Should toturing be allowed?

Werbung:
Coyote said:
You got a source for that?
Click to expand...

I doubt that he has a source.

While I have never actually tortured anyone, we did act occasionally on information gathered by torture in Vietnam. If a person has the information you want, you can get it by torture, but if they don't, they will say whatever you want them to say to stop the pain. If you can be sure that you have someone who has the information you require, you can get the information from them, no doubt. But being sure you have the right person is a tough business and less than reliable.

There are plenty of psychological tactics that can be used without actually going to torture. I know that many would say that psychological pressure amounts to torture, but give the ones who would say that a choice between being kept awake by loud music and lights and having a few fingers broken, or smashed with a hammer and my bet is that they would opt for the psychological pressure.
 
palerider said:
I doubt that he has a source.

While I have never actually tortured anyone, we did act occasionally on information gathered by torture in Vietnam. If a person has the information you want, you can get it by torture, but if they don't, they will say whatever you want them to say to stop the pain. If you can be sure that you have someone who has the information you require, you can get the information from them, no doubt. But being sure you have the right person is a tough business and less than reliable.

There are plenty of psychological tactics that can be used without actually going to torture. I know that many would say that psychological pressure amounts to torture, but give the ones who would say that a choice between being kept awake by loud music and lights and having a few fingers broken, or smashed with a hammer and my bet is that they would opt for the psychological pressure.
Click to expand...

You've presented from a fairly strong Christian perspective on many occasions so I was curious what you thought Jesus would say in this discussion about torture.
 
I have no problem with judicious torture during or just after battle to gather immediate information. But torture like we have pulled in Iraq for the most part is just sadistic crap.
 
palerider said:
I doubt that he has a source.

While I have never actually tortured anyone, we did act occasionally on information gathered by torture in Vietnam. If a person has the information you want, you can get it by torture, but if they don't, they will say whatever you want them to say to stop the pain. If you can be sure that you have someone who has the information you require, you can get the information from them, no doubt. But being sure you have the right person is a tough business and less than reliable.

There are plenty of psychological tactics that can be used without actually going to torture. I know that many would say that psychological pressure amounts to torture, but give the ones who would say that a choice between being kept awake by loud music and lights and having a few fingers broken, or smashed with a hammer and my bet is that they would opt for the psychological pressure.
Click to expand...

They say that evidence gained by torture is highly unreliable at best. I am quite sure I would say many things trying to hit the right thing in order to stop the pain. But that's just me. I don't have a problem so much with psychological pressure but I have serious problems with torture that leaves people dead or brutalized and I have seen no real evidence that such torture has produced reliable information.
 
Coyote said:
They say that evidence gained by torture is highly unreliable at best. I am quite sure I would say many things trying to hit the right thing in order to stop the pain. But that's just me. I don't have a problem so much with psychological pressure but I have serious problems with torture that leaves people dead or brutalized and I have seen no real evidence that such torture has produced reliable information.
Click to expand...

I provided it earlier in the thread.
 
Mare Tranquillity said:
You've presented from a fairly strong Christian perspective on many occasions so I was curious what you thought Jesus would say in this discussion about torture.
Click to expand...

I don't know. Would Jesus suggest that we simply stand by while terrorists explode bombs in market squares targeting women and children? Jesus told us to submit to governments and to accept that they held the power of the sword and that if one were innocent that one need not fear government but if one were guilty, they shoud fear the government as it was their duty to punish evil doers.
 
Coyote said:
They say that evidence gained by torture is highly unreliable at best. I am quite sure I would say many things trying to hit the right thing in order to stop the pain. But that's just me. I don't have a problem so much with psychological pressure but I have serious problems with torture that leaves people dead or brutalized and I have seen no real evidence that such torture has produced reliable information.
Click to expand...

It was my experience that when we acted on information that was in all likelyhood obtained by torture, that it was either spot on, or a complete wash. That would indicate to me that if a suspect had information then they gave it up at some point and if they didn't, they simply made up whatever they believed would end the pain.

Of course what I am telling you is only anecdote, but I believe that if one has information that it can be extracted. The dielemma comes with knowing whether or not the suspect is the right one and actually has the information that you want.

