• 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 Utilize Torture to Save a Life?

Would You Utilize Torture to Save a Family Member?

  • Total voters
    60
dclxvinoise said:
I haven't even viewed that thread nor have I seen the thread that it is referencing regarding zimmer that you mentioned. Unless you can prove otherwise, I eagerly await your apology for your premature assumptions. :2wave:
Click to expand...




You can suck on any hope of an apology. Your selectivity in who you call out is rather obvious. :2wave:



The fact that you selectivly call people out speaks volumes to your character.
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
You can suck on any hope of an apology. Your selectivity in who you call out is rather obvious. :2wave:



The fact that you selectivly call people out speaks volumes to your character.
Click to expand...

Don't worry, I wouldn't expect a person like you to even admit that you are wrong. That would require honesty and integrity. :2wave:
 
dclxvinoise said:
Don't worry, I wouldn't expect a person like you to even admit that you are wrong. That would require honesty and integrity. :2wave:
Click to expand...



How was I wrong? Please point out any left wingers you called out like this.


You attacking my honesty and integrity is a joke. You need to have standing to make such asinine, yet typical for you, claims.
 
dclxvinoise said:
Say what you want, but the fact that you weren't forthcoming with your ulterior motives when asked speaks volumes.
Click to expand...

Do you know what the word "ulterior" means? Because if you did you would understand that being "forthcoming" with an ulterior motive makes no sense.

More importantly, there is nothing inherently wrong (or sleazy) with having an ulterior motive, and unless you can prove otherwise your accusations will be disregarded as baseless and infantile.
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
How was I wrong? Please point out any left wingers you called out like this.
Click to expand...

I'm not the one who made such idiotic claims. You provided a thread as an example that I hadn't seen yet or even posted in. I also didn't know what other thread that OC's bait was referencing. What kills me is that you are guilty of the very thing that you accuse me of. In that thread I noticed you called out OC for baiting yet you could care less about the baiting in this thread, and we both know that you are aware of it because you have seen this thread and are currently posting in it. But yeah, continue to play obtuse. :roll:

You attacking my honesty and integrity is a joke. You need to have standing to make such asinine, yet typical for you, claims.
Click to expand...

I don't need to attack it. Your hypocrisy speaks for itself. :lol:
 
Ethereal said:
Do you know what the word "ulterior" means? Because if you did you would understand that being "forthcoming" with an ulterior motive makes no sense.

More importantly, there is nothing inherently wrong (or sleazy) with having an ulterior motive, and unless you can prove otherwise your accusations will be disregarded as baseless and infantile.
Click to expand...

I just think that it's a really lame way of debating. Call it what you want, because I will still call it baiting, which is what it is. What kills me is that you still haven't even revealed what your true motives are in this thread. If you had called it for what it was I would have no problem with it, but you continue to pretend that you are not being underhanded here.
 
Ethereal said:
-- If you had to brutally torture a person in order to save the lives of your family, would you do it?

--snip--

Answer: Yes.

Explanation: Because I hold the lives of my family in a higher regard than murderous thugs.
Click to expand...

Answer: Yes.

Explanation: the laws in the UK presently allow me to do this - I would have to prove in court that -

* I acted instinctively;

* I feared for my safety or that of others, and acted based on my perception of the threat faced and the scale of that threat;

* I acted to effect a lawful arrest or to prevent the escape of a person lawfully detained; and

* the level of force used was not excessive or disproportionate in the circumstances as I view them.

Source UK Police Oracle

If this was my kids or girlfriend I don't think I could even stop to think. It's not the kind of thing if they were in serious danger that I would stand aside and allow without any action on my part.
 
dclxvinoise said:
I just think that it's a really lame way of debating. Call it what you want, because I will still call it baiting, which is what it is. What kills me is that you still haven't even revealed what your true motives are in this thread. If you had called it for what it was I would have no problem with it, but you continue to pretend that you are not being underhanded here.
Click to expand...

Ahh, but he has admitted to there being an ulterior motive, which in and of itself implies that the existence of said ulterior motive is not "underhanded".

Perhaps the ulterior motive is to show that the issue of "morality" is not really a proper reason to debate for or against using torture techniques, but instead the focus should be on the veracity of the intel gathered using said techniques.

