Harry Potter author JK Rowling has revealed that one of her characters, Hogwarts school headmaster Albus Dumbledore, is gay.

She made her revelation to a packed house in New York's Carnegie Hall on Friday, as part of her US book tour.

She took audience questions and was asked if Dumbledore found "true love".

"Dumbledore is gay," she said, adding he was smitten with rival Gellert Grindelwald, who he beat in a battle between good and bad wizards long ago.

The audience gasped, then applauded. "I would have told you earlier if I knew it would make you so happy," she said. Read More

__________

Admin's Comment: Numerous writers have observed that Rowling's writings are "God free." We learn now they are "gay friendly." Here are a few issues of concern:

(1) The article notes that Rowling: " ... regarded her novels as a "prolonged argument for tolerance" and urged her fans to "question authority".

Rowlings comments, at least as portrayed here, appear to assume that authority and tolerance are mutually exclusive. Surely one can marshall many examples of excessively authoritarian, or dictatorial, intolerance. But examples can be exceptions; they do not necessarily prove mutual exclusion. In fact, it's not only possible, but realistic to note that, because of adherence to authoritarian standards, some refuse to tolerate those who challenge and/or deny the intrinsic value of every human soul. Recognizing and respecting a soul's intrinsic value, however, does not demand acceptance of every action and behavior as morally equal.

A long-standing aversion to authority in general, and religion in particular, characterizes many souls. Both secular and spiritual rebellion take many forms for many specific reasons, but frequently the same general reason — selfishness. We simply do not want to do what someone else wants us to do. We can not stand to be told what to do, regardless of who tells us or what motive/s they have. We question their intelligence. We refuse to be cowed into submission by their power, possessions, money or influence. Political authority is flaunted and religious authority ... well, we just laugh at that. How dare you think you can tell me what I should feel or believe, or how I ought to act.

I, too, question authority. I do not believe it, whatever "it" is, simply because someone said "it." I want to know why; what are the facts, reasons, arguments lying behind the claims and assertions? But I do not dismiss and/or reject all authority just because I am suspicious and skeptical. There are legitimate reasons for being submissive to legitimate authority, part of which involves recognizing that I am not the center of the universe. I did not create myself. Someone else knows me better and cares about me even more than I care about myself. Suspicious of overly authoritarian, apparently selfish, dictatorial leaders, whether secular or religious? Yes, but that's not reflective of the role and rule of the captain of my salvation (Heb. 2:10).

(2) "The audience gasped, then applauded."

Why did the audience applaud? To express admiration that a writer introduced a twist in the "true" nature of a fictitious character? Because they like to be surprised? Because they approved? Apparently Rowling interpreted it as approval; she believed her remarks made the audience "happy." Ah, the summum bonum of human existence, happiness. It makes no difference how or where or why, as long as we are happy we have reached our own nirvana, free from the obligation to explain and defend. It makes me happy and that's all that matters. Will we argue that whatever makes us happy must, of necessity, be right?

(3) Best lines in the article: And a spokesman for gay rights group Stonewall added: "It's great that JK has said this. It shows that there's no limit to what gay and lesbian people can do, even being a wizard headmaster."

Regardless of what one thinks about homosexuality, fictional characters do not matter. They illustrate, but prove nothing. To allow that fictional characters prove anything shows "no limit" in how far we reach to justify beliefs.