.

(Continued …)

.

You then wrote :

« And here is a link referencing Aboriginal use of "payback". https://www.creativespirits.info/aboriginalculture/law/tribal-punishment-customary-law-payback »
.

Thanks for the link, Graham. I read the article and tried to check the sources indicated in the footnotes. Among the few links that worked, I only found two that were relevant. Here are the links :

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/10/08/1033538933046.html

http://www.smh.com.au/national/trouble-at-alice-20091211-kokb.html

If you can do any better, perhaps you might be kind enough to post the links.

As you will see, only the first one has anything to do with “Aboriginal payback” :

[ An accused murderer is expected to return to Alice Springs jail this week after being speared by a member of his alleged victim's family in an Aboriginal payback.
Kevin Webb, 21, was in a satisfactory condition in Alice Springs Hospital today after being speared in the leg at the weekend
Webb is charged with stabbing one man to death and wounding two women with a kitchen knife on a bridge in Alice Springs on September 20.
Alice Springs magistrate Michael Ward granted him $1,000 bail for seven days last Thursday, specifically so Webb could receive payback ]

Perhaps you will recall that in my previous post I indicated :

« Hence, restorative or reparative justice developed originally as tribal justice. But that did not prevent tribes from performing human sacrifices and severe methods of punishment if circumstances (prolonged droughts and crimes such as murder, etc.) commanded »

The example of “Aboriginal payback” related above is a case of murder which is not in contradiction with my understanding of tribal justice.

That said, we should keep in mind the fact that tribal law and culture (the words are usually interchangeable), find their source in spiritual or religious belief (cosmology). While “law” refers to sanctions and legitimate and allowable actions, it also englobes “lore”, meaning knowledge, wisdom and learning.

Each tribe has its own law. Our indigenous peoples enjoy a full spectrum of cultural diversity.

Abrahamic law and justice has made inroads into Aboriginal tribal culture through colonisation with the results which we all know.

.

Lets make one thing quite clear - the vast majority of
modern mainstream Christians, Jews, and Muslims are not
waiting for Armageddon, or a future coming of a saviour.
Nor are they waiting for anything else that exercises the
theological minds of fundamentalists. We need to keep in
mind that the religiously minded modern person is not a
'card-carrying' fundamentalist. Fundamentalists of
whatever faith, a psychologist would be likely to declare
them to be of unsound mind.

There is never any circumstance where violence against
women (men and children as well)
is acceptable. It is always a crime. It should always
be condemned and perpetrators should feel the full force of
the law.

Foxy: We need to keep in mind that the religiously minded modern person is not a 'card-carrying' fundamentalist.

Western type person

Foxy: Fundamentalists of whatever faith, a psychologist would be likely to declare them to be of unsound mind.

I don't think we have any problem with that.

Foxy: There is never any circumstance where violence against women (men and children as well) is acceptable. It is always a crime.

I don't think we have any problem with that, either.

Foxy: It should always be condemned and perpetrators should feel the full force of the law.

What! even moslim ones? But, but, it's part of their religion. You're a racist, tut, tut. ;-)

Well said Foxy

"There is never any circumstance where violence against women (men and children as well) is acceptable. It is always a crime. It should always be condemned and perpetrators should feel the full force of the law."

Well said. "the law" would probably not be conservative Sharia law, because it would fail to protect woman.

BACKGROUND

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_and_domestic_violence :

The relationship between Islam and domestic violence is disputed. Even among Muslims, the uses and interpretations of sharia, the moral code and religious law of Islam, lack consensus.

Conservative interpretations of Surah An-Nisa, 34 in the Qur'an regarding marital relationships find that hitting a woman is allowed.

Other interpretations of the verse claim it does not support hitting a woman, but separating from her..

Yuyutsu,

It's not all that long back that Muslims were killing Hindu idol worshipers in India and it's regularly done in Muslim-dominated Pakistan.
Wife beating is not a cultural trait but one sanctioned and indeed demanded in the Qur'an.

Hindus may be considered as 'people of the Book' by some Muslims but only where Islam is not the controlling power in society.

What's your take on the Goddess Kali?

AJ wrote
People generally rest their case once it’s been made.

it's been made.

AJ wrote
It’s a mighty early departure for you, though, isn’t? I thought you’d be here for at least another couple of weeks repeating the same asinine assertion over, and over …

No sense talking to a brick wall.

AJ wrote
As do I. Some may have spotted the flaws I pointed out too.

Isn't that what the Creationists say to the scientists who take Evolution for granted? It has been said that you can never make somebody understand anything, who's job depends on not understanding it.

AJ wrote
So instead of conceding that you were wrong, you’re just going to insist that this alleged double standard really was there and then slink off?

That's the problem with OLO. it is not really a debate site, so we usually don't get feedback from other posters when a point of order is in dispute.

AJ wrote
Is this another way of saying that you’ll never speak to me again? That you’ll never use me as a means to bignote yourself in a self-congratulatory display of grandiose narcissism?

Oh no, AJ. I am your Nemesis. But I have no intention of simply going around in circles forever on this subject. I have made my case and I am confident that most people agree with me while your explanations for your clear double standards would even make Arjay blush.

AJ wrote
I look forward to going around in circles with you again as you try desperately to not understand why you are wrong.

That pretty well sums up your "debating" style. Stonewall, prevaricate, submit premises you know are not true, pretend that you can't make the simplest of logical connections, demand your opponent prove everything while you dodge saying anything you need to justify. It can frustrate an opponent but it makes you look like a fool to an audience