Is torture ever justified?
G. Jeffrey MacDonald/Religion News Service
Issue date: 5/24/09 Section: Divine Intervention
While elected officials and cable news pundits have been debating whether torture of suspected terrorists is effective, legal or constitutional, a moral question has loomed in the background: is torture ever justified?
Most Americans say yes. A Pew Research Center survey of 742 Americans in April found that 71 percent believe torture of suspected terrorists is justified, at least on rare occasions. Solid majorities of every subgroup, including religious affiliation and worship attendance, said torture could be justified.
Ethicists and other thinkers are weighing under what conditions, if any, torture could be acceptable. What's emerging is a rough outline of what could be termed a "torture doctrine," vaguely reminiscent of Christianity's 1,500-year-old Just War theory.
With torture, however, the query centers not so much on when it's just - since few public intellectuals regard torture as a just practice - as when it might be needed and defensible.
Just War theory starts with a number of questions - is war really necessary? Is it likely to succeed? Are there other alternatives? Here's how similar questions might apply to moral dilemmas surrounding torture:
Is torture ever permissible?
No, according to the Rev. Richard Killmer, executive director of the National Religious Campaign Against Torture, a coalition of more than 250 religious organizations.
Torture "is a violation of the respect and honor that every human being is entitled to," Killmer said. There are better methods, including appealing to suspects' humanity and the idea that needed information "might be important to saving innocent lives."
Others disagreed. Michael Levin, a philosopher at City University of New York, said he stands by his 1982 essay, "The Case for Torture." In it, he argues: "there are situations where torture is not merely permissible but morally mandatory."
And it's not just Americans, Levin argues, who could find justification for using torture to prevent future harm.
Most Americans say yes. A Pew Research Center survey of 742 Americans in April found that 71 percent believe torture of suspected terrorists is justified, at least on rare occasions. Solid majorities of every subgroup, including religious affiliation and worship attendance, said torture could be justified.
Ethicists and other thinkers are weighing under what conditions, if any, torture could be acceptable. What's emerging is a rough outline of what could be termed a "torture doctrine," vaguely reminiscent of Christianity's 1,500-year-old Just War theory.
With torture, however, the query centers not so much on when it's just - since few public intellectuals regard torture as a just practice - as when it might be needed and defensible.
Just War theory starts with a number of questions - is war really necessary? Is it likely to succeed? Are there other alternatives? Here's how similar questions might apply to moral dilemmas surrounding torture:
Is torture ever permissible?
No, according to the Rev. Richard Killmer, executive director of the National Religious Campaign Against Torture, a coalition of more than 250 religious organizations.
Torture "is a violation of the respect and honor that every human being is entitled to," Killmer said. There are better methods, including appealing to suspects' humanity and the idea that needed information "might be important to saving innocent lives."
Others disagreed. Michael Levin, a philosopher at City University of New York, said he stands by his 1982 essay, "The Case for Torture." In it, he argues: "there are situations where torture is not merely permissible but morally mandatory."
And it's not just Americans, Levin argues, who could find justification for using torture to prevent future harm.
Viewing Comments 1 - 1 of 1
dick
posted 10/29/09 @ 9:18 AM EST
SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM
Post a Comment