• 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!

Would you call for prosecution if someone used torture to save your life?

Would you call for prosecution if someone used torture to save your life?

  • Yes, even though I lived, the law is the law and they broke it.

    Votes: 8 40.0%
  • No, they did what needed to be done.

    Votes: 7 35.0%
  • I have no clue how I'd react in that situation.

    Votes: 5 25.0%

  • Total voters
    20
OK, saying that terrorism is wrong is one thing.

Saying that torture is right? Not only is that another thing, it is wrong.

It also helps the terrorists recruit by giving them propoganda.

You pick up arms, we WILL kill you. You put them down, we WILL talk to you. Why is torture any part of that conversation?

The epic failure of your logic is, the terrorist have ZERO desire to talk to you, don't fear death, and ANYTHING we do other then submit to their cause and convert inspires them.

I know that is an alien concept to some, but that's reality, welcome to it.

And again, if your life was in my hands in a ticking time bomb situation with a bad guy in custody... you'd go home alive.

Where as I'd be buried with all the rest killed because you and others like you, are more afraid of hurting a terrorist then saving innocent people from death.

I would say there is another flaw in your argument. I know it's not popular to say but these "terrorists" are not all brainless zombies intent on destroying America.

They were born with loving families and thinking brains much like you and I. It takes many years of political and religious indoctrination to bring about enough hate to want to kill innocents for some cause.

...In WW2, do you know why germans would often surrender to us but never to the russians? It's because they knew we would treat them well. Despite the massive Nazi propaganda machine, many germans had relatives in America and knew that we were good, decent people that would let them live if they put down their guns. Countless lives on both sides were saved because of our inate goodness.

Since there are no standing armies on the opposing side in this "war on terror", we have to use the battle of ideas even more than tanks or bombs.

Those who seek to do us harm only win when we compromise our values.
 
My point in all this, was to highlight the flaw of the torture debate.

Torture is the inteintional infliction fo cruelty on another human being for no other reason then to inflict pain and agony on said person.

There are circumstances where methods that are less desireable to be used, but shoudl remain an option if teh circumstance arises. I'm not calling for beating people just to "find out what they might know" or any other non-sense like that.


The problem is, there are too many people who cannot fathom using force to save lives, and that mindset amazes the hell out of me.


As for your hypothetical Z, it wouldn't take a vigilante to take care of some man that raped my daughter and society failed to bring them to justice, I can promise you that.
 
I would say there is another flaw in your argument. I know it's not popular to say but these "terrorists" are not all brainless zombies intent on destroying America.

They were born with loving families and thinking brains much like you and I. It takes many years of political and religious indoctrination to bring about enough hate to want to kill innocents for some cause.

...In WW2, do you know why germans would often surrender to us but never to the russians? It's because they knew we would treat them well. Despite the massive Nazi propaganda machine, many germans had relatives in America and knew that we were good, decent people that would let them live if they put down their guns. Countless lives on both sides were saved because of our inate goodness.

Since there are no standing armies on the opposing side in this "war on terror", we have to use the battle of ideas even more than tanks or bombs.

Those who seek to do us harm only win when we compromise our values.


Yeah... okay.

We play nice, and innocent people die, but you get to feel good knowing that we "kept our values". People like you get others killed.

Terrorist rejected that "good loving family" ideal, and their cultural background doesn't equate with ours. German soldiers were forced to war. Terrorist VOLUNTEER.

Big difference, but you ignored that.
 
Wow, the "trap you by hypothetical."

I have no idea how I would react. I would hope that I would be glad to be alive but not let my personal emotion remove my belief that torture is a wrong and is a crime. The reason is that innocent people are being tortured because somebody has figured that if we get even a few small bits of useful information it's worth the barbaric victimization of innocents.

I do not agree with that.
 
Yeah... okay.

We play nice, and innocent people die, but you get to feel good knowing that we "kept our values". People like you get others killed.

Terrorist rejected that "good loving family" ideal, and their cultural background doesn't equate with ours. German soldiers were forced to war. Terrorist VOLUNTEER.

Big difference, but you ignored that.

But you advocate action in which innocent people are hurt and killed as well. And this torture thing, using extremes to justify an overall ability to engage in it is not credible. And if you use torture often, as you suggest we have the ability to, then you're going to catch innocent people up in it. War, death penalty, torture, etc. you're going to get innocent people.
 
Yeah... okay.

We play nice, and innocent people die, but you get to feel good knowing that we "kept our values". People like you get others killed.
Bull****, your faux self righteous nonsense is not lost on reasonable people. How amazingly ****ed up do you have to be to actually blame a person who wants to maintain some semblance of moral decency on this issue for deaths that occur as a result of deliberate terrorist activity. You have absolutely no way to substantiate this obvious insult.

Terrorist rejected that "good loving family" ideal, and their cultural background doesn't equate with ours. German soldiers were forced to war. Terrorist VOLUNTEER.
And that's just one thing that makes them "the bad guy." By the way, in case you didn't realize this, our military is all volunteer. Your analogy is on the floor.
 
Yeah... okay.

We play nice, and innocent people die, but you get to feel good knowing that we "kept our values". People like you get others killed.

Another personal attack solely because someone disagrees with you? :doh

Truth is people with your way of thinking (i.e. Cheney, Bush, Rumsfeld, Yoo, etc.) get innocent people not only arrested and imprisoned for indefinite periods of time but, tortured. People who think like you stain America's reputation in the world.

You think because we have the power that because one group of people attacked us and act like animals that that gives us the moral excuse to imprison and then torture anybody we want to. Bullies behave like that. Dictators behave like that. America does not want to be either.
 
My point in all this, was to highlight the flaw of the torture debate.

Torture is the inteintional infliction fo cruelty on another human being for no other reason then to inflict pain and agony on said person.
You are wrong. It's clearly defined as also being for the intent to extract information.

There are circumstances where methods that are less desireable to be used, but shoudl remain an option if teh circumstance arises. I'm not calling for beating people just to "find out what they might know" or any other non-sense like that.
That is exactly what is happening. Torture is almost exclusively a fishing expedition. You torture because you don't know. If you already know, torture isn't warranted. There are other, more reliable way to corroborate information.

The problem is, there are too many people who cannot fathom using force to save lives, and that mindset amazes the hell out of me.
Patently false assertion. By the nature of why you are torturing you have no idea if you are actually going to save lives. You are fishing.
 
. A principle the Anti-Republicans with their torture witch hunts are doing their level damndest to destroy.

For ****s sake, why do you engage in this crap? It just blows any credibility you might have had out the window.
 
Then the law needs to be written so as to congratulate torturers who save lives...particularly mine and doubly so for my family's lives.

Anything less would be a most foul injustice.
We'll just modify the Good Sumaritan Law. :)
 
I wonder if you realize how many enemies have been "tortured" to allow you to be a free thinker?

I wonder if you know how many US soldiers chose to fight and die because they believe that we are the best country in the world. Don't you think it is kinda selfish to give up some of that "best" for a little personal security?
 
Yeah... okay.

We play nice, and innocent people die, but you get to feel good knowing that we "kept our values". People like you get others killed.

Terrorist rejected that "good loving family" ideal, and their cultural background doesn't equate with ours. German soldiers were forced to war. Terrorist VOLUNTEER.

Big difference, but you ignored that.

Prove it. The problem with your hypothetical is that it isn't necessarily rooted in reality.
 
As for your hypothetical Z, it wouldn't take a vigilante to take care of some man that raped my daughter and society failed to bring them to justice, I can promise you that.

Fine, would you call for your own prosecution as the only thing I can assume from your statement and dodge, deflection, and avoidance of my hypothetical is that you yourself would "Bring them to justice". In which case, different hypothetical if you prefer, would you call for your own prosecution? And, if not, do you think then that it should be completely legal for people to kill another person based on their own beliefs of an illegal act they performed even if they were found not guilty by a court of law?
 
My point in all this, was to highlight the flaw of the torture debate.

Torture is the inteintional infliction fo cruelty on another human being for no other reason then to inflict pain and agony on said person.

There are circumstances where methods that are less desireable to be used, but shoudl remain an option if teh circumstance arises. I'm not calling for beating people just to "find out what they might know" or any other non-sense like that.


The problem is, there are too many people who cannot fathom using force to save lives, and that mindset amazes the hell out of me.


As for your hypothetical Z, it wouldn't take a vigilante to take care of some man that raped my daughter and society failed to bring them to justice, I can promise you that.

Actually, what you did is expose the flaw in the absolute/black-or-white position. There is no absolute answer to this question. It depends on context. Also, one's morals, the legality of a situation, and one's behaviors/feelings are all separate entities. Trying to create an absolute consistency between them is silly; it does not exist in absolute terms.

But as for Zyph's hypothetical, if you performed a vigilante act and murdered that person, do you believe that is an illegal act, based on our current laws?
 
Back
Top Bottom