I'm slightly confused. Your character wouldn't recognize that; her failure to recognize it would be the point. Is your concern that your readers wouldn't want to see it?
Yeah and having them hide behind 'End justify the means' makes it easier for your readers to get grounded behind the character's thoughts and actions without suspending their disbelief.
"Forgive" is a loaded word. I don't condone murder, but I can understand when there is no other option. Really, whatever we think, we should feel for your protagonist if he/she does murder. I read the difference between a hero and an anti-hero is we can still understand (perhaps sympathize with) the latter but not forgive their actions.
That heavily depends upon their reasons/circumstances for said murder. If they've killed the person because their society deems murder acceptable for revenge reasons or justice reasons I could forgive. Say if the victim murdered a child or perhaps someone close to the murderer like a family member or significant other I could probably forgive. Killing them in cold blood would be a difference. Depends upon the brutality of the murder as well. I think I would be more likely to forgive a quick shot to the head than hacking the victim to pieces. If the murder was quick and painless, perhaps. It also depends on the condition and whether or not the victim would have recovered. If the victim goes into a coma with no chance of waking up or develops an aggressive cancer too late for treatment I think I could forgive. Depends on the people involved. Example, my girlfriend shoots my sister in the back when she runs at me with a knife with the intent to kill me. Extremely unlikely, of course but still something I could probably forgive. Depends on how many people are saved and upon what kind of people are being saved. Say example, a close friend kills another close friend to save the entire human race, easily forgiveable. A close friend kills another close friend to save a school full of children, easily forgiveable. A close friend kills another close friend to save a prison or some politicians. No, I would not forgive that. I do hold the beliefs of Spock's dying words in Wrath of Khan and whatnot, but that does depend upon if the many deserve it. Criminals, politicians, hate groups (ect) do not deserve to be saved. Although they can say sorry all they want but it won't change what they've done, I think it would be easier to forgive someone who feels genuinely bad for what they've done as opposed to someone who feels nothing at all or happiness.
Would it alter your opinion if the perpetrator comes from a martial society where murder was considered acceptable in certain circumstances; or would you still judge it by your upbringing/ societal expectations? Would the physical condition of the victim make any difference, i.e. if they were capable of defending themselves or not? Would suggestions of euthanasia (perhaps not willing euthanasia, but the victim was chosen because of their ill-health) soften your opinion at all? Would you be able to accept a murder if the perpetrator was in a position to protect you from imminent danger i.e. acceptance through self-preservation? What if the murder was for the greater good and indirectly saved numerous lives, even though the victim was innocent? How much would the perpetrator's remorse assist? Point 1. If the perpetrator comes from a society that considered murder acceptable in certain circumstances, then I would come from the same society so I guess it would then depend on if the murder had been committed in one of the acceptable circumstances. Point 2. This goes back to point one, is it one of the certain circumstances? If the victim was smaller, less-abled or weaker than the perpetrator then no, I could not accept the perp getting away with it. Point 3. are we talking along the lines of Logan's Run? Did the victim ask to be euthanased if them became old/frail/ill. In your world, is there a law against euthanasia? Point 4. If the murder was an act of self preservation, self defense or protecting me, then it was not pre-meditated and can therefore not be classed as murder, unless the attacker backed down and the perpetrator turned self defense into an attack and even then, would it not be manslaughter? Point 5. How can it be for the greater good if the victim was innocent? That would be like killing the Big Boss before finding out if the Bog Boss is actually the Big Boss and not a decoy. (and if he was a decoy, he would still be a bad guy working for the Big Boss.) Point 6. I can't think about his remorse until I know the answer to all the above. Hmmm. Good luck figuring this one out!
Would it alter your opinion if the perpetrator comes from a martial society where murder was considered acceptable in certain circumstances; or would you still judge it by your upbringing/ societal expectations? I would judge it based on my morale development that I have accrued over the years. Any cultural or social influences are always disregarded in my viewpoints. Would the physical condition of the victim make any difference, i.e. if they were capable of defending themselves or not? Wheelchair verse a coma here? Each raises their own questions and different answers. Would need to expand on that first. Would suggestions of euthanasia (perhaps not willing euthanasia, but the victim was chosen because of their ill-health) soften your opinion at all? Ya, pretty much. Ill-health can fall on the lines of being acceptable. We ALL die. I don't find it fair to burden others with a life that is already failing. 80 year old man that's been in the hospitable for two years and is causing huge bills on his family? Family loves him, so I get it. Now think of that money being given to a charity for children with same condition. Save an 80 year old who's had a full life or a child of 8 who's only happiness has been from a hospital bed? Would you be able to accept a murder if the perpetrator was in a position to protect you from imminent danger i.e. acceptance through self-preservation? Is this meaning self-defense or killing my blackmailer? Self-defense is 100% okay with me. What if the murder was for the greater good and indirectly saved numerous lives, even though the victim was innocent? Kill Hitler's mother before she gave birth to him? Sure. Those situations would be so few and far in between that I don't see it as a big deal. Kill all the tobacco CEOs and save 400,000+ people a year? Rather slap them with enough lawsuits to render them destitute, but whatever. How much would the perpetrator's remorse assist? 0%. Feeling guilty only makes you human, it doesn't change the act. If you didn't feel guilty you'd still have done it. Here's how I think of it. Self-defense (Y) Defense of others (Y) Random Innocent (N) Unintended Victim (N) Fatally Ill (Y) 1 year+ coma (Y) Inhuman Humans (Y) [Crime bosses, certain CEOs, etc.] Basically I depict a person based on their worth as a person. If your life is spent making money and destroying the world for others... you're not worth it. Just accidentally radiated a whole town and they'll have cancer for years. Instead of fixing the problem let's do a lot of pay offs and let the whole town die slowly for the next generation. WORTHLESS human being. Wouldn't care less if they died, I just won't be the one to do it. Sometimes people are a drain on the entire human race and it'd be okay if they got culled. Survival of the fittest, but survival of the species too. Have autism? That's fine. Have the mind of a serial killer? Not so cool.
