Wow -- two emails in less than a week. It's because I really like your site
and read it regularly. I would subscribe if you could somehow find it in
your heart to apologize to Ralph Nader and his supporters.

Rachel has eloquently summarized the reasons your argument in favor of
torture in some cases is flawed. Acceptance of torture (or rather, the
condemnation of it in any form or reason) is similar to the concept of
Innocent Until Proved Guilty. You must believe in that concept as an
absolute -- even if it means some guilty people go free. Any other stance
sends you down the proverbial slippery slope.

Your one example -- the torture of one of the 9/11 hijackers in the hope of
preventing the crime -- is equally flawed. Even accepting that you may
actually have captured one of them (remember that we now know that the
identification of at least a few of these so-called hijackers is highly
suspect), what would torture have accomplished? These guys were ready to
slam an airplane into a building. They were about to be serviced by dozens
of virgins for all of eternity.

Torture is never acceptable, Bart. Once you find "reasons" for it, you've
crossed over to the Dark Side.

Peace,
Matt in Wisconsin

 Back to  bartcop.com