Can Justice and mercy co-exist?

I think that mercy and justice can co-exist.
Punishment within the justice system can be merciful. But there are still cases of justice without mercy but they can be mutually exclusive. On the other hand, mercy is also considered to be a part of justice. It is important that an eye for an eye is not justice but considered as revenge and should not be misunderstood as justice. The purpose of justice is not revenge, but to ensure nobody is at the losing end. Although in some cases, punishent can be given out but more often, mercy and the act of forgiving are more effective ways of securing well being for all. Mercy gives the offender an opportunity to turn over a new leaf and at the same time it also gives happiness to the person showing mercy. Nobody is at the losing end. An example of this is the Iranian example. An Iranian women was disfugured by acid by another man and in the process, lost an eye. The Iranian law allows her to make the man lose an eye to but she chose to forgive. This is a good example of justice and mercy co-existing. The law sentenced the man which is justice, and the forgiveness of the women as mercy. Thus, I believe that mercy and justice can co-exist, but there is always an exception to everything.

What do you think is Shakespeare's intention of creating Shylock in The Merchant of Venice? Support your opinion with examples.

Well I feel that Shakespeare's reason for creating Shylock in the Merchant of Venice is to emphasise the discrimination of Jews that time and wants to let people watching his play stop the discrimination. Potraying Shylock in a cruel and cunning manner in the play, Shylock's ending will draw empathy from play-viewers. Shakespeare hopes that they will regret their action. An example is the purpose of Shakespeare to potray Shylock in such an evil manner. This would cause viewers to reflect on their actions on the Jews. Even by calling Shylock not by his real name but calling him "The Jew" causes huge discrimination to happen. This is and insult to his religion and Shakespeare hopes to tell people that if anyone insults his or her religion, how upset the person would be.

How to Raise a Global Kid, by Lisa Miller

I feel that the main arguement Jim Rogers is saying is that Asia is the future. He said that America is in a decline and thus, chooses to live in Asia, learning chinese. He knew that the East is now prospering and the West is now in debt, thus, he chooses to sick to the East where all the creditors are, as a normal person would do the same. I agree with this arguement, as for now, America is truly in a decline, while Asia is prospering, escpecially China. China now attracts numerous foreign investors and is forseen to be the future America. Thus, to groom children into future global people, the child must be immersed into the Asia culture and thus, learn China's language, Chinese. This would allow the child to get a headstart into the future world that will most likely revolve around China, like in the past when the world revolves around America.