I Have Reconsidered Torture
Sometime, perhaps a year or so ago, I put forth the position that torture might be justified in some very limited circumstances. My position was that if the U.S. knew it could obtain vital information to protect national (or global) security, and that torture was the last best chance to obtain that information, then torture should be allowed.
I was wrong. I am now convinced that torture should not be allowed or condoned by any nation. No exceptions.
Two arguments have caused me to rethink my position. First, I think the U.S. should do everything it can to lead the rest of the world by setting an example of moral and just policies, and that can't be done when we are one of the few civilized nations that condone torture. Second, the testimonials that say torture doesn't yield any useful intelligence simply overwhelm the voices that say torture is a valuable tool. If it's morally wrong and it doesn't work anyway, I'm not sure what's left other than "retribution", but I suppose those same circumstances have sustained the pro-Death Penalty crowd for a long time now.
Of course, all of the information which persuaded me to change my mind was present when I initially concluded that torture was OK. A cynic might say I simply changed my position because it jibes nicely with the popular position against the White House, and while I don't think that's explicitly true, there could be some truth to the notion. What can I say? I kept reading, got a clearer idea of just how isolating and defeating a policy torture can be, and I changed my mind.
7:46:59 PM 
|
