Awsome topic. Well, if there is a humane way to go I suppose Avada Kedavra wouldn't be so bad, better then crucieo'ed into madness like the Longbottoms. I think that the permission to use the killing curse was gave to the aurors as means of self defense. I mean like pyscological warfare, if the Deatheaters knew they could be Avada Kedavra'ed into oblivion then maeby there would less chance of a fight. Like the death penalty in the muggle(our) world. Sure it really isn't going to stop most Deatheaters, but mabey some.
Also, on the defense note, it gave auroers the chance to defend themselves by Avada Kedavraing their enemies instead of having to try to subdue them for a traile.
Is it a cowards cures. I guess so in the way that you would have to not to die in order to cast the spell. Its a unreversable spell, once its done the other person isn't going to come back to life any time soon. So in a way, yes, kill your enemy before they can do you in. But, if used to protect your self and others that you love, then mabey not. If you knew your enemy would not stop until you are dead then as a forcable means of protection, mabey it wouldn't be a cowardly act. It's really more of a morel than ethical issue that each person would have to answer for them selves.

Personally, I think it's cowardly. I mean, if you're in a fight and you want to end it ... what a wimpy way! Thay can't even defend themselves. Now, if the person were already dying ... that's a completely different story.

Crouch made an exception to the law because the DE's were using it, too. I guess, by that time, they were just trying to save everyone's necks.

I see your point the.time.is.now about Avada Kedavra being cowardly. I think Crouch gave the go-ahead because as you said the Deatheaters were using it anyway. And I would think that there is not an unlimited supply of Aurors. So I would suppose that the adage that "the best defense is a good offense" applied here is the eyes of the Ministry.

I think the main reason Avada Kedavra is an unforgivable curse is simply because of the fact that once it's done it's done, you can't go back and reverse the effects. I'm sure there could be a circumstance where someone could say those words hastily and then regret what they had done, and PLENTY of cases where the words should never have been said in the first place. However, it would be very effective in a war, almost necessary, just provided that it wasn't used indiscretely, which no one could ever guarantee. As far as it being a cowardly curse, yeah, it could be. I think it's a lot more humane than crucio, though, like Tom said.

Excellent post Sissa! Yes Crouch would want to catch as many Deatheaters as possible, after Voldemort pretty much having a free reign going around killing wizards and muggles, I imagine he would want to get the First Wizarding war over as quickly as possible. I do think the approval of the use of Avada Kedavra is a morel one. It is a killing curse after all, but then on the other hand letting aurers use it is like having our young troops in Iraq being able to shoot people (don't mean the political reference,).