(NOTE:For this question, write your response in about 300 words and post it on your blog.)
Although justice and mercy rarely co-exist, there are some occasions where they co-exist and I feel that there are certain requirements and different definitions for these two words for them to co-exist. If the definition of mercy is for the person in the wrong to totally not pay for his crime,one of the requirements is whether the person that is in the wrong is willing to change for the better. Should we not let these people go? If a person is willing to change for the better, in what way is there no justice to give him a chance to turn over a new leaf? There would be justice in this case because the person is willing to change for the crime he committed and would be the best result for a person that has committed a crime. There is also mercy in this case as since the person has done something wrong, he is given a chance to turn over a new leaf and not to pay for his crimes. Of course, there is also a possibility that his determination is fake but it depends on how the victim or judge decides his determination. Another requirement is for the crime to be small. It is almost impossible for justice and mercy to co-exist in these cases as it would definitely be justifiable to make him learn his lesson and it would not be possible to plead for mercy in this kind of circumstances, unless the mercy in this case is defined as making him pay less for his crime. Only then, can justice and mercy co-exist in these cases. Thus, the possibility of having justice and mercy depends on two things, which is the definition of these two words and the situation.
No comments:
Post a Comment