Quote:
Originally Posted by sck5
"But the argument is that under specific conditions, torture is acceptable."
The right used to call this kind of thinking "moral relativism" and they were opposed to it. As for me, if something is wrong to do to our guys then it is wrong to do to anyone. My morals arent rubbery enough to think otherwise. If it is sauce for the goose it is sauce for the gander. If we do it then expect to have it done to our guys. And expect to be laughed at if you complain.
|
The
circumstances under which an act is committed have
always been relevant. A killing committed while the perpetrator is committing a felony offense is murder. A killing for hire is murder. A killing of a person in
self-defense or
defense of others is generally not a crime. Subjecting a person to intense stress, under strict limitations, in order to obtain information that might save many innocent lives, might very well be viewed as lawful, and as a legal justification in the nature of "defense of others." So far as I know, the legal issue has not been resolved.
If you don't believe the circumstances matter, then how would you feel if the police learned that a serial child killer buried your child alive somewhere, and they smacked him around to get him to reveal where she was buried, in the hope of saving her life?
How would you feel if the police lied to a perpetrator by telling him that, if he surrendered, they wouldn't prosecute him criminally? Both the police and the prosecutor even signed a written agreement to that effect. After he surrendered, in reliance on their promises, they reneged and prosecuted him. Should the police and prosecutor be barred from prosecuting him, since they blatantly lied? Does it matter that he extracted that written agreement while he had a loaded shotgun taped to the head of an innocent person? You bet the circumstances matter!
By your logic, "...what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander." If the worst that our enemy did to our soldiers was to waterboard them, we'd be relieved. When they capture our troops and civilians, they torture them, and then they behead them. By your logic, do I presume correctly that you would approve of us torturing and beheading our enemies, since that's what they do to us?