Originally Posted by Duraska
There's nothing inherently wrong with that. I think it's pretty natural. However, a rational view on the situation would be: Your father committed the crime, now he has to deal with the consequences.
I think it depends on the crime. Some things are punished way too harshly, and some things shouldn't be illegal at all. This is the root of my disagreement with lawfulness...it is only humans who create and enforce the law, therefore it is fallible, therefore why should one show unconditional deference to a fallible thing?
Also, perhaps now we're just quibbling over words, but I don't like how people use the word "consequences" in this context. When I think of consequences, I think of touching a hot stove. The stove isn't trying to punish you for touching it. When human agents use their free will to inflict their will upon humans like Miko did in 251, I'd call it punishment. To call it consequences, seems to me, like a disingenuous way to dance around the "consequences" of their own actions.