Originally posted by Adam
This thread prompts me to ask the question: Can people change, and if so, should they be forgiven?
Yes, but with morality, there is a certain extreme that simply cannot be forgiven for...as in raping so many and killing so many.
One of the stories from that thread involves a lawyer for the mob who turns against his former employers to do all that law-and-order stuff, to leave a good memory for his kid. Maybe that makes him a decent guy in the end, maybe not. Maybe it depends on completely arbitrary judgements, whether the good someone does outweighs the bad they have done.
He was in greed of money, which made his life very easy. And he was outstanding in performing his job. Maybe he just came across Al Capone... Everyone would take the easiest path, well most people. But once he performed his job, he had to protect Al Capone continously, because once he refuses in a given time and withdraws, he probably would have been murdered. But what he did in the end, I would say, deems him as a decent man, with some good in him that he could've done good. It is the things that people care about that cause them to do good.
Would Adolph Hitler suddenly be a good guy if, in the end, he had swum out into the surf to save a drowing kid? Would that make him a good guy, in the end?
No...for what he did in life he has too many sins, or wrongs.
It is the things that people care about that cause them to do good. So if Hitler cared for the kid, he would save him and risk his life. And that is good. But he didn't give a crap about the Jews.
For example, you treat a friend real good, but you don't so much to the other. But your friend that was treated good believes you are a good person, but your another friend says you're alright. It the way you treat people.
If a surgeon saves lives every single day at work, but once a month heads out at night and rapes someone, does his good work outweight the bad, should he be left free to save lives?
I would say he's one twisted SOB, and you have given a difficult situation. He knows it is wrong yet he does it, there is a moral conflict there. If he stops and realizes his actions, then yes, he can make reparations to society for that and compensate for his actions. He should be restricted, or replaced. But if he is so good, then he should be kept from commiting rapes.
Is there a strict rule, or is it different in every case? And if different in every case, who gets to decide, and how, what is acceptable?
People can decide for themselves, but some people are good to others, while mean to others. it's the natural prejudice in us that causes that, no one can be all loving. But if it is a community's matter, a jury will decide that...and that's how the law works.