WHY TORTURE IS WRONG - Part 3

JESSE VENTURA

former MN governor

Jesse Ventura claims he was waterboarded as part of his Navy Seal training.

On Larry King Live he stated that waterboarding "is torture... It's drowning. It gives you the complete sensation that you are drowning... Let me put it this way, you give me a water board, Dick Chaney, and one hour, and I'll have him confess to the Sharon Tate murders."

(as reported in The Progressive, August 2009, p.5)

WHY TORTURE IS WRONG - Part 2

See also, my original post on

Why Torture is Wrong

From Madeleine Albright’s

The Mighty and the Almighty,

p. 195-197 (2006):
“...Torture may work sometimes but usually it does not. Napoleon, no bleeding heart, observed more than two centuries ago, ‘The barbarous custom of having men beaten who are suspected of having important secrets to reveal must be abolished. It has always been recognized that this way of interrogating men, by putting them to torture, produces nothing worthwhile.’

“As John McCain has argued, this debate is not about what our enemies are like; it is about us. If we rationalize torture or make exceptions for special circumstances, so will everybody else. Governments that routinely abuse prisoners will point to the United States for justification. Our standing to insist on the humane treatment of Americans in foreign prisons will be diminished. America will be known as the kind of country that tortures people or that arranges for others to do so. For what purpose? To defeat the terrorists? The effect will be just the opposite. Guantánamo has presumably kept some members of the terrorist class of 2002 out of action, but at the cost of significantly enlarging the class of 2006. The detention center there should have been shut down long ago. As for Abu Ghraib, it was the biggest gift Al Qaeda’s propagandists could have received...

“...In the time since the first photos from Abu Ghraib appeared, pamphlets have circulated in Arab communities showing those shameful images along with pictures of dead Palestinians and Iraqi children... In a region of long memories, I fear these images will be fueling anti-American violence for generations to come."

Madeleine Albright

(1937- )

1st woman U.S. Secretary of State (1997-2001)

20th U.S. Ambassador to the UN (1993-1997)

MARK TWAIN ON TORTURE

Most people have never read Mark Twain's Personal Recollections of Joan of Arc, probably because it has been universally panned as Twain's worst book, even though Twain, himself, considered it his best work.

However, there are a few passages that are memorable, maybe even brilliant, such as one in Chapter 16, Volume 2 at the Gutenberg Project.

(We could easily substitute "Dick Cheney" for "Bishop Cauchon" in these passages.)

16 Joan Stands Defiant Before the Rack

(Twain writing as the Sieur du Conte:)

...We entered the circular room on the ground floor, and I saw what turned me sick—the instruments of torture and the executioners standing ready! Here you have the black heart of [Bishop] Cauchon at the blackest, here you have the proof that in his nature there was no such thing as pity...

The guards were in their places, the rack was there, and by it stood the executioner and his aids in their crimson hose and doublets, meet color for their bloody trade..

After a little, Joan arrived and was brought in. She saw the rack, she saw the attendants... as for fear, she showed not a vestige of it...

Cauchon made a solemn speech. In it he said that in the course of her several trials Joan had refused to answer some of the questions and had answered others with lies, but that now he was going to have the truth out of her, and the whole of it...

He was sure he had found a way at last to break this child's stubborn spirit and make her beg and cry...He talked high, and his splotchy face lighted itself up with all the shifting tints and signs of evil pleasure and promised triumph.. And finally he burst out in a great passion and said:

"There is the rack, and there are its ministers! You will reveal all now or be put to the torture.

"Speak."

Then she made that great answer which will live forever; made it without fuss or bravado, and yet how fine and noble was the sound of it:

"I will tell you nothing more than I have told you; no, not even if you tear the limbs from my body. And even if in my pain I did say something otherwise, I would always say afterward that it was the torture that spoke and not I."

...You should have seen Cauchon. Defeated again, and he had not dreamed of such a thing. I heard it said the next day, around the town, that he had a full confession all written out, in his pocket and all ready for Joan to sign. I do not know that that was true, but it probably was, for her mark signed at the bottom of a confession would be...evidence...

