The Instigator
Majed
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Ragnar
Pro (for)
Winning
11 Points

is justice justified

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
Ragnar
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/21/2015 Category: Society
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 592 times Debate No: 73910
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (2)

 

Majed

Con

Do you think that if someone stole from you,attacked you or killed someone of your family member you should revenge from him?
So if revenged from him and killed him you won't be better than him and if you killed him his son is going to revenge from you so what did you win
Ragnar

Pro

I will make this short.

According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary:
  • Justice is "the quality of being just, impartial, or fair."
  • Justified is "to prove or show (something) to be just, right, or reasonable."

Justice is by nature Justified.

As for the eye-for-an-eye revenge, it is not guaranteed to always be justice, but when it is justice it is indeed justified. When it is not justice, it may still be justified (yes an action can be reasonable without being fair).

Debate Round No. 1
Majed

Con

Majed forfeited this round.
Ragnar

Pro

Extend all...

And I may as well put a final point forward. The whole of you "killed him you won't be better than him" line of reasoning is highly flawed. The villain in this type of scenario can be easily compared to a rabid dog, and there is no cure; letting them go free results in them continuing to kill people; whereas you putting them down, does not result in you killing anyone else. Let's consider when Batman brought the Joker back to life after Nightwing beat the clown to death. No good resulted from that stupidity. Besides, the basic problem as described by TVTropes.org, it ignores "there being a sharp moral distinction between killing the innocent and killing the guilty" [1].

Sources:
[1] http://tvtropes.org...
Debate Round No. 2
Majed

Con

Majed forfeited this round.
Ragnar

Pro

My opponent has committed a Full Forfeit.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Reeseroni 2 years ago
Reeseroni
MajedRagnarTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by YoshiBoy13 2 years ago
YoshiBoy13
MajedRagnarTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct to Pro: Double forfeit COMBO! Massive damage! // S&G to Pro: "So if revenged from him and killed him". you are missing from pronouns and through case of object indirect. "if you killed him his son is going to revenge from you so what did you win" Good question, I don't know myself. I'd think that it won Pro the S&G though. // Arguments and Sources to Pro: His arguments used reliable sources (I'll overlook tvtropes for now) as the basis for his points. The spellings of the words must have been a hint in the first place.