Is Mercy the Tempering of Justice?.

Mercy is the complement of justice. One implies the other.

The Immense Love of God has been experienced by some as a "wounding and a healing."

The wounding can be seen, in a mystical sense, as Justice, whereas, Mercy is the healing.

In the world, man's justice is imperfect because it is usually contaminated by ego-centric values. Therefore, man's mercy is also imperfect, unless it is imbued with sincere forgiveness.

Well said Ben.

:-)

"I am of the firm opinion is that if there is good reason to apply mercy, then not applying mercy can rightly be viewed as an injustice, no matter how heinous the crime."

Your opinion may be firm, but I have no idea what it actually is . . Are you saying that all perpetrators of "heinous crimes" ought to be treated the same? All treated harshly? All treated leniently? . . What?

I deliberately left it open ended John. I am inviting comments and opinions. What is your opinion of treating each on a case-by-case basis?

I'm sure that you know of King Manasseh (2 Kings 21), the mass murderer (verse 16) who practiced child sacrifice (verse 6), yet God showed him great mercy (2 Chronicles 33:12-13)

"I deliberately left it open ended John."

Right . . that was meaningless babel I quoted . . deceptively packaged as an expression of "firm opinion" . .

"I am inviting comments and opinions. What is your opinion of treating each on a case-by-case basis?"

I don't trust you not to distort and confuse the matter for kicks, Dennis, 'cause I've seen you play this game before.

"I don't trust you not to distort and confuse the matter for kicks . . ."

Careful with accusation John :-D)

All I'm doing is inviting you to state your opinions. You will notice that I'm not debating it; It's just a question. What is your opinion? Whether or not I agree with it, I'll not oppose it in a debate.

Oh come ON, guys. That statement is about preset penalties and mitigating circumstances that get tossed aside unless someone deliberately throws them back in to the sentencing mix, and cuts the fixed sentence because of the mitigating circumstances. Then, voila'... we has us some MERCY.

Dennis, you're chopping logic. Justice in these cases has been predetermined (mostly by TEA-Twit types who preemptively decide that the deed is always worth "X" days/months/years in the pokey. It's then up to the judge to tell 'em to go pound salt. Under the American system, justice is not denied... there is no "injustice..." if he doesn't.

I won't respond to the "chopping logic" :-D)

"Justice in these cases has been predetermined (mostly by TEA-Twit types who preemptively decide that the deed is always worth "X" days/months/years in the pokey."

I don't think you view that as justice; I don't. If "mitigating circumstances . . . get tossed aside" can we really say that justice has been served?

Is the "mind of the person" to be taken into consideration in the decision on sentencing? Would taking the "mind of the person" into consideration mean that "mandatory sentencing" should be abolished?

Depends on what we're talking about. America has jailed people for petty crimes simply as a cash cow for decades. We get a black man charged with the same drug crime as a rich white woman, the black man gets jail time and record, the white woman gets rehab.

Prison a big business, raping the taxpayer, but let's not put any viable people in jail.

Often when we talk about 'justice,' we're not talking about justice at all, but revenge. Somehow, 'punishment' is going to get us even. There is no getting even -- ever.

"Revenge doesn't get you even, often makes things worse." The Fire

Justice SHOULD be about preventing future crime. We should take a cold, hard look at who we put in jail and why.

You and Ben are of the same mind I see.

Many thanks

and me to ...

you make a good point.

Thank you Kathryn.

First you have to define justice and mercy. If you simply base either on emotion of the moment then yuo are most likely providing either.

Without a description of justice and mercy then when they are applied they only exist in one person's mind, the one who believes they are providing it. For the person being given the justice and mercy may or may not see it as such.

When considering justice and mercy without a clear understanding of what it is then it could quite possibly doing just the opposite for the person who was recieving it.

As an example, there was a situation at work in which an individual had lost his wife and he had become a heavy drinker (several weeks) to the degree that it disrupted his work and put his co-worker at considerable personal risk. The individual was given a choice to stop the excesses of his drinking or lose his employment. Many of his co-workers were very upste with this and voice those feelings, he had lost his wife, he had a teenage daughter, they would make extra effort to provide ofr his and their safety. Was the choice just, most wold begrudgingly accept that it was. Was there mercy, most said no.

The employer offer as part of the choice to provide an extended program (in and out patient care) to help the individual 'dryout' and return to work. The results were the individual took the employers' option with a great deal of reluctance (many words were said, along with those of co-workers). The individual was successful in his recovery, he and the coworkers did express to the supervisor that this turned into what was best for all, especially the daughter.
The justice and mercy, all depended on who's perspective and when it was evalutated. After all said and done, was there justice and mercy given, to whom (the employees, co-workers, daughter, the supervisor)? The supervisor did explain the why he was making the choice.

The question remains what is justice and what is mercy?

A marvelous comment. It is difficult to define justice especially as you have shown, the concept varies from person to person.

There are several views of justice. There is restitution, compensation, rehabilitation, punishment etc.

Let's say for argument sake that justice is accomplished when the reaction/response is appropriate. That is still open ended I know but that is what we all wish to aim at. Mercy then becomes appropriate kindness. You have given an excellent example of appropriate kindness.

Grat examples, great and appropriate thinking.

fortunately it worked out and the person recovered, and many people recognized it and acknowledge it. However, if the person had not recovered then the view of others may have been different.

If it hadn't worked out would there still have been justice and mercy?

The supervisor felt it would because even if the individual was lost the others wouldn't have been.

I agree with the supervisor.

Thhis raised the issue is who dewscribes it as mercy and why the mercy was provided.

I wonder is it truly mercy if the person providing the mercy is not taking some rsik with showing mercy. I must admit that that to me if a person has not invested something it the activity, any activity, they are not truly involved and don't fully consider what is happening and what the consequences might.

Similarly justice without a commitment by who invokes it is nothing more than a dispationate law/rule.

Mercy, justice, good intentions and other such acts are nothing unless those invoking them have a commitment to the results.

Interesting view Duane. That never occurred to me.

It is the difference between those simply saying what they think is good and what they are willing to stand up for because the belive it is right and good. This becomes very apparent in politicians, governement employees, businesses, etc. when they are not willing to decribe how something/someone should be held accountable, especially when it might apply to them.

I agree.

... there is a time & place for everything ...

☀★¸¸.☆.¸¸ . ✶*¨*. ¸ .✫*¨*.¸¸.✶*¸¸.☆.¸¸ . ☀★☀★¸¸.☆.¸¸ . ✶*¨*.
Thanks for sharing at MAY I MAKE A POINT? Have a good day!

I agree.

You're welcome.

~Thank you for posting to...~

You're welcome Kira

I agree. Another thing that bothers me is all these degrees of crime, especially murder. If someone ends another person's life, they are gone, murder is murder to me.

The crime remains the same.

Thanks for that. I now invite your comments also on The Quality of Mercy

Interesting and worthwhile comment.
My own view is : Mercy is the nature of God (that little idea of Jesus - redemption?), Justice one the other hand is an idea of the human ego - rather presumptuous really, to sit in judgment on God's creation (we not only do it without understanding but frequently get the facts wrong).
That is the experience of a lawyer, you will understand I no longer practise.

That is really what I have been thinking ... and would add that the only real justice is that of Karma (a great reason for use of the Golden Rule) which is also GOD (Universal Truth if you prefer) based. IMnsHO

I agree with all of it. (I was raised by a lawyer :-D)