. . . murder.
In the traditional system of Cherokee justice, the clan of one who
killed another, even by accident, was responsible for the loss of
life, to the victim's clan, and was obligated to surrender a life,
whether that of the killer, or not.
So, clearly, in their eyes, death--or rather, the killing of a
human being--*was* murder. In their eyes, that crane operator's
life--or that of one of his matrilineal clan--would have been
forfeit; and the debt would have been enforced swiftly by your
father's clan, in the event of any hesitation.
In regard to your final paragraph, "pretty damned good" isn't at
all "good enough".
Even one "false positive" is *too many*: or are you truly so
deluded, so convinced that delegation to a government absolves
you, me, or anyone of moral culpability, to believe that the
inevitable imperfection of even a system operated in good faith
excuses putting even a single, innocent person to death?
Sorry, even I can't buy that; and I don't consider the "false pos-
itive" argument valid, in light of issues regarding whose a life
is, to give or take, in the first place. (The same issue, BTW,
ultimately ended the Cherokee practice of blood-debt, as many
had adopted a faith with which it was ultimately incompatible.)
--
HadEnuf? |
