Justice In To Kill A Mockingbird

It is the underlying issue in every court case and disagreement between people all over the world; does justice mean equal treatment? Should it? The answer to these questions is a controversial one, but can be answered with the unpopular opinion that no, justice in today’s society and courts does not mean fairness. Justice should be the act of giving consequences to those who deserve, at the level they deserve, without any other factors and influences playing a role. This, unfortunately, is not seen as often as it should be as a result of personal opinions and values. Racism, sexism, religious persecution; all of it will always exist no matter what we do. It isn’t a matter of eliminating it from our lives completely, although that is a great …show more content…
No one should have to fear the system put in place to protect them, but it is undoubtedly what is happening every day to the minorities of this country. Justice does not mean equal treatment in courts and culture; it should, but it does not. The well known story To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee outlines this question very well in regards to the racism present throughout human history. In the novel, Harper Lee explores the idea of justice through the tales of Jean Louise “Scout” Finch’s childhood stories of her father’s fight against injustice. Atticus Finch is a lawyer who was appointed to defend …show more content…
The two words are often used interchangeably but do they really mean the same thing? No, not in today’s justice system they do not. An article called Justice vs Fairness by Harvard University philosopher, John Rawls, lets the two meanings of these words fight and come to the conclusion that they are not synonyms; not anymore. The word justice is used in reference to a standard of rightness. Fairness is used to describe that rightness as an act of judging without reference to one’s feelings or interests and “used to refer to the ability to make judgements that are not overly general but that are concrete and specific to a particular case.” (Rawls) Based on these definitions and the ideal idea of justice, these definitions should be able to be used as synonyms right? This spot is where the issue of personal values comes into play; they are way too prominent in a court system. Within the article, the principles of justice are described from the point of view of Rawls and his colleagues. They state that the most fundamental principle of justice, defined by ancient philosopher Aristotle, is that “equals should be treated equally and unequals unequally” saying that a person should be treated the same as everyone else unless a relevant difference between the two that relates to the case is present. (Rawls) Race, gender, age, sexual orientation, religion: none of these are factors that relate to any