So justice is more immediately satisfying, while compassion leaves you feeling morally clean but unfulfilled, and no matter which you choose, you’ll just end up buying a bottle of regret in the end anyway?

Is regret a symptom of deciding you have to choose either justice or compassion, or is it the eventual outcome of any choice where you have to condemn or pardon in various degrees?

Had to think about this one.

Is this an indirect reference to the Scotland incident?

C., you win some kind of imaginary prize.

this may be the new eternal question!

Scotland incident?

I hope the bar doesn’t run out of regrets; I am going to need a couple pints myself.

The person they declared responsible for the Lockerbie Pan-Am bombing was released by the Scottish justice minister on compassionate grounds due to having a terminal cancer.

Metaphors make great mixers.

Yeah i heard that on the radio this morning. and im sure the people in the plane he blew up would have rather died peacefully at home too. id go with justice. compassion is just too arbitrary. theres no standard and that pisses me off. plus i dont like dry drinks.

Prostate cancer isn’t really a peaceful death, from what I hear. The guy’s gonna be in real pain once his organs start failing from the cancer. The ‘compassion’ here probably means ‘we’re not going to spend the money to execute him’.

I like my comics like my Vonnegut: laughing at depressing things.

Perhaps if he’s still in jail they have to pay for his treatment. Oh wait, everybody gets to go to the hospital there.

Nny, compassion is too arbitrary? Justice is just as arbitrary. The closest there is to a non-arbitrary setup is the law, and what the law does is not quite justice. “Justice” is really a polite term for “revenge” on a personal level, which is kind of the antithesis of compassion. The law, on the other hand, is about attempting to maintain order and attempting to get compensation in some form for those affected by its breaches of order (whether through awards to them or punishing those breaking the order), and we all know that there are many instances in which that is pretty arbitrary as well, with idiotic laws and corrupt processes. Is that justice? Hell no. The only clear definition of Justice is a French electronic music duo.

I’m disappointed with this Cat & Girl, personally. It’s way too essentialist for a thorny concept (stepping outside of its particular target, though I frankly don’t think that matters much), especially for someone who has been more than willing to deconstruct social mores on a regular basis.

I’d rather be executed than die of Prostate Cancer.

Especially if it’s by firing squad. That’s cool, and chicks dig cool dead guys. After all, look at Joseph Beuys.

If felt isn’t cool, then I’ve made some very poor choices in life. Where’s the Scotch?

@amjes:good point, maybe i didnt consider all angles. and what i mean is with, justice of law, as arbitrary as the rules may be, at least theres rules. and even with that im sure im still missing something.
anyways i think you should replace “French electronic duo” with “Walker:Texas Ranger.” also,”Weezer being punished for releasing Beverly Hills as a single” would be acceptable

After Girl’s explanation in the penultimate (full) panel, I was sure that this would be some sort of turn-the-other-cheek moral or pointing out how justice and revenge are often conflated.

It turned out to be nothing of the sort, of course.

Without the explanation in the comments, I would not have made the connection.

Both justice and compassion sometimes taking on different flavors depending on whether you are dishing it out, watching someone else dishing out, or being served with it. If you’re on the receiving end, either one can sometimes give you serious heartburn.