Dumbledore Can Remove Horcruxes without Destroying it's Vessel.
Case in point: The Resurrection stone. I always thought that it wasn't the resurrection stone that was the horcrux, but the ring that it was on, and that the horcrux was destroyed by only breaking the ring and leaving the stone intact with it's powers, but... this isn't the case at all? In fact, the books make it explicitly clear that it's the opposite, the stone was the horcrux and the ring wasn't. Rambling below:
“The ring’s gone,” said Harry, looking around. “But I thought you might have the mouth organ or something.” Dumbledore beamed at him, peering over the top of his half-moon spectacles. “Very astute, Harry, but the mouth organ was only ever a mouth organ.” And on that enigmatic note he waved to Harry, who understood himself to be dismissed. "The mouth organ was ever just a mouth organ", Dumbledore is practically telling you that the mouth organ has never been special and has only ever been normal, which I assume would not be the case had it been a part of a destroyed horcrux
And even the descriptions show that the stone was cracked in the middle, presumably from Dumbledore hitting it with the Sword of Gryffindor.
It was large, rather clumsily made of what looked like gold, and was set with a heavy black stone that had cracked down the middle. Slughorn’s eyes lingered for a moment on the ring too, and Harry saw a tiny frown momentarily crease his wide forehead. (Bolded by me)
(Side note: I assume that Dumbledore's act of valor for the sword is being able to get it and destroy the horcrux while dealing with the new curse on his arm.) It's such a weird and big thing for my brain to just misremember like that, maybe it's because in DH's The Prince's Tale, the scene with the ring and sword described it as the ring being the thing that was cracked. So a few months back, I searched around for opinions and such about this detail, and I found this random tweet by the author about it.
The crack in the stone was irreparable. Only Dumbledore cd have extracted the soul fragment but left the original charm intact.
And.... wow, If I ever talk about how Dumbledore is the one who is most used as a plot device in the series, and that most of the plot contrivances surrounding his character and actions are derived from the author not really giving a shit about consistency when writing him, I'll be sure to use this as an example. "Why did Dumbledore do or not do this? So that the plot could happen silly!". It just really feels like rules-lawyering at this point "Why It's said that they had to be damaged irreparably, nothing about it being destroyed or non functional Harr Harr" Anyways, how do couple this with the fact that Harry also had to die for the scarcrux? Just give him another scar and extract the soul piece from there, scars mean irreparable damage after all. Well, I just assume that human beings are much more complex than the resurrection stone, especially with their souls in the equation, maybe whatever Dumbledore did would have ripped out a part of Harry's soul along with the scarcrux, or even just straight up killed Harry too. That, and that Horcruxes are IIRC incredibly rare, doubly so on living Horcruxes and triply so on Living Human ones (And you can say that the last two might not even have existed before Voldemort). You can guess that perhaps experiments were done on previous horcruxes that were on inanimate objects, but that none were done on living ones because quite possibly it has never been done before (And Dumbledore can't exactly do those experiments himself, at the very least not humanely.) Also keep in mind that Harry is also a quadruple special case of a horcrux, because he was an accidental one probably without any of the usual spells for horcrux making being applied** thus making any previous research that could be applied even more obsolete, and also Dumbledore's absolute trust and value in love and love magic.. Take that all together and you can make a very reasonable case on why Dumbledore didn't try to screw around with the scarcrux and instead relied on Harry's sacrifice(Harry's love)+Lily's blood in Voldemort's body(Lily's love) as the way to remove it with a chance of it not killing Harry. Asterisk here**
"He seems to have reserved the process of making Horcruxes for particularly significant deaths. You would certainly have been that. He believed that in killing you, he was destroying the danger the prophecy had outlined. He believed he was making himself invincible. I am sure that he was intending to make his final Horcrux with your death."
Dumbledore's theory on this is... wrong on so many accounts, many of the deaths used to make Voldemort's horcruxes were not significant at all, and there was no mention of any item of importance that Voldemort brought along with him to Godric's Hollow to use as a receptacle for the horcrux, though perhaps it was on Voldemort's person and thus completely destroyed by the blowback of the rebound (even though his wand wasn't destroyed...) And the funny thing is, I don't know if it was intended by the narrative or not! I mean, this was so wrong that it must have been noticed right? But then again it's literally never mentioned in the text how Dumbledore was wrong here.
Anyways, I wanted this here because IF we take what Dumbledore said here as true, then perhaps Voldemort had to do some spells in preparation before Harry's murder, plus that, Y'know, intent is very important for spells usually. This doesn't change anything since the fact that Harry is still an unintended horcrux is very much apparent and the quadruple special case remains, but I found this interesting and wanted to talk about it anyways.
