Q: ₊˚⊹ — Do you believe all humans deserve equal chances (at all points in their life) to change (for the better or worse)?
A: I would like to elaborate on this one, but it’s tricky. Maybe this would work better as an open ended question.
For those who say yes, I ask, for you, that does apply to criminals, right? Even the worst of them? And does your view change depending on remorse or guilt that these people feel?
For those who say no, I ask, what about you? At your lowest, do you feel the same way? That that person, the one doing terribly (for whatever reason it may be) doesn’t deserve to get better? And if you, in this case, say no, you DO deserve to get better: why not those around you? —
I doubt this will be answered the way I intend, so I may re write it later… >_<
As always, thank you to those of you who answer!! ^_^
---------------------------------------------------
Nobody ever "deserves" anything other than whatever's best for them and everyone involved. Everyone is innocent in God's eyes, and He/She wouldn't punish them, just like you wouldn't punish a baby for "misbehaving."
Here's an excerpt from one of the Conversations with God books by Neale Donald Walsch:
---------------------------------------------------
But some people are basically evil. Some people are intrinsically bad.
- Who told you that?
It is my own observation.
- Then you cannot see straight. I have said it to you before: No one does anything evil, given his model of the world. Put another way, all are doing the best they can at any given moment.
- All actions of everyone depend on the data at hand.
- I have said before—consciousness is everything. Of what are you aware? What do you know?
But when people attack us, hurt us, damage us, even kill us for their own ends, is that not evil?
- I have told you before: all attack is a call for help.
- No one truly desires to hurt another. Those who do it— including your own governments, by the way—do it out of a misplaced idea that it is the only way to get something they want.
---------------------------------------------------
Here's an excerpt from Mike Dooley's book 'Choose Them Wisely: Thoughts Become Things!':
---------------------------------------------------
Have you ever wondered how you might behave in someone else's shoes? If you have, you'll likely admit that this kind of thinking is usually critical of the person of the person you're thinking about. The truth is, you are the other person, and they are behaving exactly as you would if you were indeed in the exact same shoes--however inconsiderate, abusive, outrageous, or immoral their behavior is.'
'True, you are probably more thoughtful, fearless, loving, and honest than those who disappoint you. But you are also at a different point in your journey, maybe "more advanced," or maybe just more at ease for having chosen a less "challenging" path. We're all of "one," exhibiting different colors of the same light, and rather than passing judgment, it's best to remember that each of us is just doing the best we can.'
---------------------------------------------------
Some people appeal to justice or "balance," whatever that might mean, as a reason for carrying out retribution against wrongdoers. But what exactly is being balanced in a way that harming them makes it more even, and why does it need to be balanced? The idea is pretending that two wrongs somehow make a right. And what is justice? According to Rachel Dawes from Batman Begins:
---------------------------------------------------
Rachel Dawes: The DA couldn't understand why Judge Faden insisted on making the hearing public. Falcone paid him off to get Chill out in the open.
Bruce Wayne: Maybe I should be thanking them.
Rachel Dawes: You don't mean that.
Bruce Wayne: What if I do Rachel? My parents deserved justice.
Rachel Dawes: You're not talking about justice. You're talking about revenge.
Bruce Wayne: Sometimes they're the same.
Rachel Dawes: No, they're never the same, Bruce. Justice is about harmony. Revenge is about you making yourself feel better. Which is why we have an impartial system.
---------------------------------------------------
Retribution and vengeance are nothing more than schadenfreude fueled by the vile, distorted emotion of hatred.
---------------------------------------------------
But whether we "should" give someone a second chance might depend on the chances of them possibly reforming weighed against the danger of giving them such a chance. For example, you may not want to let a sociopathic or hardened criminal out of prison so that he can rebuild his life if he's likely to harm or murder someone else. But your question seems to call for an explanation of what kinds of things we would have to do and what compromises we might have to make to give someone a second chance. I mean, you can always become a better person while still in prison, right? Well, I guess it also calls for an explanation of what you are or are not giving the criminal a chance to do. To merely change himself, or to be free to live a fulfilling life?
As a matter of sheer pragmatism rather than a matter of judgment and condemnation, you may want to give someone who feels remorse or guilt a second chance (such as being freed from prison) more than you would someone who feels no guilt or remorse, because the person who feels no guilt or remorse is probably more likely to commit further crimes.
"And if you, in this case, say no, you DO deserve to get better: why not those around you?" reminds me of another reason we know that nobody deserves to be punished or for bad things to happen to them: The fact that the criminal is afraid of the punishment and will do anything to try to avoid it is evidence that he doesn't deserve it. He knows that it would be a tragedy for him to be hurt, because he knows his value and loves himself. And I know it, too, as soon as I see him scared and about to be majorly penalized and I empathize with him as one conscious, living being to another.
Also, for those instances in which it is presumably best to lock somebody up, the prison system *really* needs some reformation. It doesn't have to be and definitely shouldn't be as horrific as it is, especially regarding the allowance of routine violence between inmates.
I say we "presumably" should lock them up because I'm not really sure if we should ever punish anybody for anything. In 'Conversations with God Book 4: Awaken the Species', God says that in societies of Fully Evolved Beings, people who harm others are simply "caused to be made aware" (whatever _that_ means) of the harm they've done. The rest is up to them. And furthermore, I suspect that by segregating the criminal sect from the rest of society, we're blocking the paths of karmic interaction, integration and resolution that would help society to overcome its vicious cycles of trauma and violence. So, I suspect that the whole paradigm of punishment is a primitive, self-defeating, oppressive, misery-sustaining ideology in which two wrongs sometimes make a right. And that's in the best cases. In the worst cases it's simply spite, ultimately born of common shortsightedness and ignorance of the fundamental unity of all beings.