![[info]](https://www.insanejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
I'm all for euthanasia, and in my country euthanasia is legal in certain cases (but bound by strict regulations as it should be) but I refuse to call Dumbledore's cowardly cop-out euthanasia.
Yes, I called it cowardly.
To truly choose for euthasia in case of a lethal affliction which would end in a truly painful or dehumanising death is okay with me. It takes courage to choose your own fate, after all.
If Dumbledore had openly asked Poppy and Snape for a 'kind death' if things would be unbearable I would be fine with it.
If Dumbledore and Snape had made a pact together that, when compromised, Snape would've killed Dumbledore as a strategic act to go deeper undercover, I would view it as an militairy act; unpleasant but necessary.
In both these cases Snape's 'soul' (if such a thing exists) would not be damaged. A gentle death on request can be an act of mercy or of love and an act of war in which one sacrifices himself so the other might further the cause can also be viewed as an act of love and sacrifice, not evil.
Dumbledore, however, does none of these things. Dumbledore asks Snape, who is unwilling and begs him to reconsider, to kill him so as to spare him possible humiliation and torture at the hands of Bellatrix and Fenrir. Nobody is to know, therefore Snape would be branded a murderer. He would be an outcast and a criminal in the eyes of his peers.
In short; Dumbledore asks Snape to perform a gruesome (for him) task, one Snape does not want to perform, one for which he will be vilified and spit upon and possibly killed for, for no other reason than to spare Dumbledore a bit of pain and a bit of humiliation at the hands of his enemies. Not for strategic gain, not for 'the greater good' but pure out of selfish reasons. Snape does not want to but Dumbledore bullies him into it.
So Snape is branded a murderer and Dumbles gets the over the top state funeral as the great hero of the age.
Dumbles is a SELFISH COWARD.
As for what this does to Snape's 'soul'; I don't believe in 'souls' as seperate entities from our physical bodies, but if one translates 'soul' into psyche, I would say that this damages Snape very much. Snape is already a deeply clinically depressed man (and every time it looks as if he might get better, Dumbledore is sure to kick him down into guiltridden depression again; won't do to have a psychiologically healthy Slytherin spy after all, he might not be that easily manipulated into sacrificing his own life) and killing Dumbledore dunks him deep into selfloathing again.
Even if the whole Order would've known in front that Snape had been ordered to kill Dumbles on his command, it would've damaged Snape to actually do it. Come on, the man has suffered for twenty years that somebody he cared about died when he, unadvertantly, told Voldemort about some vague prophesy. The guilt has eaten him alive, the flames of which were regularly fanned by Dumbledore (for the 'greater good' of course) and this man is asked to perform a 'mercy killing' or even a 'strategic killing'?
Bad move, Dumbles. Bad move.
But then, Dumbles isn't too careful with his toys.
Yes, I called it cowardly.
To truly choose for euthasia in case of a lethal affliction which would end in a truly painful or dehumanising death is okay with me. It takes courage to choose your own fate, after all.
If Dumbledore had openly asked Poppy and Snape for a 'kind death' if things would be unbearable I would be fine with it.
If Dumbledore and Snape had made a pact together that, when compromised, Snape would've killed Dumbledore as a strategic act to go deeper undercover, I would view it as an militairy act; unpleasant but necessary.
In both these cases Snape's 'soul' (if such a thing exists) would not be damaged. A gentle death on request can be an act of mercy or of love and an act of war in which one sacrifices himself so the other might further the cause can also be viewed as an act of love and sacrifice, not evil.
Dumbledore, however, does none of these things. Dumbledore asks Snape, who is unwilling and begs him to reconsider, to kill him so as to spare him possible humiliation and torture at the hands of Bellatrix and Fenrir. Nobody is to know, therefore Snape would be branded a murderer. He would be an outcast and a criminal in the eyes of his peers.
In short; Dumbledore asks Snape to perform a gruesome (for him) task, one Snape does not want to perform, one for which he will be vilified and spit upon and possibly killed for, for no other reason than to spare Dumbledore a bit of pain and a bit of humiliation at the hands of his enemies. Not for strategic gain, not for 'the greater good' but pure out of selfish reasons. Snape does not want to but Dumbledore bullies him into it.
So Snape is branded a murderer and Dumbles gets the over the top state funeral as the great hero of the age.
Dumbles is a SELFISH COWARD.
As for what this does to Snape's 'soul'; I don't believe in 'souls' as seperate entities from our physical bodies, but if one translates 'soul' into psyche, I would say that this damages Snape very much. Snape is already a deeply clinically depressed man (and every time it looks as if he might get better, Dumbledore is sure to kick him down into guiltridden depression again; won't do to have a psychiologically healthy Slytherin spy after all, he might not be that easily manipulated into sacrificing his own life) and killing Dumbledore dunks him deep into selfloathing again.
Even if the whole Order would've known in front that Snape had been ordered to kill Dumbles on his command, it would've damaged Snape to actually do it. Come on, the man has suffered for twenty years that somebody he cared about died when he, unadvertantly, told Voldemort about some vague prophesy. The guilt has eaten him alive, the flames of which were regularly fanned by Dumbledore (for the 'greater good' of course) and this man is asked to perform a 'mercy killing' or even a 'strategic killing'?
Bad move, Dumbles. Bad move.
But then, Dumbles isn't too careful with his toys.