Perhaps the ulterior motive is to show that morality is fluid and itself debatable, that there is no clear cut right or wrong in given circumstances.

Any poll using hypotheticals is going to have an ulterior motive of some sort. It is only underhanded if it the ulterior motive is a "trap".

If the motivation for the poll is to give supporting evidence of a theory or concept by the poster, it is not necessarily underhanded.

From what I know of ethereal, my guess would be that he's gathering supporting evidence for a theory of his (of course, I could be way off, but the basic thing is, he isn't underhanded or sneaky).

I doubt that he is baiting a trap of some sort.

I myself would use a hypothetical poll to present evidence for a theory of mine if such a situation arose, but it would not be a "trap".

I would not give away the underlying motivations as they could then be a confounding factor with the evidence that I was trying t gather. People might preemptively try to refute the argument I would eventualy make by voting dishonestly in the poll, or answer the presented hypothetical with the knowledge of the ensuing argument, which be they for or against that argument, could cause a subconscious alteration in the way they answer the poll.

Just sayin'.
 
dclxvinoise said:
I just think that it's a really lame way of debating. Call it what you want, because I will still call it baiting, which is what it is. What kills me is that you still haven't even revealed what your true motives are in this thread. If you had called it for what it was I would have no problem with it, but you continue to pretend that you are not being underhanded here.
Click to expand...

1. Having an ulterior motive is not the same thing as "baiting."

2. Undermining your opponent's position is part of debate. If having an ulterior motive helps one accomplish this goal it is necessarily a legitimate debate tactic.

3. Having an ulterior motive is not inherently wrong. There is no reason to expect anyone to be completely transparent on a debate forum, or anywhere else for that matter.

4. I will articulate my intentions when I feel comfortable with the progression of this thread. You have cast aspersions on my character and questioned the legitimacy of my premise, therefore I will not move forward until this issue has been resolved.
 
dclxvinoise said:
I'm not the one who made such idiotic claims.
Click to expand...

See that's your 1st problem. You sir, indeed are this panda.


You provided a thread as an example that I hadn't seen yet or even posted in. I also didn't know what other thread that OC's bait was referencing. What kills me is that you are guilty of the very thing that you accuse me of. In that thread I noticed you called out OC for baiting yet you could care less about the baiting in this thread, and we both know that you are aware of it because you have seen this thread and are currently posting in it. But yeah, continue to play obtuse. :roll:



I don't need to attack it. Your hypocrisy speaks for itself. :lol:
Click to expand...



I don't believe you to be a moron, so I must assume you are lying when you claim you have no idea that that was a troll thread.


Your selective outrage is noted.


as for me? the difference is that is a troll thread. This one is not. Try again,
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
See that's your 1st problem. You sir, indeed are this panda.
Click to expand...

Dude I declared you the winner of the biggest internet penis in two separate threads. Why do you insist on trying to turn everything into a pissing contest? Are you feeling inadequate in some way and need to do this to somehow validate your masculinity to yourself? If so, I feel bad for you.

I don't believe you to be a moron, so I must assume you are lying when you claim you have no idea that that was a troll thread.

Your selective outrage is noted.
Click to expand...

Actually, I said that I hadn't seen that thread previously. I also have no idea what specifically it is referencing. However, in this thread I knew exactly what it was referencing because I had seen that thread. I'm assuming the thread referenced in the thread you mentioned is in the basement somewhere. I don't read every single post on this forum, so I apologize for not being aware of these threads and thus taking away your justification to paint me with such a broad brush.

as for me? the difference is that is a troll thread. This one is not. Try again,
Click to expand...

I no longer believe that this is a trolling thread. I suppose I just get a bit defensive and paranoid sometimes when I see a thread that clearly has an ulterior motive and the the original poster isn't forthcoming with it when asked and in fact criticizes me of daring to ask about the motive and what it is. In most cases I've seen in the past, someone only does that when they are trying to bait people. I admit that I was incorrect in this case.
 
dclxvinoise said:
Dude I declared you the winner of the biggest internet penis in two separate threads. Why do you insist on trying to turn everything into a pissing contest? Are you feeling inadequate in some way and need to do this to somehow validate your masculinity to yourself? If so, I feel bad for you.
Click to expand...



