Bible is popular............
Pizza is popular..........
Sex is popular.........

Soooo.

The Bible is popular............
Pizza is popular..........
Sex is popular.........
But thoes have good qualities besides its popularity

Soooo.

The Bible is popular............
Pizza is popular..........
Sex is popular.........


The bible is horridly written.
Pizza hut/Dominos have horrible pizza.
I'm gay. Thus straight sex is popular, but I never saw the appeal.

Soooo.

The Bible is popular............
Pizza is popular..........
Sex is popular.........
The Bible is a load of bullcrap.
Pizza is crap.
Sex, when not done properly, can be crap as well.

Next?

I'm gay. Thus straight sex is popular, but I never saw the appeal.
I've never seen the appeal of either kind. Then again, I guess it's because I'm more into "other" things...

I have only seen the movies, and the only one worth watching mor than once is the goblet of fire, even though im told by many that only half the book made it to the movie.....

my girl is a huge fan of the films, so i have to watch them more than necessary at times, but hey i make her sit through my horror films so i guess it evens out.


id personally rather watch the lord of the rings.

I read the books and enjoyed them. I saw only one of the movies, Chamber of Secrets, and I hated it.

I read the books and enjoyed them. I saw only one of the movies, Chamber of Secrets, and I hated it.


first was definitely the worst though, i heard the 2nd book was as boring as the movie.

The Bible is a load of bullcrap.
Pizza is crap.
Sex, when not done properly, can be crap as well.

Next?

The POINT is unless you try something how can you say it´s crap just because it´s popular?

That smacks of narrow mindedness

The Bible is a load of bullcrap.
Pizza is crap.
Sex, when not done properly, can be crap as well.

Next?

You have never had real pizza, have you? If you are only used to the shit they serve at Pizza Hut, fair enough. But a real, handmade, proper pizza, is delightful...

You have never had real pizza, have you? If you are only used to the shit they serve at Pizza Hut, fair enough. But a real, handmade, proper pizza, is delightful...
Agreed. I was once at an Italian restaurant like that, and ... *descriptive gesture of ecstasy* ... it was almost worth the £25 I had to pay for it. :(

I liked the books. Somewhat overhyped, but like that changes anything.

Agreed. I was once at an Italian restaurant like that, and ... *descriptive gesture of ecstasy* ... it was almost worth the £25 I had to pay for it. :(

I would almost invite you to come to Milan, to enjoy my Sunny Huge Terrace looking out over...uhm... a hotel, and enjoy my (Italian) flatmate's skill of making pizzas in our own wood oven that we have on that lovely sunny terrace.

I would really, really, ALMOST invite you.

But I wont, sorry. :D

I'm gay. Thus straight sex is popular, but I never saw the appeal.
That's funny... I consider myself straight, but I can see the appeal of gay sex. Well, maybe that's just me.

I would almost invite you to come to Milan, to enjoy my Sunny Huge Terrace looking out over...uhm... a hotel, and enjoy my (Italian) flatmate's skill of making pizzas in our own wood oven that we have on that lovely sunny terrace.

I would really, really, ALMOST invite you.

But I wont, sorry. :D
Awww.... now you've made me hungry again! And I just ate dinner! :(

first was definitely the worst though, i heard the 2nd book was as boring as the movie.

The fifth book is the worst. It's like trudging up a steep mountain, where you'll occasionally get rest stops in the form of interesting scenes but then it's back to trudging.

You have never had real pizza, have you? If you are only used to the shit they serve at Pizza Hut, fair enough. But a real, handmade, proper pizza, is delightful...
No, I even dislike "real" pizza. Don't mind me, I also don't like chocolate... I'm just a weirdo that way. That's why I got kicked out of Canada. :p

The fifth book is the worst. It's like trudging up a steep mountain, where you'll occasionally get rest stops in the form of interesting scenes but then it's back to trudging.
Which one was the fifth again?

No, I even dislike "real" pizza. Don't mind me, I also don't like chocolate... I'm just a weirdo that way. That's why I got kicked out of Canada. :p



OK, if you dont like chocolate, then you MUST be a total freak. I will not try to convert you to the pizzaphiliac side.

Or listen to your opinions about books, for that matter...
:D

That's funny... I consider myself straight, but I can see the appeal of gay sex. Well, maybe that's just me.


Awww.... now you've made me hungry again! And I just ate dinner! :(


Well it's just that I don't find women attractive. Though I must say the wild abandon with which some of the porn star women act is certainly alluring. Though that's got nothin to do with their gender.

Or listen to your opinions about books, for that matter...
:D
That's unfair. I can take being called a freak, but tecnically freaks are the most bookish and educated of the populace.... I think,

Well, no, that's nerds, but I'm one of those too...

Harry Potter is cool. I've read the books to my kids, they've read them to me. We see the movies on the day they open and get the books the day they're released. We have all the books-the US versions as well as the ones released in the UK. We have all the movies on DVD.
My kids love the stories and we look foward to the next books and movies to be released. Its another thing we all do together.

That's unfair. I can take being called a freak, but tecnically freaks are the most bookish and educated of the populace.... I think,


Well, you are a anti-chocolatist... And by that, you lose all your rights to be listened too... Seriously: there is nothing wrong with chocolate, you chocolate-hater!

We have all the books-the US versions as well as the ones released in the UK.
I have always wondered what the difference is!!! Plz tell me! For some of the books, I have the adult edition, but it is not as if that includes any hardcore sex or anything. So, what is going on with all these different versions???

Well, you are a anti-chocolatist... And by that, you lose all your rights to be listened too... Seriously: there is nothing wrong with chocolate, you chocolate-hater!


I have always wondered what the difference is!!! Plz tell me! For some of the books, I have the adult edition, but it is not as if that includes any hardcore sex or anything. So, what is going on with all these different versions???


I have family in the UK that sends my son the British versions as a novelty- The cover art is different as is some of the wording/terminology.

For instance-the "Sorcerer's Stone" is called the "Philospher's Stone" in the British version. Lots of stuff like that.

In my opinion, not worth buying more than one version, but my son likes to have them and has read all those versions as well.

No, I even dislike "real" pizza. Don't mind me, I also don't like chocolate... I'm just a weirdo that way. That's why I got kicked out of Canada. :p


Which one was the fifth again?

Heh, I don't like pizza either. Something about the pizza sauce...

Fifth book is Order of the Phoenix. Harry gets put on trial, frog-lady Umbridge...

For instance-the "Sorcerer's Stone" is called the "Philospher's Stone" in the British version. Lots of stuff like that.


You say it like 'Sorcerer's Stone' is the more proper version. :p

I always wondered why they changed it to 'Sorcerer's'...

You say it like 'Sorcerer's Stone' is the more proper version. :p

I always wondered why they changed it to 'Sorcerer's'...


hihi, I agree. I had never even heard of "the Sorcerer's Stone"-version...

Why do they do that? Are there no philosophers in the US?

I really haven't been motivated to read the books because I've been ignoring the hype while simultaneously waiting for it to die down. I really refuse to read anything that people get so worked up about -- it gives one expectations, and that usually leads to disappointment or disgust.

Those books can't POSSIBLY be as wonderful as children claim they are.

No, I even dislike "real" pizza. Don't mind me, I also don't like chocolate... I'm just a weirdo that way. That's why I got kicked out of Canada. :p


Which one was the fifth again?
Really? Have you had Pizza from NYC or northern New Jersey? Because those are the only places to go to get real pizza.

Harry actually reminds me of a lot of whiney teenagers on this forum - except he actually gets the girl in the end.

Ron is a total plank with no emotional or intellectual depth whatosever.

Hermione just cries all the time.

Most of the other characters are fairly 2-dimensional, Snape is the only one that really seems capable of moving beyond this mould.

I think HP is fun to read and has a good plot not overly-challenging or taxing and makes a nice break from "On Libery" or anything else that I'm forced to study. Rowling makes the best of what talent she has - it's a fun read but it's not Shakespeare by any stretch.

I think a lot of people are losing track of one crucial fact. JK Rowling's Harry Potter novels have reintroduced kids to the joys of reading. Just for that alone, I tip my hat to her.

When I want to read a great novelist, I read someone on the order of a Leon Uris, Jerzy Kosinski, Sandra Cisneros or Emily Bronte'.

When I want to be entertained, I read J.K. Rowling. She is quite gifted and lucky. Her novels have given her the chance to help avert (maybe not intentionally) the painful spiral into illiteracy of kids. In today's PS2 world, putting a book of 500+ pages into kids hands and having them VOLUNTARILY take the time to read is a gift to our society.

For the record, I was also one of those guys that initially refused to read her work. I thought it would be too kiddie-oriented for me. But to my surprise, her work reads on different levels and quite well.

The depth of her characters is not apparent, and each one seems to fit into some comfortable niche. But the complexity and depth is there if you look for it.

Oh, and incidentally, "Good vs Evil" stories have dominated fiction for a long time...and there are plenty of shades of grey in her works, Severus Snape is just the PRIMARY example of a character with a lot of colors. He is unpleasant, and might not be all good, but he is not all bad either.

I'm glad the books are there, they are good solid reads...and it means another generation (maybe two) of kids will enjoy reading.

I think a lot of people are losing track of one crucial fact. JK Rowling's Harry Potter novels have reintroduced kids to the joys of reading. Just for that alone, I tip my hat to her.

When I want to read a great novelist, I read someone on the order of a Leon Uris, Jerzy Kosinski, Sandra Cisneros or Emily Bronte'.

When I want to be entertained, I read J.K. Rowling. She is quite gifted and lucky. Her novels have given her the chance to help avert (maybe not intentionally) the painful spiral into illiteracy of kids. In today's PS2 world, putting a book of 500+ pages into kids hands and having them VOLUNTARILY take the time to read is a gift to our society.

For the record, I was also one of those guys that initially refused to read her work. I thought it would be too kiddie-oriented for me. But to my surprise, her work reads on different levels and quite well.

The depth of her characters is not apparent, and each one seems to fit into some comfortable niche. But the complexity and depth is there if you look for it.

Oh, and incidentally, "Good vs Evil" stories have dominated fiction for a long time...and there are plenty of shades of grey in her works, Severus Snape is just the PRIMARY example of a character with a lot of colors. He is unpleasant, and might not be all good, but he is not all bad either.

I'm glad the books are there, they are good solid reads...and it means another generation (maybe two) of kids will enjoy reading.

While I agree that getting children involved in reading is ALWAYS a good thing the op asked what WE thought of Harry Potter


I did such … I did not find them particularly inspired or original compared to other fantasy/SCI-FI authors.

They are not bad just not really deserving of the hype they have gotten…

But at least it is getting the young people involved (same with LOTR)

Harry actually reminds me of a lot of whiney teenagers on this forum - except he actually gets the girl in the end.

Ron is a total plank with no emotional or intellectual depth whatosever.

Hermione just cries all the time.

Most of the other characters are fairly 2-dimensional, Snape is the only one that really seems capable of moving beyond this mould.

I think HP is fun to read and has a good plot not overly-challenging or taxing and makes a nice break from "On Libery" or anything else that I'm forced to study. Rowling makes the best of what talent she has - it's a fun read but it's not Shakespeare by any stretch.
I agree … I just feel no empathy for the characters (it is worse in the movies)

I mean they are entertaining but it gets rather annoying having the main characters in the book be more hapless lucky people then skillfully or determined ACTORS in changing the future

While I agree that getting children involved in reading is ALWAYS a good thing the op asked what WE thought of Harry Potter


I did such … I did not find them particularly inspired or original compared to other fantasy/SCI-FI authors.

They are not bad just not really deserving of the hype they have gotten…

But at least it is getting the young people involved (same with LOTR)

I never said I classed her with Isaac Asimov, Robert Heinlein, Ray Bradbury, Andre Norton or any other Grand Master of Science Fiction or Fantasy, I simply said I found her books entertaining, and more complex than most folks give her credit for.

When your initial intended audience are concrete rather than abstract thinkers, the abstract thinkers will always find reason to not be as attracted to the works.

As far as the hype goes? More power to her. I don't begrudge her one farthing of the money she has made, nor the attention she has gotten. If you think about it, she has given folks in the UK something to brag about. She is the most popular novelist to come from the UK since Tolkien and her name and works are instantly recognizable. She has left her contemporaries in the dust.

She must be doing something right.

Heh, I don't like pizza either. Something about the pizza sauce...

Fifth book is Order of the Phoenix. Harry gets put on trial, frog-lady Umbridge...
I don't even remember it. :confused: Then again, nor do I remember anything very much from the 6th, 3rd, 4th, 1st, or 2nd books, but at least I know their titles... except for #6, I've forgotten that one too.
Really? Have you had Pizza from NYC or northern New Jersey? Because those are the only places to go to get real pizza.From NYC, once, when I happened to be visiting. It was awful.

I once had a tolerable one in Rome, but I still don't think I'd go back.

Most of the other characters are fairly 2-dimensional, Snape is the only one that really seems capable of moving beyond this mould.Oh, that explains why he's my favourite character in the series then. :p

First, I find those of you that hate it because it's popular or because you're being elitist when it comes to books to be idiotic at best.

Second: they're hardly fantastic, classic works of literature. As someone said before: they're the Star Wars of the book world. They are enjoyable, and I like 'em. They do paint a somewhat realistic picture of a school of magic--or at least how I'd imagine it anyway--so you gotta give them points for that.

And maybe it's just me, but I like long books...the longer the better, typically...

As for the movies: first two were great, mainly because they stuck to the books so well. I've never seen a movie adaptation of a book that managed that and we need it to happen much more often.

After that...after that...I can't even rem*--ahem, I mean, the third and fourth movies were total shit. Fluer was rather pretty though.

*Cookie to whoever gets that reference.

First, there is nothing wrong with reading fantasy or myth, if there is something to be learned from that story. The Lord of the Rings and the Chronicles of Narnia along with Classical mythology and Norse mythology are excellent fantasy and mythological readings.

However, Harry Potter does not fall under this category. The presence of magic is the ultimate problem with it. Unlike in the Lord of the Rings of the Chronicles of Narnia where magic represents the power of God, the angels, the demons, etc, or the magic of mythology where the magic of the deities are used for the betterment of good or evil Harry Potter and his friends use magic for their own devices. That is a sin expressly condemned in the Bible. The fact that the heroes of the story do this ought to be enough to dissuade one from reading the books.

Moreover, J. K. Rowling (is that the author's name?) has resarched occult practices for Harry and his friends to use. I would find no problem with that research if the bad-guys were to use that magic, but the good-guys use it. Another strike agianst the book. Not only fictional magic is being used improperly in the books, but so is real witchcraft, and it is being glorified.

Finally, the books glorify the works of man, which any Christian should know is not only a dnagerous road, but a heretical if not blasphemous one. They take God, so far as I know, out of the picture and promote the abilities of the puny children of dust. Which by the way is why I don't like Disney's movie of the Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe.

So, I have not read the Harry Potter books, and I do not plan to do so.

First, there is nothing wrong with reading fantasy or myth, if there is something to be learned from that story. The Lord of the Rings and the Chronicles of Narnia along with Classical mythology and Norse mythology are excellent fantasy and mythological readings.

However, Harry Potter does not fall under this category. The presence of magic is the ultimate problem with it. Unlike in the Lord of the Rings of the Chronicles of Narnia where magic represents the power of God, the angels, the demons, etc, or the magic of mythology where the magic of the deities are used for the betterment of good or evil Harry Potter and his friends use magic for their own devices. That is a sin expressly condemned in the Bible. The fact that the heroes of the story do this ought to be enough to dissuade one from reading the books.

Moreover, J. K. Rowling (is that the author's name?) has resarched occult practices for Harry and his friends to use. I would find no problem with that research if the bad-guys were to use that magic, but the good-guys use it. Another strike agianst the book. Not only fictional magic is being used improperly in the books, but so is real witchcraft, and it is being glorified.

Finally, the books glorify the works of man, which any Christian should know is not only a dnagerous road, but a heretical if not blasphemous one. They take God, so far as I know, out of the picture and promote the abilities of the puny children of dust. Which by the way is why I don't like Disney's movie of the Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe.

So, I have not read the Harry Potter books, and I do not plan to do so.


Wah wah wah. It is not the MAGIC that is being glorified. It is CONFIDENCE, TEAMWORK, TRUST -- you know, things we WANT to see in children!!

As far as your problem with the magic, that's a whole 'nother can of worms. I really don't wanna derail this thread on that one.

What the heck is your problem with Disney's take on Narnia? Aslan, the Christ figure, leads the children (the chosen ones) to overcome the supposed goddess-culture/pagan "evil" (the White Witch). What's so "eebil" about that?

Wow! people actually voted the first one. Lol, that was a joke I put up, they could have just said they didn't like it, I underestemated people. They are very truthful.

Wow! people actually voted the first one. Lol, that was a joke I put up, they could have just said they didn't like it, I underestemated people. They are very truthful.


Or very ignorant.

First, there is nothing wrong with reading fantasy or myth, if there is something to be learned from that story. The Lord of the Rings and the Chronicles of Narnia along with Classical mythology and Norse mythology are excellent fantasy and mythological readings.

However, Harry Potter does not fall under this category. The presence of magic is the ultimate problem with it. Unlike in the Lord of the Rings of the Chronicles of Narnia where magic represents the power of God, the angels, the demons, etc, or the magic of mythology where the magic of the deities are used for the betterment of good or evil Harry Potter and his friends use magic for their own devices. That is a sin expressly condemned in the Bible. The fact that the heroes of the story do this ought to be enough to dissuade one from reading the books.

Moreover, J. K. Rowling (is that the author's name?) has resarched occult practices for Harry and his friends to use. I would find no problem with that research if the bad-guys were to use that magic, but the good-guys use it. Another strike agianst the book. Not only fictional magic is being used improperly in the books, but so is real witchcraft, and it is being glorified.

Finally, the books glorify the works of man, which any Christian should know is not only a dnagerous road, but a heretical if not blasphemous one. They take God, so far as I know, out of the picture and promote the abilities of the puny children of dust. Which by the way is why I don't like Disney's movie of the Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe.

So, I have not read the Harry Potter books, and I do not plan to do so.

Oh I see! You must have known Lewis and Tolkien personally! Why didn't I guess? Ah, yes, and life is nat one's own device? Why not? You do not HAVE to live! Otherwise, you would never die! You would never have to die...and unicorns would fly over California, and I would give a shit what you say!!! Woudln't that be nice? And for whatever reason, what you say is gospel, oh yes, you're quoting the Bible, the Ancient book.

Oh I see! You must have known Lewis and Tolkien personally! Why didn't I guess? Ah, yes, and life is nat one's own device? Why not? You do not HAVE to live! Otherwise, you would never die! You would never have to die...and unicorns would fly over California, and I would give a shit what you say!!! Woudln't that be nice? And for whatever reason, what you say is gospel, oh yes, you're quoting the Bible, the Ancient book.


*hugs Monkeyperson* Someone agrees with me!! Thank you!!

Or very ignorant.

Or ignorantly truthful. Or truthful of beign ignorant. Or vice versa.

Hmm...LOTR one's popular, too. I think it's kind of dry.

Wah wah wah. It is not the MAGIC that is being glorified. It is CONFIDENCE, TEAMWORK, TRUST -- you know, things we WANT to see in children!!

As far as your problem with the magic, that's a whole 'nother can of worms. I really don't wanna derail this thread on that one.

What the heck is your problem with Disney's take on Narnia? Aslan, the Christ figure, leads the children (the chosen ones) to overcome the supposed goddess-culture/pagan "evil" (the White Witch). What's so "eebil" about that?

Aslan helped the children in the movie. The book? Aslan used the children.
Also, everything that happened because of Aslan's coming in the book (Father Christmas coming, the spell of winter weakening, etc.) was said to be because of the childen coming in the movie. Changes the imortance of Aslan, or Jesus if you want to unmask the sybolism.

Oh I see! You must have known Lewis and Tolkien personally! Why didn't I guess? Ah, yes, and life is nat one's own device? Why not? You do not HAVE to live! Otherwise, you would never die! You would never have to die...and unicorns would fly over California, and I would give a shit what you say!!! Woudln't that be nice? And for whatever reason, what you say is gospel, oh yes, you're quoting the Bible, the Ancient book.

Read the letters Tolkein and Lewis wrote and you will not be able to deny the place Christianity had in the purpose of their works.

As for the rest, could you try to ba a little more coherent for me please. You lost me with the unicorns.

Aslan helped the children in the movie. The book? Aslan used the children.
Also, everything that happened because of Aslan's coming in the book (Father Christmas coming, the spell of winter weakening, etc.) was said to be because of the childen coming in the movie. Changes the imortance of Aslan, or Jesus if you want to unmask the sybolism.

So you're saying "Jesus" used the "chosen ones" in the book, and that made it better? Are you American or something? Seriously, you have to be retarded, are you related to a George W. Bush?

First, there is nothing wrong with reading fantasy or myth, if there is something to be learned from that story. The Lord of the Rings and the Chronicles of Narnia along with Classical mythology and Norse mythology are excellent fantasy and mythological readings.

However, Harry Potter does not fall under this category. The presence of magic is the ultimate problem with it. Unlike in the Lord of the Rings of the Chronicles of Narnia where magic represents the power of God, the angels, the demons, etc, or the magic of mythology where the magic of the deities are used for the betterment of good or evil Harry Potter and his friends use magic for their own devices. That is a sin expressly condemned in the Bible. The fact that the heroes of the story do this ought to be enough to dissuade one from reading the books.

Moreover, J. K. Rowling (is that the author's name?) has resarched occult practices for Harry and his friends to use. I would find no problem with that research if the bad-guys were to use that magic, but the good-guys use it. Another strike agianst the book. Not only fictional magic is being used improperly in the books, but so is real witchcraft, and it is being glorified.

Finally, the books glorify the works of man, which any Christian should know is not only a dnagerous road, but a heretical if not blasphemous one. They take God, so far as I know, out of the picture and promote the abilities of the puny children of dust. Which by the way is why I don't like Disney's movie of the Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe.

So, I have not read the Harry Potter books, and I do not plan to do so.
UH OH THEY'RE WITCHES AND MAGIC QUICK LET'S BURN THEM!

Do you forget the pagan origins of Christianity? Do you also forget that pagans were considered okay till they wouldn't convert no matter what the Church did so they wrote into the Bible that they were bad? Did you forget that the Jesus story itself was based on pagan myths, taken almost word for word in some parts?

...oh wait, no one would have ever taught you that...

UH OH THEY'RE WITCHES AND MAGIC QUICK LET'S BURN THEM!

Do you forget the pagan origins of Christianity? Do you also forget that pagans were considered okay till they wouldn't convert no matter what the Church did so they wrote into the Bible that they were bad? Did you forget that the Jesus story itself was based on pagan myths, taken almost word for word in some parts?

...oh wait, no one would have ever taught you that...

I'm gonna take a wild stab, and just, say you're pagan?

Aslan helped the children in the movie. The book? Aslan used the children.
Also, everything that happened because of Aslan's coming in the book (Father Christmas coming, the spell of winter weakening, etc.) was said to be because of the childen coming in the movie. Changes the imortance of Aslan, or Jesus if you want to unmask the sybolism.

The children could not defeat the Witch until Aslan was ressurrected. Also, without humans, there would be no point in the existence of a Christ figure. Aslan needed the child to betray him in order for his life to be sacrificed. Kind of like Jesus needed Judas. One could say that Aslan's divine influence is what led the children to Narnia to begin with. There are so many ways to argue about this.

So you're saying "Jesus" used the "chosen ones" in the book, and that made it better? Are you American or something? Seriously, you have to be retarded, are you related to a George W. Bush?
And you can quit harping on Americans. Americans are no different from anyone else. We are people. We have faults and we have decent qualities to be admired. Britain is no better than America, so I'd suggest you stop spouting off your ignorant babble and educate yourself.

(On a side note, how old are you? Not trying to discriminate or anything. I'm just curious.)

I'm gonna take a wild stab, and just, say you're pagan?
Ooooh...so close...and yet so far.

I'm an athiest, actually. It's my sister that's the pagan. Oh, and my girlfriend.

I'm gonna take a wild stab, and just, say you're pagan?


*poke* Hey, nothin wrong with being pagan. Of course, that poster did seem a little...vicious, dare I say?

The "pagan origins" referred to are quite likely Mithraism, which is a very old tale that is nearly identical to the New Testament, (and prophesies in the OT) but it pre-dates the Bible by centuries.

And you can quit harping on Americans. Americans are no different from anyone else. We are people. We have faults and we have decent qualities to be admired. Britain is no better than America, so I'd suggest you stop spouting off your ignorant babble and educate yourself.

(On a side note, how old are you? Not trying to discriminate or anything. I'm just curious.)

Monkeydude just felt like taking a stab at Bush. Relax. I'm American too, lol. However, internationally, Americans are percieved as rude, dumb, and lazy by a good portion of the world.

And you can quit harping on Americans. Americans are no different from anyone else. We are people. We have faults and we have decent qualities to be admired. Britain is no better than America, so I'd suggest you stop spouting off your ignorant babble and educate yourself.

(On a side note, how old are you? Not trying to discriminate or anything. I'm just curious.)

i have every right to take a stab at Americans. I am American. I am most certainly not Un-American, I just have to take some time out to laugh at stupidity--er Americans.

(13, I know you said you're not discriminating, but I think just for asking, that youare agist. and yes, i'm sure it's a word, i made it up just yesterday)

*poke* Hey, nothin wrong with being pagan. Of course, that poster did seem a little...vicious, dare I say?

The "pagan origins" referred to are quite likely Mithraism, which is a very old tale that is nearly identical to the New Testament, (and prophesies in the OT) but it pre-dates the Bible by centuries.
Yes, Mithraism. I couldn't remember the word. Thank you.

And I'm a wee bit vicious towards Christians especially because I've experienced so much more of Christianity than any other religion. Therefore, I can target it both with more anger and more accuracy.

Monkeydude just felt like taking a stab at Bush. Relax. I'm American too, and I'm coming from a COMPLETELY different direction than you are,lol. However, internationally, Americans are percieved as rude, dumb, and lazy by a good portion of the world.

In fact, I percieve most Americans as rude, dumb, and lazy, even though i am 2/3. (that's not the dumb one for those of you who are counting.)

Yes, Mithraism. I couldn't remember the word. Thank you.

And I'm a wee bit vicious towards Christians especially because I've experienced so much more of Christianity than any other religion. Therefore, I can target it both with more anger and more accuracy.

I can relate. However, I'm less vicious toward Christians in general than toward IDIOTS in general. However, when the two coincide, it's scary.

And I'm a wee bit vicious towards Christians especially because I've experienced so much more of Christianity than any other religion. Therefore, I can target it both with more anger and more accuracy.

I know how you feel, although I have not converted to any other religion yet, and I am not sure if i should.

So you're saying "Jesus" used the "chosen ones" in the book, and that made it better? Are you American or something? Seriously, you have to be retarded, are you related to a George W. Bush?

Can you please try to have an intelligent discussion? Or must you insult me because I disagree with you?

I can relate. However, I'm less vicious toward Christians in general than toward IDIOTS in general. However, when the two coincide, it's scary.

That's basically my town in a nutshell. A big ugly stupid nutshell. With only one stoplight. And only one gas station. And a school syestem that has to pull from three towns just to get 1000 students total.

The children could not defeat the Witch until Aslan was ressurrected. Also, without humans, there would be no point in the existence of a Christ figure. Aslan needed the child to betray him in order for his life to be sacrificed. Kind of like Jesus needed Judas. One could say that Aslan's divine influence is what led the children to Narnia to begin with. There are so many ways to argue about this.

Aslan did not need the children. He could have used other children, or he could have left Narnia to itself. But he chose to save it and he chose those who he would use to betray him and who would fight the witch, etc.

i have every right to take a stab at Americans. I am American. I am most certainly not Un-American, I just have to take some time out to laugh at stupidity--er Americans.

(13, I know you said you're not discriminating, but I think just for asking, that youare agist. and yes, i'm sure it's a word, i made it up just yesterday)
...you're American? I could have sworn you were English...

As a thirteen year old, you still have not fully developed abstract thought and clarity. That is not agism. That is scientific fact. I was thirteen once--only about six years ago, mind you--so I do know.

What makes you hate Americans so much anyway?

Angry Fruit Salad: Aye. I don't hate Christians in general though. I know quite a few Christians at work. They're rocksomeawesome. I just don't like fundies, mainly, and others who try to force their beliefs down my throat in more subtle, less forceful ways.

Can you please try to have an intelligent discussion? Or must you insult me because I disagree with you?

I could probably try. And I'm insulting you because I can't feel my toes, it has nothing to do with you personally, or you're beliefs, it's just I'm fasting, and I need to do something to get it off my mind. Typing and insults always work.

What makes you hate Americans so much anyway?


i just think they're rude, lazy, dumb, and disgusting.

I could probably try. And I'm insulting you because I can't feel my toes, it has nothing to do with you personally, or you're beliefs, it's just I'm fasting, and I need to do something to get it off my mind. Typing and insults always work.

That's slightly odd, I'm not gonna lie. :confused:

i just think they're rude, lazy, dumb, and disgusting.
And this opinion is formed based on what? The people in your town? You do know that a small town like that is not exactly a proper portrayel of a country of ~300 million, correct?

Aslan did not need the children. He could have used other children, or he could have left Narnia to itself. But he chose to save it and he chose those who he would use to betray him and who would fight the witch, etc.


He set himself up to appear to need them. Oi. I really cannot see it from your point of view.

*poke* Hey, nothin wrong with being pagan. Of course, that poster did seem a little...vicious, dare I say?

I wasn't saying there was anything wrong with it! i was once considering it. I decided not to, because I didn't believe it. Right now, I think I'm athiest, but I just don't know.

And this opinion is formed based on what? The people in your town? You do know that a small town like that is not exactly a proper portrayel of a country of ~300 million, correct?


International BUSINESSES even see Americans as rude, dumb, and lazy. It's a general opinion. Of course, even I see a large number of rude and ignorant Americans -- many of them are trolling messageboards! lol

And this opinion is formed based on what? The people in your town? You do know that a small town like that is not exactly a proper portrayel of a country of ~300 million, correct?

No, I'm not basing it on that. I'm basing it one the other side of the big glass wall. From the point of view of Europe. I agree with +trillions of people who should know.

I wasn't saying there was anything wrong with it! i was once considering it. I decided not to, because I didn't believe it. Right now, I think I'm athiest, but I just don't know.


I wasn't taking you seriously, dude. *poke*

He set himself up to appear to need them. Oi. I really cannot see it from your point of view.

Reformed Christian/Calvinist here. Everything revolves around God. God didn't need to do anything for us, but He did anyway, sometimes through humans, other times not.

Does that help, or no?

That's slightly odd, I'm not gonna lie. :confused:

it's just that i'm trying to fast, and it's really cold in the room I'm in, so, once more, i can't feel my toes, and today, i wish i just would have worn socks and sneakers...

International BUSINESSES even see Americans as rude, dumb, and lazy. It's a general opinion. Of course, even I see a large number of rude and ignorant Americans -- many of them are trolling messageboards! lol
A general opinion does not a fact make. General opinion a century or two ago was that blacks were an inferior species to whites and would be eliminated via misunderstood Darwinism. Did that make it a fact? No.

I won't disagree that there are idiotic Americans. Thing is, the same is true of any other nation. On the whole, there really aren't THAT many more extremists or idiots in the U.S than in any country, relatively speaking, of course.

it's just that i'm trying to fast, and it's really cold in the room I'm in, so, once more, i can't feel my toes, and today, i wish i just would have worn socks and sneakers...

Okay, it's not so odd now. :)

I wasn't taking you seriously, dude. *poke*

*squirms* Stop poking me!

A general opinion does not a fact make. General opinion a century or two ago was that blacks were an inferior species to whites and would be eliminated via misunderstood Darwinism. Did that make it a fact? No.

I won't disagree that there are idiotic Americans. Thing is, the same is true of any other nation. On the whole, there really aren't THAT many more extremists or idiots in the U.S than in any country, relatively speaking, of course.

Opinion is seldom based on fact anyway. I think he was just trying to say that Americans often have a tendency to come off as assholes.

Reformed Christian/Calvinist here. Everything revolves around God. God didn't need to do anything for us, but He did anyway, sometimes through humans, other times not.

Does that help, or no?

I don't think anyone else here is Christian. And, stupid 13 year old talking here, what's a calvinist?

Reformed Christian/Calvinist here. Everything revolves around God. God didn't need to do anything for us, but He did anyway, sometimes through humans, other times not.

Does that help, or no?


THAT'S why I can't see it from your point of view. My personal worldview so strongly contradicts with where you're coming from that I absolutely cannot warp my perception enough to not feel like you have your head up your ass.
I don't say that to be offensive, but try seeing both the Narnia movie and the Harry Potter series from the point of view of a person who was actually raised neo-pagan. Does it feel extremely uncomfortable to you?

I don't think anyone else here is Christian. And, stupid 13 year old talking here, what's a calvinist?

Basically, we follow a ... whatever that thing where each letter stands for some other word or phrase. Our word is TULIP.

T - total depravity = Man is totally evil, not utterly, but totally
U - unconditional election = God decides who is saved and who isn't
L - limited atonement = Jesus' sacrifice was only for the elect
I - irresitable grace = those whom God chooses cannot refuse Him
P - perseverence/ preservation of the saints = a Christian cannot lose salvation

A lot of persons accuse us of taking free will out of the picture, but we don't. It's much too complicated to get into in depth with nonChristians. If you don't believe in the infallibilty of Scripture, you either are unable to understand it, or you begin to view God as demonic.

THAT'S why I can't see it from your point of view. My personal worldview so strongly contradicts with where you're coming from that I absolutely cannot warp my perception enough to not feel like you have your head up your ass.
I don't say that to be offensive, but try seeing both the Narnia movie and the Harry Potter series from the point of view of a person who was actually raised neo-pagan. Does it feel extremely uncomfortable to you?

No, it doesn't really feel like anything, but that's because I haven't been exposed to any type of Paganism. So I can't really try to see something from a point of view I know little if anything about. I am sure it would be uncomfortable, though I don't know about extremely.

Basically, we follow a ... whatever that thing where each letter stands for some other word or phrase. Our word is TULIP.

T - total depravity = Man is totally evil, not utterly, but totally
U - unconditional election = God decides who is saved and who isn't
L - limited atonement = Jesus' sacrifice was only for the elect
I - irresitable grace = those whom God chooses cannot refuse Him
P - perseverence/ preservation of the saints = a Christian cannot lose salvation

A lot of persons accuse us of taking free will out of the picture, but we don't. It's much too complicated to get into in depth with nonChristians. If you don't believe in the infallibilty of Scripture, you either are unable to understand it, or you begin to view God as demonic.
...so, essentially, you're stubborn fundies who are so caught up in their religion that--oh, nevermind, you won't listen to a word I have to say with those beliefs. No wonder Fass despises Calvinists so much...

...so, essentially, you're stubborn fundies who are so caught up in their religion that--oh, nevermind, you won't listen to a word I have to say with those beliefs. No wonder Fass despises Calvinists so much...

Go ahead. I'll listen and correct you. :p

No, it doesn't really feel like anything, but that's because I haven't been exposed to any type of Paganism. So I can't really try to see something from a point of view I know little if anything about. I am sure it would be uncomfortable, though I don't know about extremely.


I could argue on the basis of Mithraism that you HAVE been exposed to paganism in a sense, but I won't go there. I have been exposed to Calvinism, but rather negatively. Apparently your sect has just as many assholes as any other sect of any other religion. (Not that I expected ANY group to be asshole-free..)

Anyway, my view may be skewed or "tainted" because of my bad experiences.

I could argue on the basis of Mithraism that you HAVE been exposed to paganism in a sense, but I won't go there. I have been exposed to Calvinism, but rather negatively. Apparently your sect has just as many assholes as any other sect of any other religion. (Not that I expected ANY group to be asshole-free..)

Anyway, my view may be skewed or "tainted" because of my bad experiences.

As you said, that's how it is with everything: one of the reasons I am Calvinist.

As you said, that's how it is with everything: one of the reasons I am Calvinist.


Can you run that by me again?

Well, so long to you guys, and I'll see you tommorrow!

I'm more of a Lord of the Rings kind of guy. Besides, Gandalf would so kick Dumbledork's butt in a fight :D

Can you run that by me again?

Because I see the influence of sin everywhere, it is easier for me to believe that sin pervades all aspects of life, a doctrine of Calvinism.

Because I see the influence of sin everywhere, it is easier for me to believe that sin pervades all aspects of life, a doctrine of Calvinism.


The whole point of view thing. Gotcha.

It's extremely overrated if you ask me. It's so clichéd and the author doesn't think its ideas through (don't the magic people constitute a "race", one that could easily be called superior due to clearly greater ability?). As a children's book, it might be ok, but that's about all it's good for. As for the accusations of Satanism, I have one suggestion to Christian fundamentalists: Get a life!

To the Calvinist guy: I really couldn't care less about your doctrine. If God has already decided to send me to hell, all the better. I have no interest in spending eternity with someone who treats people like dolls and throws people in hell for things they had no control over.

It's extremely overrated if you ask me. It's so clichéd and the author doesn't think its ideas through (don't the magic people constitute a "race", one that could easily be called superior due to clearly greater ability?). As a children's book, it might be ok, but that's about all it's good for. As for the accusations of Satanism, I have one suggestion to Christian fundamentalists: Get a life!

To the Calvinist guy: I really couldn't care less about your doctrine. If God has already decided to send me to hell, all the better. I have no interest in spending eternity with someone who treats people like dolls and throws people in hell for things they had no control over.

That is perhaps why of all of the "Christian" and "pseudo-Christian" faiths, I find Calvinism to be morally and ethically objectionable. I find it morally objectionable that someone may criticize a book simply because of the patina of magic is placed over the story. What makes it worse is that the person is unwilling to read the books anyway. Choosing to remain ignorant instead of attempting to understand something is really something God would have you do, right?
----------

As far as the "muggles" thing in the books, it is very clear that there is conflict among wizards on the subject. You will note the evil, objectionable wizards all tend to be prejudiced against both muggles and "mudbloods." All calling for the superiority of "pure" wizarding lines. Tom Riddle or Lord Voldemort is much like Hitler in the regard that he is very much a "mudblood" (Hitler was a quarter Jewish) yet encourages his followers that the pure wizarding lines, or as I think of them "The Aryan Wizards", are superior.

What you see as simplistic, I see as a well-considered approach to the subject of racial prejudice.

I am sorry you don't like the books, but I would have hoped that you and others who argue that the books are simplistic would have taken better care in your arguments. Simply saying that the books are not your cup of tea and moving on would be better than to present an argument that is decidedly flawed.

The ending of the 6th book, kinda reminded me of the ending of the first Spider Man movie. SPOILER ALERT!!!! I AM ABOUT TO POST A SPOILER, SO BE WARNED, THOSE OF YOU WHO HAVEN'T READ THE 6TH BOOK!! HERE IT COMES: what with Dumbledore's funeral reminiding me of "Uncle Ben's" grave, and Ginny reminding me of Mary-Jane Watson. The 7th book is obviously going to take place outside the school for once, and according to J.K., it will be the longest book yet.
So far, the books haven't let me down, and I'd say 5th was the best. Although, Harry's life is really messed up. In the beginning, it was fun for him, but ever since the end of the 4th book, his life went downhill. :(
As for Harry and religion, I obviously think they're a bit stuffy. Same thing with the Da Vinci Code.

That is perhaps why of all of the "Christian" and "pseudo-Christian" faiths, I find Calvinism to be morally and ethically objectionable. I find it morally objectionable that someone may criticize a book simply because of the patina of magic is placed over the story. What makes it worse is that the person is unwilling to read the books anyway. Choosing to remain ignorant instead of attempting to understand something is really something God would have you do, right?


Perhaps he is under the impression that his God would find it sinful for him to read the books.

As far as the "muggles" thing in the books, it is very clear that there is conflict among wizards on the subject. You will note the evil, objectionable wizards all tend to be prejudiced against both muggles and "mudbloods." All calling for the superiority of "pure" wizarding lines. Tom Riddle or Lord Voldemort is much like Hitler in the regard that he is very much a "mudblood" (Hitler was a quarter Jewish) yet encourages his followers that the pure wizarding lines, or as I think of them "The Aryan Wizards", are superior.

Maybe, but I never understood how that worked. If it was intended to be a parallel with real life, it should be remembered that the "Aryans" didn't possess magic powers lacked by the Jews or others, making the analogy somewhat flawed.

I'm more of a Lord of the Rings kind of guy. Besides, Gandalf would so kick Dumbledork's butt in a fight :D
Couldn't have anything to do with the fact that Dumbledorf is a corpse, could it? :p

And agreed. LOTR > HP.

first was definitely the worst though, i heard the 2nd book was as boring as the movie.

I actually played the "Which mythology is that one from?" game with each piece of the scene setting.

It is an old fashioned morality play. When you get to book 6 you see conflicts between promises and commitments thuis you have multiple shades of morality but his is lost on most people.:headbang:

To the Calvinist guy: I really couldn't care less about your doctrine. If God has already decided to send me to hell, all the better. I have no interest in spending eternity with someone who treats people like dolls and throws people in hell for things they had no control over.

Well, I'm sorry you feel that way. But I look at this way. God will only give you what you want. You may not want Hell, but you don't want fellowship (this may not be the word I want) with God. So you'll take the other option. Unless you repent. But that's between you and God. I can plant and water, but God gives the increase.

That is perhaps why of all of the "Christian" and "pseudo-Christian" faiths, I find Calvinism to be morally and ethically objectionable. I find it morally objectionable that someone may criticize a book simply because of the patina of magic is placed over the story. What makes it worse is that the person is unwilling to read the books anyway. Choosing to remain ignorant instead of attempting to understand something is really something God would have you do, right?

Hmm... Again I'm sorry you feel that way. I find it objectionable that a little dust bunny (that would be you and me and everyone else) think that s/he can influence the designs and plans of an omnipotent, sovereign God.

And if you knew that you would be edified little if at all by a book and that you may even be tempted to fall apostate (for a time: no one can lose salvation), why would you read the book? God does not want you to flirt with temptation.

I am extremely attracted to fantasy and myth. Why should I place myself in that temptation?

Perhaps he is under the impression that his God would find it sinful for him to read the books.

See my last post.

Maybe, but I never understood how that worked. If it was intended to be a parallel with real life, it should be remembered that the "Aryans" didn't possess magic powers lacked by the Jews or others, making the analogy somewhat flawed.

No, the analogy is NOT flawed. People who are prejudiced choose a quality or LACK of a quality that allows them to justify (in their minds) their prejudice. In this case, muggles not being able to use magic allows the followers of Voldemort to justify their unreasoning hatred of non-magic users and assigning muggles as inferior feeds these folk's insecurity

White supremacists hate blacks and other races because they are NOT white.

Some heterosexuals hate homosexuals because they aren't attracted to the opposite sex.

Hitler, Goebbels and that whole crowd hated Jews, Homosexuals and Communists and in their convoluted, tortured way labeled them as "sub-human."

This is PRECISELY the same principle that Rowling is using in her books. The "Wizarding Bloodline Purists" consider non-magic using folk (Muggles) to be inferior or "sub-human."

Hmm... Again I'm sorry you feel that way. I find it objectionable that a little dust bunny (that would be you and me and everyone else) think that s/he can influence the designs and plans of an omnipotent, sovereign God.

And if you knew that you would be edified little if at all by a book and that you may even be tempted to fall apostate (for a time: no one can lose salvation), why would you read the book? God does not want you to flirt with temptation.

I am extremely attracted to fantasy and myth. Why should I place myself in that temptation?

I do not pretend my life will influence deity. But I do not submit to the idea that God failed to provide me with free will and the ability to reason, stand erect, and otherwise function independently of his will. It is the nature of man to err, to be tempted, to fall from the divine. It is in the act of realizing your humanity and trying to do better for yourself and others in which a person may find salvation.

God does not want mindless drones as worshippers. We are allowed to make mistakes, to question.

If the God you follow demands complete perfection, then the founder of your faith was deluded and lead astray.

Any religion that calls books, learning and the ability to exercise critical thinking sinful is already apostate, flawed and without merit.

International BUSINESSES even see Americans as rude, dumb, and lazy. It's a general opinion. Of course, even I see a large number of rude and ignorant Americans -- many of them are trolling messageboards! lol

on the international buisness thing, I heard form my parents about an american/japenese buissness deal. the japanese representative gave the american his card. the american put it in his back pocket and sat down. In japan this is seen as really rude, because the card has the persons name on it, and if you put it in your back pocket and sit down, you are effectively sitting on the card, and the person's name ie- you don't care about the person. From this story and others I don't think americans mean to be rude, but many are just ignorant of how to act in a foriegn country. another example was an american stepping on a thai coin in Thailand-the coins have the king of thailand's face on it- so he was stepping on the king's face in thai people's minds.

Anyway I am 15, pagan and I like Harry Potter and pizza