Is an eye for an eye a good standard of justice?

Is an eye for an eye a good standard of justice?

God does not seem to think so.

Our standard of justice as shown in the scriptures and in most governments is based on an eye for an eye where the penalty has a relationship to the severity of the offence.

God does not go by this standard.

In his eyes, all sins are the same, in terms of the penalty God planned and will be punished eternally and in the same way.

Is God’s eternal punishment for all sinners, great or small, good justice?
If so, should we scrap an eye for an eye and have the same punishment for all crimes and sins?
Should we follow God’s lead instead of going against it in secular justice?

Is an eye for an eye good justice?

If you think so, please speculate on God’s overkill in terms of punishment.

Regards
DL

Absolutely it is. If you mess with me I kill you. It’s the best axiom to live by in my humble opinion.

God in the old testament loved killing people. Killing people was easy sport for god.

In all actuality god probably enjoyed killing people especially the sinners.

It must feel great and mighty killing people as god. What is good for god is good for everybody else, yes?

It leaves the whole world blind.

And you have a problem with equality?

Yeah if it’s a universal, equal fucking over of all humanity. Yeah.

The world is largely already blind.

Most really don’t have eyes to see.

Another unicorn fantasy like god.

In its raw and crude form, revange is justice; an eye for an eye.

But, we have been changed the meaning of justice over the time and now it is bent more towards curing than mere revange.
And, that is a welcome change.

with love,
sanjay

Curing? :laughing: Justice= Just-us.

With Animosity,

The Joker

Joker,

I cannot help it if that simple assertion of mine is beyond your comprehending capabilities.
I sincerely feel sorry for you and also wish that you will be able to make it one day.

with love and hope also,
sanjay

Justice has little if anything to do with “An eye for an eye” or revenge, which are inherently presumptuous.

Justness means “properly level” or “properly ordered”. It means compensating for whatever is out of harmony. And although revenge might compensate for the anger or hatred in a victim, it does not correct for the over-all disharmony. It tends to just fuel continued disharmony.

Justice is returning harmony to an acceptable state, not an easy thing to do. And simple minded, black and white axioms don’t cut it.

Let’s say there’s only 2 people in the world…and one pokes the other’s eye out.

There wouldn’t be harmony until the 1st guy got his eye poked out as well.

If only one of em has just one eye, then the other has advantages over him that aren’t fair.

So you gotta poke the other eye.

For harmony and balance.

Feel sorry for me? :laughing: No, what you said I very much comprehended.

With animosity and scorn also,

The Joker

Justice has everything to do with revenge or retribution. Don’t kid yourself.

You lost me.
You indicate an eye for an eye being good justice then you show you like justice that exceeds it.

Try again.

Regards
DL

That was Ghandi.

So what is the right level of punishment. Easy to sit on Ghandi’s shoulders my friend but would you give as a good standard to replace an eye for an eye.

P.S. Yours is actually a foolish quote as everyone knows that it is not eyes that are being talked about. Or didn’t you know that?

I think perhaps you did not.

If not even for even, how much should the victim give up to the perpetrator?

Regards
DL

That equality was the goal of that saying.

Tell us though, was that perpetrator not created by those around him and should they not share the guilt?

If so, that means that it may be more equal to give mercy, or is that justice, with less than the eye he took.

What do you think?

Regards
DL

I appreciate your thinking but I do not see too much curing in our systems.

I do not think you have anything in the way of stats or info to confirm your view but if you do, please show them.

All I see us doing is warehousing bodies without caring if they reform or not.

Regards
DL

Not badly put.

I see most seeing an eye for an eye as revenge.

Reciprocity is a moral tenet, do unto others, for most religions and governments, — so I see it as bringing things into the balance you speak of. Not just getting revenge. Most people, I hope, want justice when harmed and not just revenge.

Is an eye for an eye overkill to you? If so how far do we extend mercy to the perpetrator and do we ignore the victim that seeks that equality in the law?

Regards
DL

Where did the first guy learn to poke out eyes and does his teacher bear any of the blame for the poking out of eyes?

Regards
DL