Yes my penis is quite lovely isn't it. Sorry though, this dick is for chicks..... :2wave:


Actually, I said that I hadn't seen that thread previously. I also have no idea what specifically it is referencing. However, in this thread I knew exactly what it was referencing because I had seen that thread. I'm assuming the thread referenced in the thread you mentioned is in the basement somewhere. I don't read every single post on this forum, so I apologize for not being aware of these threads and thus taking away your justification to paint me with such a broad brush.



I no longer believe that this is a trolling thread. I suppose I just get a bit defensive and paranoid sometimes when I see a thread that clearly has an ulterior motive and the the original poster isn't forthcoming with it when asked and in fact criticizes me of daring to ask about the motive and what it is. In most cases I've seen in the past, someone only does that when they are trying to bait people. I admit that I was incorrect in this case.
Click to expand...



Good. I hope to see you open fire on OC now in that thread. I think there may be an "ulteiror motive"..... :lol:
 
I voted no on this poll, in accordance with one of my rules: Ask a stupid question, get a stupid answer.


Duke
 
Duke said:
I voted no on this poll, in accordance with one of my rules: Ask a stupid question, get a stupid answer.


Duke
Click to expand...





so you wouldn't torture someone to save your moms? harsh man.... harsh..... :lol:
 
Moderator's Warning:
If you want to use what you think is hypocracy to highlight why you disagree with someones point ON TOPIC, that's one thing. If you want to rant about their "character" and "integrity" on a personal level while not touch the topic through multiple points its better suited for the basement, take it there.

Slippery, insinuating someone is "senseless" if flaming. Refrain from such in the future
 
Last edited:
Slippery Slope said:
I was going to say that I'd be willing to beat you senseless to save my mom. But I realized someone got to you already. :rofl
Click to expand...




So you are willing to use torture, to in effect save your mother....


but if it's someone elses mother/daughter/father/son, you could care less...


your hypocrisy is noted, as is your e-machismo. :rofl
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
interesting. so what lengths would you go to to save your mom?
Click to expand...

Oh, none whatsoever. See, I don't have a mother, I am the product of two suns colliding in a black hole. I fell to this "earth" a few decades ago.


Nuclear Duke
 
Ethereal said:
This hypothetical scenario is an attempt to gauge one's moral position on torture. It is not meant to elicit idiotic references to the television show 24. That a hypothetical is unlikely to occur is irrelevant - they are intended to subject our moral suppositions to scrutiny by forcing us to make a choice. Having said that, please answer the question with a YES or NO answer followed by an explanation.

If you had to brutally torture a person in order to save the lives of your family, would you do it?

The hypothetical assumes said person is a murderous thug who is directly responsible for endangering your family.

Answer: Yes.

Explanation: Because I hold the lives of my family in a higher regard than murderous thugs.
Click to expand...

Mind if I modify your hypothetical just a tad?

New Rule #1: Only one course of action is allowed. Once you get the information you like, you may only go to rescue your family member once.

If you get to your destination and it is the wrong destination - your family is blown to smithereens. You get to live a long life regretting your action every single day.

If you rescue your family the kidnappers are picked up by a giant claw and dropped either down the volcano of your choice, or in the prison of your choice.

New Rule #2: In addition to being allowed to use torture you are allowed to use psychology, respect, befriending, etc. on your kidnapper.

Now, would you still choose torture to get your information?
 
ADK_Forever said:
Mind if I modify your hypothetical just a tad?

New Rule #1: Only one course of action is allowed. Once you get the information you like, you may only go to rescue your family member once.

If you get to your destination and it is the wrong destination - your family is blown to smithereens. You get to live a long life regretting your action every single day.

If you rescue your family the kidnappers are picked up by a giant claw and dropped either down the volcano of your choice, or in the prison of your choice.

New Rule #2: In addition to being allowed to use torture you are allowed to use psychology, respect, befriending, etc. on your kidnapper.

Now, would you still choose torture to get your information?
Click to expand...

Yeah, and I'd take him with me and if it turns out he lied, I'd bring a world of pain down upon him that makes the torture look like a walk in the park.

He would linger....
 
Ethereal said:
I hold the lives of my family in a higher regard than murderous thugs.
Click to expand...

Why is that?




Hey, say what you want about that question, it's still not as dumb as the one in that post. But really, why?


Duke
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom