| Sep 22 - 10:23:31 |
|
| Post Reply | Post new topic | Page: 1 |
| Whats Wrong With the World Vol. I : Mercy. | Started by: Octavius on Dec 27, '07 18:05 |
|
As many of you probably know, I have some very opinionated views on a broad variety of subjects relating to our thing. However, I've always kept some of my thoughts quiet, I believed that I held an absurdly outlandish outlook on certain matters; yet after speaking with some friends, it turns out my views are not so absurdly outlandish at all! So with my newly discovered normality in check, I decided to come to the streets and have a good old fashioned rant about everything that's wrong with the world. When I stop for a moment and consider the above, one of the first thing that comes into my mind is the practice of mercy. Given our Sicilian roots, I suppose most of us are Catholic, and even if you're not, most beliefs follow the same system; that by the Lord's own decree there is a Heaven and there is a Hell. Our God is not a merciful one, so what right have we got, as mere mortals, to display mercy? None. But perhaps some among you are not religious. That's fine, I'll approach it from a more logical direction. A wise man by the name of Shakespeare was wont to say that "Nothing emboldens sin so much as mercy." Now, I don't like quoting people generally speaking, it shows a lack of mind-power to be able to develop your own way of saying things, but this little gem is irresistibly apt. Mercy is a concept which allows people to commit heinous acts, knowing they will escape the ultimate punishment come the final hour; if you'll forgive a slight exaggeration. But it's not the giving of mercy that irks me so, in fact, showing mercy could be considered a noble act that takes confidence and humanity to execute. No, the giving of mercy doesn't irk me. It is the asking for mercy that betrays everything we stand for. We are men of honour, we do not kneel in the mud begging for life, or at least we shouldn't. It's an extremely low practice if you ask me, and I'd never take mercy, let alone beg for it like a dog for scraps. |
|
| Report Post | Tip |
|
Walking along the streets, Keats hears the beginning of this discussion and stops to listen to the man's reflection. As the speaker concludes his remarks, Keats steps forward and addresses the points that have been so eloquently raised. Sir, while your topic is surely not groundbreaking, I find you approach very interesting and worthwhile. I am glad to see that your thoughts no longer remain quiet; the streets could use more of this, in my humble opinion. If you don't mind, I'd like to comment on the content of your statement. While it is true that our Sicilian heritage is intertwined with the threads of Catholicism, I suspect that many of us have abandoned our faith and are only nominally Catholic. At the very least, I would suspect some of us, myself included, are heavily conflicted, though they do believe. I disagree with your quick dismissal of the theological aspect of mercy. Who are you to say that our God is not merciful? Does it not say in Deuteronomy that "The Lord thy God is a merciful God" (Deuteronomy 4:31)? Did Christ not say "Be ye therefore merciful, as your Father also is merciful" (Luke 6:36)? The first principle of your theological argument, that "Our God is not a merciful one", is totally incorrect. Equally incorrect is your dismissal of the theological argument that is perhaps mercy's strongest pillar or support. I, though, have never been one to force religion onto people, and acknowledge that many people believe themselves to be quite comfortable without a theological worldview. A different approach, though hardly a more "logical" one, is called for. I, too, am familiar with the wise Shakespeare; please allow me to present a quote of my own. I submit for your consideration perhaps the best known speech on mercy in any language, written by the aforementioned author in The Merchant of Venice : "The quality of mercy is not strain'd, It droppeth as the gentle rain from heaven Upon the place beneath: it is twice blest; It blesseth him that gives and him that takes: 'Tis mightiest in the mightiest: it becomes The throned monarch better than his crown; His sceptre shows the force of temporal power, The attribute to awe and majesty, Wherein doth sit the dread and fear of kings; But mercy is above this sceptred sway; It is enthroned in the hearts of kings, It is an attribute to God himself; And earthly power doth then show likest God's When mercy seasons justice. " You say that "Mercy is a concept which allows people to commit heinous acts, knowing they will escape the ultimate punishment come the final hour; if you'll forgive a slight exaggeration." First, I forgive the slight exagerration. More importantly, you are not describing an ACT of mercy but an EXCESS of mercy. Truly, if no one suffered any worldly consequences for their evil and/or illegal actions, then these heinous acts would be perpetrated indefinitely. To borrow from the Bard, mercy is at its greatest when it is seasoned by justice. Only through careful and judicious use does mercy "blesseth him that gives and him that takes". Though I may may disagree with much of your speech thusfar, I am almost entirely in agreement with you. Mercy should not be sought, and should never be expected. Only the men or women who possess the ability to show it should be the only ones ever thinking about it's use. Mercy is something that is given, not taken, and should be treated as such. With a sardonic smirk, Keats retreats to a bench, curious to see what others have to say on this particular issue. |
|
| Reply by: Keats at Dec 27, '07 18:41 | |
| Report Post | Tip |
|
Ah, you pesky wordsmith. It seems as though I have indeed been exposed as a part time Catholic. I'll freely admit my religious knowledge is shaky, at best. My assumptions were based on the entire Heaven and Hell principle, and though it would indeed be a fascinating debate, I'll not talk about religion further; not only for the risk of subsequent embarrassments. I'd beg to differ though, as I've always looked upon Mercy as a singularity, for want of a better term. Mercy cannot be granted partially, it is an absoloute. I fail to see how there can be an excess of mercy in relation to this, which is quite paradoxical considering my original point was to suggest mercy was an excess. I'd have to disagree with the Bard also, blessed indeed are the merciful; though I cannot say the same for those who accept it. |
|
| Reply by: Octavius at Dec 27, '07 19:06 | |
| Report Post | Tip |
|
Very well, we'll leave religion for another day. Though it is hard to totally block out the Judeo-Christian view of the Western world when Shakespeare was writing within it. As I said, though- another day. Mercy IS a singularity, and can only be granted absolutely. But I am suggesting that it is in the process of distinguishing the situations in which mercy should be applied that one should be judicial- not in the actual extending of mercy. I find it curious that you are so hostile against the idea of accepting mercy. Truly, many of us in the life strive to do our utmost. But regardless of whether you examine people from a theocentric or anthropocentric perspective, only a fool could say that we are perfect. Everyone has the potential to make a genuine mistake. Why should we resist learning from this mistake by rejecting the potential for mercy? |
|
| Reply by: Keats at Dec 27, '07 19:38 | |
| Report Post | Tip |
| Post Reply | View All Threads | Page: 1 |
How much do you want to tip for this post?
Minimum $20,000
Minimum $20,000
