Is torture ever justified? <POLL>

[maddogchen]

Originally posted by: OffTopic
It set precedence for the enemies to torture your POW if the leader of the world doesn?t follows the rules that it helps setup.

I don't think they need a precedence. I think they already do or did torture our POWs.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Rainsford
This reminds me of the movie Swordfish. Not that great a movie, but a good moral discussion. If it's ok to torture someone you think is guilty to save lives, how about killing them? They are a "bad guy" after all, what is their life worth to thousands of innocent people? And how about killing one or two innocent people? Sure, they aren't "bad", but how can you justify saving a few lives vs many more people who are equally as innocent? And if you are willing to do that, where do you stop? How about 100 innocent people, how about 1,000?

I know it's not the same thing, but once "saving innocent lives" starts justifying things you would otherwise think are wrong, really terrible things can be justified. One day you're torturing Achmed bin Talal who knows about a bomb at the Super Bowl, and the next your imprisoning Joe Smith for "thoughts agains the state". The problem is who do I trust to make those decisions on who's worth torturing? The fact is I don't trust anyone to make that kind of decision, do you?

Nope. I don't trust a single person to make that kind of decision.

 

[StageLeft]

I know it's not the same thing, but once "saving innocent lives" starts justifying things you would otherwise think are wrong, really terrible things can be justified.

It happens all the time, and parallels are easy to draw. Innocent civilians are dying in Iraq because they are collateral damage in a war that many consider justified.

Nope. I don't trust a single person to make that kind of decision.

I'd trust myself, but I'm not in power, and people would disagree with me anyway I'd off them first!

 

[bigalt]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

I know it's not the same thing, but once "saving innocent lives" starts justifying things you would otherwise think are wrong, really terrible things can be justified.

It happens all the time, and parallels are easy to draw. Innocent civilians are dying in Iraq because they are collateral damage in a war that many consider justified.

I'm pretty against the slippery slope argument for anything (mostly because I'm sick of it about gay marriage). The line _can_ be redrawn, it's just difficult.

But, while collateral damage in the form of death of innocents is one thing, I just can't abide collateral damage in the form of systematic infliction of pain on innocents. It takes a sick individual to do it. Perhaps if for everything the torturer did to his victim, it was done to him as well?

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: bigalt

Originally posted by: Skoorb

I know it's not the same thing, but once "saving innocent lives" starts justifying things you would otherwise think are wrong, really terrible things can be justified.

It happens all the time, and parallels are easy to draw. Innocent civilians are dying in Iraq because they are collateral damage in a war that many consider justified.

I'm pretty against the slippery slope argument for anything (mostly because I'm sick of it about gay marriage). The line _can_ be redrawn, it's just difficult.

But, while collateral damage in the form of death of innocents is one thing, I just can't abide collateral damage in the form of systematic infliction of pain on innocents. It takes a sick individual to do it. Perhaps if for everything the torturer did to his victim, it was done to him as well?

Deliberate or no, the US military readily admitted prior to the gulf war that civilians would die. They categorized this risk as acceptable. Just because they aren't actively targetting civilians doesn't mean that they don't 100% know that civilians will die as a result of what they're doing.

If I ram my car into pedestrians deliberately the end-result is no different than if I speed through a school zone at 120 and hit some by mistake. In both cases I knew that people would die. Although I wasn't deliberately trying to do it in the second I knew what would happen; it was an unavoidable side-effect of my action. Similarly, if you're testing out pipe bombs for fun and you happen to be testing them on the highway - although you have no real intention of killing people - when they do die you will be charged, rightfully, with murder.

If the known, predicable end result of two different actions is the same, the intentions are not always so meaningful.

 

[bigalt]

If I ram my car into pedestrians deliberately the end-result is no different than if I speed through a school zone at 120 and hit some by mistake. In both cases I knew that people would die. Although I wasn't deliberately trying to do it in the second I knew what would happen; it was an unavoidable side-effect of my action. Similarly, if you're testing out pipe bombs for fun and you happen to be testing them on the highway - although you have no real intention of killing people - when they do die you will be charged, rightfully, with murder.

If the known, predicable end result of two different actions is the same, the intentions are not always so meaningful.

i was trying to counter, but was just writing the same thing. i consider torturing someone to be far worse than killing them, and set my approval accordingly.

 

[DrPizza]

What?! We don't have any drugs yet that would leave the person so out of it they couldn't avoid telling the truth?

 

[Howard]

Yes, but rarely. I would torture information out of a recalcitrant prisoner to save just ten people, but I would never condone the torture of a person for the purpose of inflicting needless pain.

 

[KarenMarie]

for information, yes.
for punsihment, no. one bullet in the head, no fanfare, no whoopdeedo, just quick and done with.

 

[EXman]

Yes, child abusers desrive to be ripped from limb to limb.

If hooking up a car battery to a terrorist and giving him shock treatment during an acid bath prevents 9/11 redux, then sure!

sounds good to me