Dumbledore trusted snape for many reasons, but the main reason was to use him as a spy. I personally still think snape is a good guy and was only forced to kill Dumbledore to 1 protect Harry 2 protect himself and draco(becuase of the unbreakable vow).
Gender: Male Location: With a bunch of Aqua-Bitches fool !
Yeah Jk would never put a controversial matter like racism in her book.. Voldermorts life goal isn't purifing the magical world of mudbloods and he's definitly not down with pure blood supremacy ..
Yeah that Voldemort guy is all abourt hugs and kisses isn't he? Question did you've ever actualy read a Harry Potter book?
ok read the following line really carefully...
SHE ALREADY PUT A CONTROVERSIAL SUBJECT MATTER LIKE RACISM IN HER BOOK GIVE ME ONE GOOD REASON WHY SHE WOULN'T PUT ANOTHER CONTROVERSIAL SUBJECT LIKE HOMOSEXUALTITY IN HER BOOKS???? AL WHAT YOU'VE GIVING ME TILL NOW IS SH*T OF THE HIGHEST ORDER ..
I'f it's so moronic why couldn't you give me a good reason why it's moronic?And how do you know it'll never happen or did you've already read book 7.. And for the record it's youre problem i'f you feel strongly against my idea i like a good debate myself unfortunatly you're not really good in that
I sooo agree on that it really has no relevance...So why are you fantasizing about two men kissing?
That was you riight... ( I'm serieusly pissing my pants right now you're a funny guy but i ain't mad at ya you can go fantasize about kissing men all you want it's the internet you're girlfriend isn't gonna know about it ...Do you even have a girlfriend.. )
Stick to the subject????ow no you didn't
You where the one who started about kissing men the thread wasn't even about that.. So why don't you listen to you're own advice..
I just said the word gay and you're fantasizing about two men having sex?? g*damn you s*ck really mature G reeaaalyy mature...
The greatest wizard of the world was gay so what? There are worst things in the world than being gay it's 2007 nobody's gonna give a godd*mn f*ck especialy not JK godd*mn she's rich and she does whatever the f*ck she wants not what some caveman from the midle of nowhere think about the desicions she makes in her books.. Last time i've checked England was a free country she can write whatever the f*ck she wants to and hey everything on this forum that's about the storyline of the 7th Harry Potter book is premature unles you where blessed with the first sample of the book... gues it's time for someone to take his head out of his own ass and take a look in the world nowadays instead of boring people by saying absolutly nothing
And i'f you don't like surprising storylines suspense and originaltity go read Winnie the Poe or a gay magazine..Because you like seing gay men kissing hey girlfriend
Sorry but when i'm reading a book like Harry Potter i like being got off guard i like surprises instead of constaly knowing what's gonna happen gues that would become really boring ..
Gender: Male Location: Barkdonald's Inc. OMFGPlulz: dunt
Masturbation is a form of sex. It's self-sex, but sex none the less.
And no, I'm not gay. But again, it's kind of pathetic that the best you can come up with is that, especially since you know nothing about me. Calling someone gay is the lamest comeback possible.
Gender: Male Location: With a bunch of Aqua-Bitches fool !
Ey look men i'f you wanna be gay you can be gay till the break a dawn dude i don't give f*ck you don't have to pretend you''re exposed What do you want me rather to call you than? malebootylovingamerican?
And no i don't know anything about you... and i don't think i want to either
That's a cleverly disguised form of racism. We both know that the definition of a Mudblood is someone with heritage of Muggle ancestry. The thing about it is, do you see racism as we know it in our world? No. Anything about whites vs blacks? None, zip and zilch. Nada. You can't exactly get in trouble for calling someone a Mudblood, but you can get in trouble for calling someone ******/chink/etc.
Her concern is; she doesn't want to see little Sally run off to school and call her teacher, who happens to be a black, a ****** just for the heck of it. She teaches the general concept, yet not encourage kids to go running around sowing anti-Black sentiments.
However, what you suggested is much more direct. There's no disguising homosexuality, it is what it is and it's stagnant. It's not exactly something that you can sugar up.
What kind of impact do you think having one of their greatest Magical heroes as a homosexual will have on very young readers?
What kind of trouble do you think she'll get into with Bloomsbury for pulling off that kind of stunt?
Think about it, if his death caused a huge uproar, finding out he's gay will be like a firestorm in midsummer.
Hahahahahahahahaha!!
You're accusing me of not providing the facts. Oh, that's a good one.
As far as I know, I have backed up my statements and claims and have provided reasonable arguments. You? You keep blustering on about how "It's 2007, let's all go and insert homosexuality in any type of media we can get our hands on"!
Rowling says: "Snape was loved."
And from that, somehow, you say: "OMFG It's Dumbledore!"
Oh, it's not up to you to decide which is the better debator in this argument. Nor is it up to me. It's up to the onlookers. And it looks like I've garnered more support than you have. How many supporters do you have? Oh yeah, none. Nil.
Okay, let's get some things straight.
You're for use of homosexuality, I'm strongly not.
Every time I've tried to dismiss the subject, you've brought it back for some odd reason. You know what? You're just blustering again. And I'm perfectly straight, thank you very much.
And yet you somehow get the idea that I, not you, enjoy watching men kissing. Your logic is absolutely nonexistant.
Oh, my, you're wetting yourself. Now, now.
Go clean it up, seriously. If you find any of this funny, then you're more idiotic than I thought.
How is this relevant? It isn't. You're drowning here and trying to throw out completely deranged insults just to annoy your opponents. And I am straight. Jesus Christ.
I don't find it annoying as much as I find it pathetic.
Once again, 0/5 for originality.
Oh yes, I did.
Seriously, what is the point of all these snide little sidesnips? To make you feel better? Well, whatever floats your boat.
I slipped it in there as an satirical example. Know your literary terms. If you actually think I meant that seriously then you need to read my posts more carefully.
There are worse things than being gay, yeah. Tell me something I don't know for once. And it still doesn't change anything. Homosexuality is still too inappropriate a subject to insert into something like Harry Potter. It doesn't matter if it's 2007 or 2003. If it's inappropriate for anyone in the intended age group, it shouldn't be there.
She writes whatever she wants?. No shit. However, it's the response to her writing that will make the most impact and that's what's on Bloomsbury and Rowling's mind. Just because it's a "free country" doesn't mean you don't get people pounding at your front door for making a poor decision. No excuse.
Get real. None of the trio, as far as we know, have lost their virginity and they're turning 17. No concept of sexuality yet. Not even close. Romance maybe. And if she hasn't done that, what the hell makes you think she'll throw a bombshell concept like homosexuality into the mix? Totally uncalled for.
You're saying that it'll be boring if gayness not in there?
Not long ago you were blustering that you were actually hoping that it wouldn't be on there.
Not long ago, you were also accusing me and Barker of being gay.
Try not to be such a hypocrite.
Your idea of "originality" and "suspense" is restricted to having homosexuality inserted into a book? Oh, please. You wouldn't know a good book if it hit you on the head at this rate. There are more and better methods of having those two elements in a Potter book without the inappropriate trash.
You seem to be pretty sure that it'll be in the seventh.
Gender: Male Location: With a bunch of Aqua-Bitches fool !
Don't start with the off topic crap because you're two men kissing comment was really inmature and off topic and gave me the logical impression you where gay ...
And yes this is supposed to be a debate so debate bring in facts instead of insults because i'm laughing my ass off because of you're very original insults gues now i know who took the last orginaltity pill..
But to be on topic you've still didn't gave me a good reason why homosexuality is impossible you've only came with insults and b*llsh*t and of course i'm gonna diss you what the hell did you expect
Damn look at the controversy iv'e created by making this thread i'f i was Jk i would of made money outta you DarkC.. and other fools who think gay people are pink demons from hell
Gender: Male Location: With a bunch of Aqua-Bitches fool !
Woow DarkC that's a whole lotta b*llsh*t you've written there I'ma gonna read that in the morning doh some of us still have social lives you know unlike some of us.. *cough* DarkC*cough*
Maybe i'll bother reading it tomorow when i have the time you made me laugh more than enough today
You didn't even read my own post. Next time read my post before responding. You're not justifying any of your gay accusation bullshit either.
Did I not say that I merely tossed that one in as a satirical example? Yes I did. It wasn't meant to be taken seriously, yet someone with a severe lack of common sense like you apparently just did. Next time you post something, read between the lines to make sure it makes sense first. And stop the meaningless insulting, tis' making you appear to be as mature as a twelve year old.
Hahahahaha, you tried calling me and Barker gay, completely out of context, and yet you're whining to me about me throwing out the insults? You know why I'm throwing em' right back in your face? Because I detest unruly people calling me a gay, that's why.
Again, hypocrisy reeks on you, badly. Go take a good shower.
No, you've got it wrong again, I'm not exactly putting time and effort into making up these little snob eddies to throw my opponent off. You're still throwing insults around like a child yet to go through puberty. If you want to be more respected, don't throw extreme wildcards like that.
Oh, please.
I know each and every one of your points, and you have not the brains to catch any of mine. How very immature and shortsighted. Read again between the lines if you want to grow in terms of intelligence, really.
Oh, that gives you leeway to call me gay, because you don't like me.
That's not how it works here, kid.
Controversy? What controversy? It hasn't actually been done yet and it's rather one sided right now, don't go thinking it's a controversy just yet. Try to be politically correct for once.
No, you're wrong yet again. I don't oppose gays by themselves, but I oppose the concept itself being put into a children's book. Please tell me you weren't so ignorant as to not see that.
God, the ignorance of some people these days; God, deliver us from evil. And by evil I mean stupidity.
I'm not gonna start anything like usually do this time.
No offense, but J.K. Rowling would never put that stuff in a children's book. It's not appropriate for kids our age. I mean, it's true we all know about it, but that doesn't mean it has to be everywhere you turn. We already know about people being gay. Why ruin such a good book by doing that?
I'm not trying to offended anyone.
I'm just saying that it wouldn't be something parents would let their kids read. Some parents don't even want their kids to read Harry Potter books because they think it talks about the devil, and how good he is blah blah blah.
So imagine if J.K. Rowling were to do that, imagine how many disappointed kids there would be.
P.S. I hope no one is offended by my opinion. I don't mean anything by it. Please don't take it as an insult. Thank you!
Exactly! Simply because we're embracing a newer, radical culture does not mean that gayness should be expressed in anything possible media-wise. Potter books are fine without it.
Gender: Female Location: every which way but loose
As if homosexuality needs to prove a point, right? Anyone who suggests it should be represented everywhere possible is basically implying that it's not yet socially accepted. Which is rude.
perhaps you ppl should open a separate thread on homosexuality in Harry Potter novels, cause like this you are going completelly out of topic, and you might get some ppl distrurbed. Especially those who are attracted by the title, they come here and see something completely diferent.
Gender: Female Location: every which way but loose
Ok, but the title is already suggestive of a discussion regarding homosexuality and Dumbledore/Snape, which this thread is filled with. Why open another thread?