The whole reliability issue is one of having the right suspect more than the reliability of the information you get. If you have the right suspect, I believe you can trust the information that you get but if you have the wrong suspect, then everything you get will be a fabrication.
 
palerider said:
I don't know. Would Jesus suggest that we simply stand by while terrorists explode bombs in market squares targeting women and children? Jesus told us to submit to governments and to accept that they held the power of the sword and that if one were innocent that one need not fear government but if one were guilty, they shoud fear the government as it was their duty to punish evil doers.
Click to expand...

So there is no moral issue? Wow. I think your choice to torture or stand by while "terrorists explode bombs in market squares targeting women and children" is what's called a "false choice" in that it implies that this is the only two options open to us.

My question was more oriented towards the idea that we have the right to decide who deserves torture, who deserves to have their body torn apart while they are living--much like Jesus had done to Him. I'm guessing that He would forbid it, but I'm not a Christian so my opinion doesn't count for much.
 
Mare Tranquillity said:
So there is no moral issue? Wow. I think your choice to torture or stand by while "terrorists explode bombs in market squares targeting women and children" is what's called a "false choice" in that it implies that this is the only two options open to us.

My question was more oriented towards the idea that we have the right to decide who deserves torture, who deserves to have their body torn apart while they are living--much like Jesus had done to Him. I'm guessing that He would forbid it, but I'm not a Christian so my opinion doesn't count for much.
Click to expand...

You must not have read my posts very well. I clearly stated that knowing if you have the right person before you begin the torture is where the whole issue gets sticky. I certainly don't support torture in the form of a fishing expedition, but if one can be certain that one has the person with the information one is seeking, torture will certainly bring the information to the surface.

And I never said that there were only two choices. You were the one who gave only two choices...either Jesus would support torture, or he would not.
 
palerider said:
You must not have read my posts very well. I clearly stated that knowing if you have the right person before you begin the torture is where the whole issue gets sticky. I certainly don't support torture in the form of a fishing expedition, but if one can be certain that one has the person with the information one is seeking, torture will certainly bring the information to the surface.

And I never said that there were only two choices. You were the one who gave only two choices...either Jesus would support torture, or he would not.
Click to expand...
I actually read your post very carefully. All torture is a fishing expedition, one cannot know anything with adequate certainty to justify torture. Look at the good, devout, and absolutely certain Christian people who tortured people to save their souls in the Inquisition. They were certain too, but the necessary level of certainty to justify torture is not available to human beings, we are too fallible.

The two choices were presented by you in the sentence: "Would Jesus suggest that we simply stand by while terrorists explode bombs in market squares targeting women and children?"

Just like the death penalty, torture leaves no room for error, once you torture someone there is no taking it back if you discover that you were wrong to do it. My position is that Jesus--having been tortured-- would not agree to let anyone be tortured for any reason. That is also my stand on the subject, and the two choices you offered in your sentence above are not the only ones possible.
 
Mare Tranquillity said:
I actually read your post very carefully. All torture is a fishing expedition, one cannot know anything with adequate certainty to justify torture. Look at the good, devout, and absolutely certain Christian people who tortured people to save their souls in the Inquisition. They were certain too, but the necessary level of certainty to justify torture is not available to human beings, we are too fallible.
Click to expand...

Of course one can know with adequate certainty. To suggest otherwise is just silly. And the inquisition has nothing at all to do with today. By the way, no where near as many were killed during the inquisition as most people believe. Not even close.

Mare Tranquillity said:
Just like the death penalty, torture leaves no room for error, once you torture someone there is no taking it back if you discover that you were wrong to do it. My position is that Jesus--having been tortured-- would not agree to let anyone be tortured for any reason. That is also my stand on the subject, and the two choices you offered in your sentence above are not the only ones possible.
Click to expand...


Your position on Jesus is nothing more than an emotional appeal that has as much validity as if I appealed to the Easter Bunny or the Tooth Fairy. And to suggest that because a thing happens to you is a valid reason to prevent it happening to anyone else is as silly as your first assumption.

And while I would support raising the bar with regard to evidence for capital punishment, I still believe the death penalty is appropriate punishment for some crimes as I believe torture is warranted under certain conditions.
 
Werbung:
Back
Top