My point…even if we entirely ban waterboarding, as well as any other forms of torture, as any of your definitions would dictate, no terrorist, no criminal would care in the least. Terrorist occurrances would more likely skyrocket than lower. Now, I know none of you were intending to say or imply that, but think of it. Even if our nation never tortured, many others would still. Now, look. We stop, they continue, perhaps even more than before. The two options, in this issue, continuing torture, or outlawing it. If we outlaw it, in this issue, no good can be done. We can do little to stop the continued torture that will exist, but if we do continue torturing, we may do good by it.

I wish it weren’t so, but I think the ends do justify the means in such a case as this, where one or more lives could be saved by torturing one person. I think if greater good can be done by killing or torturing than by sitting home watching TV, it’d better be done.

The problem with legalizing torture, or even merely waterboarding, is that, at least for me, I don’t trust Uncle Sam to do it when it needs to be done, and not when it doesn’t. If it weren’t for this, I think it’d be all for legalizing it.

As for torture, rape and sodomy being used in the War on Terror…if this is true, it is no pleasure, but a shame to bear the nationality of an American. As it is, I’m proud to be an American.

Even if waterboarding is made illegal by the government, would you obey it, if your wife, son, or daughter was in danger, perhaps about to die, and you could waterboard an accomplice? I see as little reason not to as a piranha has to start flying. Then again, that’s more of a test to see who you love more, God or your wife/son/daughter. Not one I’d even like to take.

This isn’t an issue I think I’m well-informed enough on, but I think I’ve said what I believe.

!Noah!

Bryce — I think torture is different from killing. To kill someone is, honestly, to only kill the body. We are not violating their soul. To torture someone is different. When we torture someone we are, most probably, breaking down their emotions, forcing them to violate their conscience. So just for the person involved it’s a whole different affair. To kill their body is momentary physical pain; to kill their soul is lifelong emotional pain.

The men we torture are the men we manage to capture alive, we kill many of the rest. The men we torture are guilty of the same crimes as the ones we kill.

My disagreement with the poster and many commentators is that killing gets a free pass, while torture violates the dignity of man.
In a simplified sense, we kill people so they stop shooting at us (in the short run), and stop blowing us up (in the long run).
We torture people (who shoot us and blow us up) so we know how to better stop the rest of the explosions.

Torture is cruel, but there’s a good chance they’ll be able to finish their lives.
Death is also cruel, and they never get to finish their lives.
Which one steals more from the victim? There are many instances of God condoning killings, but I don’t know of one that condones torture. That might settle the question. :P

I would point out to the other commentators that the parallels they draw between torture and war are unjustified. Although some might argue that waterboarding is a case of ends justifying means, war is not a supporting evidence in its favor. Killing in war is not a wrong for the sake of a greater right. It is a right for the sake of a right. There is no parellel.

Torture does not get / rarely gets useful information. Sure, people will talk under pain, but they won’t always say the truth. So by torturing you’re upping your chances at getting the saving information, but you won’t ‘probably’ get it.

How ‘humane’ must we be with those we are at war with? Does blowing them up violate their dignity?
Due to the Hague convention we can’t use hollow point bullets in war. Why? Because they flatten out and rip a lot more flesh out than other bullets. Hunters use them because they take down animals, police use them because they take down criminals, but we can’t use them in war because they aren’t humane.
I see unnecessarily killing people as much more violating to a person’s dignity than torture.

Random point: torture is mentioned as being used in the Bible. Job is one of the most famous examples, going through a whole lot more than waterboarding. Oh, and the confession the devil wanted was never given.
A second example from recent reading is Ezekiel. If laying on one side of your body for 390 days, eating food you put beside you before you began, and then having to cook your food on cow manure (a concession) isn’t degrading, I’m not sure what is.

Civis: #3. If someone waterboarded my wife/family, etc. I’d kill them also. And would feel completely justified in doing so. Japanese waterboarding != US waterboarding for the most part. On the surface this may seem like me / the US making up the moral rules. The only reason I think Japanese waterboarding was wrong, and that US waterboarding can be right, is because of my complete certainty that the Japanese were wrong and that we’re right.
#7. Even if all torture is stopped in the US, torture will not be stopped worldwide (as you may have alluded to in #5).
Torture has been around a long time before the US has, and isn’t stopping now. There will *always* be a people somewhere that permits torture.

Also, statistically speaking in the scheme of human rights/dignity issues, torture is a very small problem. A tiny problem in the US. And torture of Christians/ gun owners won’t come through the current state of torture, but through evil men ripping this country completely apart.
For the record: I condone little torture. It is too often abused. Most times it is done wrongly.

1) Torture has been used no to get information and prevent attacks, but to try to get information linking al queda to Iraq in order to justify our invasion.

2) American soldiers have raped women and sodomized boys in front of thier mothers the course of “enhanced interrogation.” Women have smuggled out notes requesting someone “come and kill me” after what was done to them.

3) We executed Japanese soldiers for “waterboarding” American soldiers

4) During World War Two, Germans would surrender to Americans because they knew they would be treated humanely. When faced with Soviet troops they fought to the death.

5) At least one American citizens has been tortured in the “war on terror.”

6) Even if torture is permissible, the U.S. has no jurisdiction over foreigners in foreign lands.

7) Those who support torture should consider that unless stopped now, these techniques will be used against them as well. What would you think if policiemen came and waterboarded you or raped your children in front of your eyes until you gave them a list of everyone you know who owns a Bible or a firearm?

I tell those who support torture, “Be careful what you ask for.”

Ella, killing in war is not degrading to humanity if the war is just. Check out Just War – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just_War – part of the problem with modern Conservatism and its component Christian constituency is that they now view war as an essentially utilitarian endeavor. I think MT would agree with me, if she’s up on her jus ad bellum Thomism, that war isn’t dire ends that need to be prevented by immoral means. (Check out this excellent article by the analytical Thomist G. E. M. Anscombe – http://www.anthonyflood.com/anscombetrumansdegree.htm – it explained a lot of those things for me.)