Consider the depth, the wisdom of that answer, coming from an ignorant girl. Why, there were not six men in the world who had ever reflected that words forced out of a person by horrible tortures were not necessarily words of verity and truth, yet this unlettered peasant-girl put her finger upon that flaw with an unerring instinct. I had always supposed that torture brought out the truth—everybody supposed it; and when Joan came out with those simple common-sense words they seemed to flood the place with light. It was like a lightning-flash at midnight which suddenly reveals a fair valley sprinkled over with silver streams and gleaming villages and farmsteads where was only an impenetrable world of darkness before. Manchon stole a sidewise look at me, and his face was full of surprise; and there was the like to be seen in other faces there. Consider—they were old, and deeply cultured, yet here was a village maid able to teach them something which they had not known before. I heard one of them mutter:

"Verily it is a wonderful creature. She has laid her hand upon an accepted truth that is as old as the world, and it has crumbled to dust and rubbish under her touch. Now whence got she that marvelous insight?"

The judges laid their heads together and began to talk now. It was plain, from chance words which one caught now and then, that Cauchon and Loyseleur were insisting upon the application of the torture, and that most of the others were urgently objecting.

Finally Cauchon broke out with a good deal of asperity in his voice and ordered Joan back to her dungeon...

The Bishop's anger was very high now. He could not reconcile himself to the idea of giving up the torture. It was the pleasantest idea he had invented yet, and he would not cast it by. So he called in some of his satellites on the twelfth, and urged the torture again. But it was a failure.

With some, Joan's speech had wrought an effect; others feared she might die under torture; others did not believe that any amount of suffering could make her put her mark to a lying confession. There were fourteen men present, including the Bishop. Eleven of them voted dead against the torture, and stood their ground in spite of Cauchon's abuse...

Edited for brevity --the full text can be found HERE.

Look for these previous posts:

Christians Behaving Badly #11 (Church goers support torture)

and Why Torture is Wrong

WHY TORTURE IS WRONG

In a previous post, I reported on a study that showed that the more someone attended church services, the more likely s/he was to support the use of torture.  

WHY TORTURE IS WRONG

1. Torture is cruel and unusual punishment, which is forbidden by the Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The statement implies that our government will not inflict such treatment, regardless of the severity of a crime. Similar words appear in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: "No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment."

2. A government with a policy of torture leaves its own citizens and soldiers open to retaliatory torture.

3. Although I am not a believer, I pull my life philosophies and ethics from many sources. One of my core beliefs is that everyone should treat others as they wish to be treated. Nearly every culture and/or religion on earth has some similar ethical regulation which would certainly rule out torture.

        Hinduism demands that "no man do to another that which would be repugnant to himself."

        The Torah instructs, "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself."

        Confucius said, "What you do not want done to ourself, do not unto others."

        Buddha taught us to consider others as ourselves.

        The Stoics of ancient Greece argued that all men are "equal persons in the great court of liberty."

        The Christian gospels demands, "Do unto others as you would have done to you."

        The Quran warns that a true believer must love for his brother that he loves for himself. 

        The world's first known legal code's purpose was " to cause justice to prevail and to ensure that the strong do not oppress the weak." This was the law code of Hammurabi ---in the area now known as Iraq.

        (Source: The Mighty and the Almighty by Madeleine Albright, former UN Ambassador and Secretary of State)

4. Information attained through torture is unreliable. If someone knows nothing, s/he will make up information to feed to torturers just to stop the torture. If suspects do know something, they may give false information to a hated enemy both to stop the torture and misdirect the torturers.

5. Those who have been tortured, if ever released, have horror stories to tell which, in the case of terrorists, often give cause to others to join terrorist groups. Relatives of torture victims may retaliate with suicide bombs or other terrorist acts.

6. There have been recent reports of Iran (& other countries) torturing its own citizens who do not follow strict government mandates. We have lost our moral high ground to oppose such behavior when we have engaged in similar behavior ourselves.

7. Torture is just plain wrong, unethical, and inhumane behavior. I have always been appalled by countries that have engaged in torture. I used to think America was better than that.

8. The ends do not justify the means. There may be times when torture leads to information that may save lives, but by torturing suspected terrorists, we become terrorists ourselves.

(©2009 C Woods)

For more information:

The Religious Dimensions of the Torture Debate

Survey: Support for terror suspect torture differs among the faithful.

CHRISTIANS BEHAVING BADLY #11 by supporting torture

In my attempt to show that being religious is not a guarantee of moral behavior,this post is a part of my series of reports featuring the bad behavior of religious people, past or present....

Look for other posts showing the bad behavior perpetrated by members of other religious groups.

SUPPORTING TORTURE

A recent survey conducted by the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life found that the more Americans attend church, the more likely they are to support the use of torture. Those unaffiliated with a religious group were the least likely to support torture.

Among the religious, evangelicals were the most likely to support torture, while mainline Protestants were the least likely.

That reminds me of something writer Anne Lamott said: "You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do."

I doubt that most people would condone the torture of one of our own citizens by a foreign country no matter what the person has done, but when a group has a collective hatred toward another group because they oppose us in a war, are of a different faith, culture, nationality or race, then religious people assume God hates all the same people they do ---and if God hates them, of course they must deserve to be tortured.

The survey did not determine why more religious people support torture than non-religious people, but my guess is because, like the God of the Old Testament, they want to see people suffer who do not believe as they do.

What concerns me a great deal is that of all groups surveyed, including the non-religious, the highest percentage of people who think torture can never be justified was only 31% (mainline Protestants) and the lowest 15% (evangelical Christians.) Of those who seldom or never attend religious services, only 26% chose the never justified option. (Choices were: torture against suspected terrorists can often, sometimes, rarely, or never be justified, with the option to also choose don't know/refused.)

I wish I had more information on how people thought about torture in the past. After WWII, when German and Japanese concentration and POW camps were in the news, I would guess that a higher percentage of Americans would have been philosophically against torture, because during the war it had been directed against people somewhat like us, instead of people who look and think differently than the majority of American citizens.

I have moved

WHY TORTURE IS WRONG

(which was formerly a part of this post)

to a separate post.

Click on the above link to read it.

For more information:

The Religious Dimensions of the Torture Debate

Survey: Support for terror suspect torture differs among the faithful.

WHY I AM AN ATHEIST - PART 3

IN GOD'S NAME

There are many reasons why I have rejected

religion. When I started to read about the atrocities religious people condoned ---all in God's name ---throughout history, I wanted no part of religion.

In my early teens, I loved history. But as I read and learned more about the history of the world, I became more and more astounded at how many people had been killed and/or tortured in the name of God.

Thousands had been accused of witchcraft and killed (the Bible says witches should be stoned) mostly from the Middle Ages up to the Salem witch trials.
As an adult, I became more interested in recent history. It seemed that nearly every world conflict was based, at least in part, on religion. Religious intolerance of other religions is found nearly everywhere. Despite our religious freedoms, religions seem to tear people apart more than they join them together.

As Mark Twain said: “Man is the Religious Animal. He is the only Religious Animal. He is the only animal that has the True Religion ---several of them. He is the only animal that loves his neighbor as himself, and cuts his throat if his theology isn’t straight.”

Yes, I know religious people are capable of good deeds but religion has been, throughout history, the source of atrocities, too -----Nazi exterminations of Jews, conflicts in Northern Ireland, conflicts between India and Pakistan, the Spanish Inquisition, Middle Eastern conflicts, religious terrorism.

In ancient Greece, people were executed because they didn't believe in Zeus.
In Peru, when Pizarro captured the Inca ruler Atahualpa, he promised to free him if the Incan people would fill a room with gold. Once the task was completed, Pizarro killed Atahualpa anyway. His reason? The Inca was not a Christian, thus he decided he had no obligation to fulfill a promise to him.

The tragedy of 9/11 is a perfect example of Muslim zealotry gone bad. But then most Christians conveniently forget that Christians killed every man, woman, and child in Maarat and Jerusalem ---at least 50,000 people--- during the First Crusade (1098 and 1099.) They killed everyone: Muslim, Jew, Christian, man, woman, and child ---and even ate the bodies of those they had slain, all in the name of Christ.

There were nine Crusades in the Middle East and numerous others elsewhere. Although the main targets were Muslims, Crusaders also targeted pagan Slavs, Jews, Russian and Greek Orthodox Christians, and political enemies of the popes, among others.

Most of us have no idea if our own ancestors were involved in The Crusades, but the Muslims know. They meet in coffee houses where the entertainment consists of relating family histories for generations back to the Crusades as if it all happened yesterday. This is why Muslims were so horrified when George W. Bush used the word “Crusade” in remarks about his War on Terrorism.

In the 1950s, Sir Steven Runciman wrote a resounding condemnation of the Crusades: "High ideals were besmirched by cruelty and greed... the Holy War was nothing more than a long act of intolerance in the name of God".

Eric Hoffer: “ . . Faith organizes and equips man’s soul for action. To be in possession of the one and only truth and never doubt one’s righteousness; to feel that one is backed by a mysterious power whether it be God, destiny or the law of history; to be convinced that one’s opponents are the incarnation of evil and must be crushed; to exult in self-denial and devotion to duty —these are admirable qualifications for resolute and ruthless action in any field.” (The True Believer, 1951, p. 126)

It always amazed me that no matter what religion someone was, s/he thought God was on his/her side.
In my youth, I was horrified by bigotry among religious people. In the early 1960's, the Presbyterian church my family attended in an all-white suburb sponsored a Cuban refugee family. The first time the family entered the church and people realized the family was black, several members of the congregation left the service.
It has been said the most segregated time each week in America is when Christians are in church. Churches, by far, have been more segregated than schools, government offices, businesses, or even neighborhoods.

The atrocities, the bigotry, the violence that I have barely touched on here ---all in the name of religion ---are just some of the many reasons I am am atheist.

copyright 2009 C. Woods

GOD IN THE WHITE HOUSE

In less than a week a new president will be inaugurated, so I thought this would be a good time to contemplate how presidents' religions have defined their policies.

I recently read an excellent book:
GOD IN THE WHITE HOUSE
How Faith Shaped the Presidency from John F. Kennedy to George W. Bush
by Randall Balmer

        In God in the White House Randall Balmer relates the dramatic change from President Kennedy’s obligation to assure his detractors that, as a Catholic, he would uphold the wall of separation between church and state, to recent candidates who apparently need to embrace religion in order to be elected.
        Yet among recent presidents, declarations of religious belief during campaigns have had little to do with how a president has acted in office.

        Balmer is an ordained Episcopal priest and a professor of American religions at Barnard College. Yet he is not sympathetic to the entanglement of religion and politics in this country.

        "The radical disjunction between George W. Bush's claims of moral rectitude and his indifference to the moral ramifications of his policies is striking, even breathtaking," says Balmer. Bush "trumpets his morality", yet his administration deceived the nation, discredited those who exposed the deception, and authorized the use of torture.

        Balmer asks: What would have happened, for example, if there had been a series of thoughtful follow-up questions to George W. Bush's declaration... that Jesus was his favorite philosopher? "Mr. Bush, Jesus demands in the Sermon on the Mount that his followers 'turn the other cheek.' How will that teaching guide your conduct of American foreign policy, especially in the event of, say, an attack on the United States?" Or: "Jesus, your favorite philosopher, says that we should care for 'the least of these.' How does that inform your understanding of welfare or Social Security or civil rights or the graduated income tax?" "Can you provide a specific example of how your fidelity to the Christian faith affected your policies as governor of Texas?"

        Then, once in office, a few questions like this: "Mr. President, Jesus expressed concern for the well-being of the tiniest sparrow. Do you see any relationship between that sentiment and your administration's environmental policies? " Or: "Mr. President, Jesus, the man you invoked on the campaign trail as your favorite philosopher, invited his followers to love their enemies. How does that teaching square with the invasion of Iraq or with your administration's policies on torture?"

        This book is easy to read and informative. I lived through all the presidents he covers, but I learned things from this book that I hadn't known before and was reminded of those I did but had forgotten. It is well worth reading, especially for those concerned about keeping church and state separate in this country.

------------
For an excerpt from GOD IN THE WHITE HOUSE and a podcast of an interview with Randall Balmer that aired on NPR's Fresh Air 8/20/08, click HERE. 

Update Feb 2009: For a video interview with the author and Jon Stewart on The Daily Show, click HERE.

Editorial reviews and reviews by readers can be found at the amazon.com link below: