Debate: Was Umbridge Right

[Shadow Gaunt]

Was Umbridge right?

On one hand, we have the fact that 'her right to be that way is her right', and morality doesn't come into play. Additionally, she was extremely ambitious and did what she believed in throughout her whole life. Is this enough to justify her being 'right'?

On the other hand, she was sadistic, and her morals were clearly skewed to the reader and to many characters in the Harry Potter books. She also stopped at nothing in accomplishing her goals, including discriminating against others.

Please be respectful of each other and acknowledge that we are not debating to 'destroy' or convince each other, we are debating to have a discussion and to have fun while doing it. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Try and support your arguments with evidence, and have fun!!

[Adaleine Shuster]

Umbridge had her right to believe these things and she thought that she was doing what was right. I accept that and support people doing what they believe in. That is all good and all but when Umbridge starts hurting students at he place of work is where I feel it becomes unacceptable. I don’t think that you should be hurting other people just because. In book 7 it is mentioned that Harry still has scarring from when he wrote lines with her. Even worse she was a teacher and yet she hurt her students.

[Prof. Will Lestrange]

As far as I can tell, Dolores Umbridge always wholeheartedly supported the current Minister of Magic, right or wrong, whenever she was working for the Ministry. So as a teacher in Harry Potter's fifth year, she took great pains to support Minister Fudge's version of the truth - up to and including thoroughly quashing opinions that contradicted that version (e.g. Harry Potter talking about his seeing Voldemort return) and punishing people who made those opinions.

While I could imagine this support working for good if she somehow had her position under, say, a Shacklebolt administration - opinions that change with the person in power do not seem to match any sort of inherent 'rightness' in my universe. And, as a teacher, she completely failed at teaching her subject effectively (to the point that her students had to form an inter-house study group to counteract that) and acted to make tensions among the student body worse than they already were via the Inquisitorial Squad!

[Astor Arensin]

I agree with Prof. Will in that Umbridge always supported the Minister, but the way she went about doing so was... immoral, and yes, sadistic. She was a cruel woman who dosed students with Veritaserum and forced them to use blood quills for detentions, which is illegal.
As well as her stance on creatures such as centaurs, 'half-breeds', werewolves, and others that aren't 'pure.' Which is ironic considering she claimed to be pureblood (if I remember correctly) despite never providing proof of it. I believe she was a half-blood, but I suppose you could make an argument that she is a pureblood, but perhaps not a highly admired or respected family and as such wanted to distance herself from that reputation.

[Galena May]

I understand that Umbridge was dedicated to the ministry and used manipulative ambition to rise to the top to counter personal hurt and maybe she could have been better under a different ministry, but no matter what, I cannot call it justified to be using blood quills on a school- going student and leaving them permanently scarred for life. There is no excuse to be so cruel. It just shows the extent she was willing to go to for the sake of her position in the Ministry to protect her personal image. Past hurt can only justify so much selfishness, but a blood quill literally crosses the line into saying that the person is inherently cruel and likely would have been so even without the past hurt. Being against centaurs and other creatures is just another proof of her personality, irrespective of her past. Therefore, I have to agree with the others above that no she wasn't right, and with her choosing to hide her sadistic nature under a sweet smile, instead of being openly and confidently cruel, and her incompetency as a teacher, combined with the fact that she had to use the Ministry's power to even be respected, I think she is far less talented than Bellatrix, and at the same time being equally cruel.

[Kathren Johnsun]

I'm going to Devil's Advocate this because I think it would be fun for this topic specifically. Umbridge was completely in the right given the information she had to work with. No one other than Harry knew what had happened in the graveyard, and Cedric did die in a tournament that had an age limit (with an age line enforcement) added because it was life-threatening. After two months of the Prophet mudslinging Harry and Dumbledore, it makes sense she would believe the Minister over them. Yes, she did use a blood quill on Harry, but only after giving him several chances to retract what he was saying. If he wanted to get out of the punishment, he just had to say that he made it up (which she believed wholeheartedly), but he never did which caused the punishment to continue.

Two years later, we see her doing the Muggle-born trials. This is her job now, which you can do without actually wanting to do it. We do not know if she has a reason to need to keep that job other than just the money/influence that came with it. It is possible that she was trying to support other people (causing her to need the job).

Ok, while this was a fun challenge, I do feel kind of dirty now, so I think that is all I can do for this.