• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

John McCain CIA Torture Report Senate Speech

Jack Hays said:
The problem is designed to remove all attempts to dodge the moral issue, like yours, from the discussion.
Click to expand...

Except there is no moral issue. It is an imaginary scenario with no basis in the real world, making it irrelevant to real world morality.
 
Jack Hays said:
The problem does not guarantee that torture succeeds but it guarantees that every other course of action will fail.
Click to expand...

no it doesn't.
 
Jack Hays said:
You are wishing the problem away, not addressing it.
Click to expand...

There is no problem, except in your imaginary, nonreal world scenario. In the real world, that set of situation cannot exist, so trying to use it to discuss morality in the real world is stupid.
 
Jack Hays said:
The point is to compel confrontation with the possibility of torturing one life to save a million.
Click to expand...

I don't think it compels confrontation. If the U.S. wanted to engage in moral relativism then it should have thought of that before crowning itself king of the "free world" and declaring itself as the example to which all other nations should aspire.
 
Jack Hays said:
Alan M. Dershowitz | Harvard Law School

Professor Alan M. Dershowitz is Brooklyn native who has been called “the nation’s most peripatetic civil liberties lawyer” and one of its “most distinguished defenders of individual rights,” “the best-known criminal lawyer in the world,” “the top lawyer of last resort,” “America’s most public Jewish defender” and “Israel’s single most visible defender – the Jewish state’s lead attorney in the court of public opinion.” He is the Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law at Harvard Law School. Dershowitz, a graduate of Brooklyn College and Yale Law School, joined the Harvard Law School faculty at age 25 after clerking for Judge David Bazelon and Justice Arthur Goldberg.
He has also published more than 1000 articles in magazines, newspapers, journals and blogs such as The New York Times Magazine, The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal, The Harvard Law Review, the Yale Law Journal, Huffington Post, Newsmax, Jerusalem Post and Ha’aretz. Professor Dershowitz is the author of 30 fiction and non-fiction works with a worldwide audience, including The New York Times #1 bestseller Chutzpah and five other national bestsellers. His autobiography, Taking the Stand: My Life in the Law, was published in October 2013 by Crown, a division of Random House. Earlier titles include “an exceptional, action packed book,” The Trials of Zion, a novel which has been called “a thought-provoking page turner;” Rights From Wrong; The Case For Israel; The Case For Peace; Blasphemy; Preemption; Finding Jefferson; and Shouting Fire.
Click to expand...

How exactly is who he is in any way supposed to make his imaginary scenario any more relevant to the real world?
 
Redress said:
There is no problem, except in your imaginary, nonreal world scenario. In the real world, that set of situation cannot exist, so trying to use it to discuss morality in the real world is stupid.
Click to expand...

More evasion.
 
Jack Hays said:
You are evading.
Click to expand...

No, actually I am not. You are being hypothetical.

How many of the people tortured by the CIA had secret codes to bombs placed in New York City set to explode in 30 minutes?
 
Jack Hays said:
Sorry, but that's how Dershowitz wrote it. Any attempt to avoid the dilemma is a declaration of failure.
Click to expand...

No, pointing out it's flaws is not a declaration of failure. That is just stupid...
 
Napoleon said:
I don't think it compels confrontation. If the U.S. wanted to engage in moral relativism then it should have thought of that before crowning itself king of the "free world" and declaring itself as the example to which all other nations should aspire.
Click to expand...

Interesting but irrelevant and, again, an evasion.
 
Redress said:
How exactly is who he is in any way supposed to make his imaginary scenario any more relevant to the real world?
Click to expand...

Because Charles Barkley said it was a good idea?
 
Last edited:
Jack Hays said:
Interesting but irrelevant and, again, an evasion.
Click to expand...

Its not an evasion. You said the point of the imaginary scenario was to compel confrontation. Meaning you want people who otherwise oppose torture to question that value if torturing someone were guaranteed to save lives. I don't for the reason I specified in my last post. Obviously the imaginary problem doesn't yield the result you were hoping for.
 
Napoleon said:
Its not an evasion. You said the point of the imaginary scenario was to compel confrontation. Meaning you want people who otherwise oppose torture to question that value if torturing someone were guaranteed to save lives. I don't for the reason I specified in my last post. Obviously the imaginary problem doesn't yield the result you were hoping for.
Click to expand...

Then you are afraid.
 
Risky Thicket said:
Gul Rahman for starters.
Click to expand...

It's freaking weird to me that people that involve themselves in torture many times strip their victim naked and mess their junk. What the **** is that about? I suppose in this case they just stripped him naked from the waist down and chained outside to freeze to death, but still, why strip him half naked? WTF? Hell, when they used to execute people they would cut the genitals off, and again, wtf is that about? Bunch of ****ing weirdos if you ask me.
 
Jack Hays said:
The question, weighing the torture of one person against saving a million.
Click to expand...

Not really. I weighed the question even with the false dilemma and my answer is still that I wouldn't torture anyone.
 
Jack Hays said:
You have dodged it multiple times.
Click to expand...

No, you just have not liked the answer. You do this all the time, you reject everything but what you want to hear, which does kinda explain all those wordpress blogs you tend to cite.
 
Jack Hays said:
It is a problem created by law professor Alan Dershowitz. A nuclear weapon has been placed in New York City. It has been found, but it is set to detonate in one hour. It will detonate instantly if moved. The detonation can be prevented only with a code known only to the bomb maker, who is in custody. If it detonates the bomb will kill at least one million people. Do you torture the bomb maker to learn the code?
Click to expand...

Nope. That took less than a second to answer. Your man Alan Dershowitz perhaps needs to know some of us aren't immoral filth.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom