Which theory of justice considers punishment as a morally acceptable response to crime?

• A. Ethical Relativism
• B. Retributive Justice
• C. Procedural Justice
• D. Noble Cause Corruption

Answer: (B)

Retributive justice centers on the idea that punishment is morally acceptable because wrongdoers deserve it. When someone commits a crime, they violate moral norms and incur a debt to society, and the punishment should be a proportionate response that restores a sense of justice. The focus is on desert and the intrinsic rightness of holding the offender to account, rather than on what the punishment might achieve in terms of deterring others or reforming the offender.

Ethical Relativism would deny a single universal justification for punishment, since moral standards vary across cultures; it doesn’t claim that punishment is morally warranted simply because a crime occurred. Procedural Justice is concerned with the fairness of the process—whether laws are applied consistently and due process is followed—so it explains legitimacy of procedures, not the moral justification of punishment itself. Noble Cause Corruption describes a problematic behavior where officials bend rules for perceived good outcomes, not a theory about why punishment is morally warranted.

So the idea that punishment is a morally acceptable response to crime aligns most closely with retributive justice.