See... that doesn't make any sense because the Laws have nothing to do with morality.
I'm not talking about morality, I'm talking about belief shaping how your magic works... I don't think WCVs inherently 'count', but if you *believe* they do the effect on your soul via killing them with magic might be the same.
"Classic" werewolves are just human magic practitioners. So they definitely count as human inherently; I'm just not sure whether killing one
you believed was a natural wolf would stain your soul.
I cannot help but think that if there /were/ a solid line in the sand drawn between things that are killable and things that aren't, all wizards including Harry would know of it.
I doubt that; Kumori's actions in DB seem to seriously raise questions about the blanket prohibition of necromancy. I think the Council tends to steer well clear of messy issues and gray areas, and I doubt they encourage looking into them. (Also see: why nobody else ever animated a zombie T-rex).
As for whether the council comes after you, I think that has to do more with whether a wizard killed "one of us" or not. It seems like the Council is pretty xenophobic. Anything not human is not a person and a-ok to kill
Mostly, although I don't think it's xenophobia as such -- that implies the attitude is irrational. Thomas is a
very unusual exception -- the vast majority of non-human intelligent creatures in the DV seem to be amoral, alien and dangerous to humanity at best. Toot-toot is also an exception, apparently, but he's *personally loyal to Harry* -- I'm not sure whether he's actually inherently any 'nicer' than any other fae. He seems pretty happy
in Changes, and he kind of laughs about Slade's torture, so he's relatively amoral as well.
The Council's position about one-strike warlocks like Harry after Justin or Molly in PG is a lot shakier than their position toward nonhuman intelligences. If anything, given that they seem to claim some sort of protection of humanity, and given the levels of supernatural predation Harry suggests in DB, they're arguably not hitting the ghouls and vampires
and such as hard as they should be -- I've argued for a while that if they really *believed* their protecting-humanity rhetoric rather than just used it as an excuse for why the survival of the Council in its current form is absolutely necessary, they'd be a lot more proactive against supernatural predators. Given the situation we see in WN, where a pretty major operation *actually aimed at the WC itself long-term* would probably have been missed by 'normal' (=Not Harry) White Council Wardens till too late... I'm not convinced they provide any meaningful protection against them at all. So Listens-to-Wind's idea that the fall of the Council would mean humanity taken over by predators seems a bit questionable in light of this and his Senior Council position. (And if we're really to accept potentially tens to hundreds of thousands of deaths *per year* from supernatural predators in the US alone, in what sense are they not --already-- taken over? How many supernatural predators *are* there anyway?)