Is torture ever morally acceptable?

[starshiptrooper]

He isn’t a suspect if he is a terrorist, right?

Continuous loud music and sleep deprivation most certainly is torture. My Mom had chronic insomnia for years, she was still suprisingly able to raise a family.

That reminds of me of my late-night/early-morning flight to California.

Am I a Catholic? Do I believe in your God? Are people who murder civilians really children of your God? What does that even mean?

 

[Frank_Drebin]

Again, it is the intent, not the actions then, correct? So if you are doing it for the person’s own good, it is not torture? It seems a bit of a fine line.

Also, where does one draw the line? Sleep depravation is common. Some people cannot sleep on a hard stone floor, certainly. Is it torture to not give them some sort of mattress? It seems ridiculous, but ost people don’t consider insufficient sleep to be torture either. How many hours must a prisoner be given?

I think it can begin to get a bit difficult to define, and unless there is a Church approved list of dos and don’ts, I am not sure how we parse it, beyond the obvious.

Note I am not arguing for physcial pain infliction, but the more nuanced examples. Is bread and water torture, as far as nourishment? What about the mental anguish inflicted when a prisoner invariably loses weight, or has not seen their family in weeks?

What level of comfort must be provided to not be tortorous, and where is it defined?

 

[Frank_Drebin]

AIUI, someone can die if kept awake long enough; so even if technically not “torture”, it is intentional harm, therefore reprehensible if done as interrogation.

Actions undertaken as physical training, where care is taken not to harm those in training, are not the same as actions done to break captives’ resistance. There are military training situations where trainees have to swim with bound limbs; however, tying someone up and throwing them into deep water as interrogation would be reprehensible. AIUI.

ICXC NIKA

Care is taken not to harm prisoners though. We are talking about loud music and poor sleep.

Believe me, I still shudder at the training, and woke up for weeks afterwards back home, as did many others. It was mental anguish for us too. But because their intent was good, it is okay?

 

[GEddie]

Again, it is the intent, not the actions then, correct? So if you are doing it for the person’s own good, it is not torture? It seems a bit of a fine line.

Also, where does one draw the line? Sleep depravation is common. Some people cannot sleep on a hard stone floor, certainly. Is it torture to not give them some sort of mattress? It seems ridiculous, but ost people don’t consider insufficient sleep to be torture either. How many hours must a prisoner be given?

I think it can begin to get a bit difficult to define, and unless there is a Church approved list of dos and don’ts, I am not sure how we parse it, beyond the obvious.

Note I am not arguing for physcial pain infliction, but the more nuanced examples. Is bread and water torture, as far as nourishment? What about the mental anguish inflicted when a prisoner invariably loses weight, or has not seen their family in weeks?

What level of comfort must be provided to not be tortorous, and where is it defined?

If someone is weary enough, they will sleep. The issue is not discomfort, but being actively kept awake (such as when POWs were kept up to their neck in water and could not fall asleep without their head going under).

Again, there is a strong distinction between a training situation, where one can “washout” it they can take no more; and being “broken.”

ICXC NIKA

 

[Tomdstone]

Says who, you?

I think it isn’t. And my source is them same as yours - opinion.

So if it is torture, does that mean the US military is guilty of torturing their own members? It happens regularly in Spokane, Washington.

Of course it is torture to forcefully subject someone to continuous loud unwanted music and to force them to stay awake and not sleep. That sleep deprivation is mentioned as a form of torture by the American Catholic bishops as we see here:
usccb.org/issues-and-action/human-life-and-dignity/torture/the-problem-with-torture.cfm

Any act by which severe mental or physical suffering is intentionally inflicted on a person is by definition torture. Playing continuous loud unwanted music is mental suffering. Continuous and forceful sleep deprivation - preventing the person from sleeping - is physical suffering. It is torture and of course, it is gravely wrong to torture anyone.

 

[starshiptrooper]

Whose God? Does this mean we can’t make any distinction between innocent civilians and the guilty terrorists?

 

[Frank_Drebin]

Of course it is torture to forcefully subject someone to continuous loud unwanted music and to force them to stay awake and not sleep. That sleep deprivation is mentioned as a form of torture by the American Catholic bishops as we see here:
usccb.org/issues-and-action/human-life-and-dignity/torture/the-problem-with-torture.cfm

Any act by which severe mental or physical suffering is intentionally inflicted on a person is by definition torture. Playing continuous loud unwanted music is mental suffering. Continuous and forceful sleep deprivation - preventing the person from sleeping - is physical suffering. It is torture and of course, it is gravely wrong to torture anyone.

Actually, that quote on what constitutes torture is from the the 1948 UN declaration of human rights.

I was looking for a specific list from the Church detailing forms of torture. Like I said, isolation for prisoners from their families is a serious form of mental anguish. It would be nice to see the Catechsim clarify mental anquish and what acts are torturuos, since vague defintions for mental and physcial anguish are left wide open for interpretation.

Not that I am looking for loopholes, I oppose torture, but it stands to reason prisoners of war are likely to be sleep deprived simply because they are frightened, along, or worried. When does it become torture?

 

[Monte_RCMS]

some say for information gathering, it’s ok.

but for punishment, it’s not ok.

also depends on the definition of torture.

cutting off noses and ears, no.

permanent physical or mental damage, no

speaking forcefully, yes

verbal trickery, yes

deprivation of use of cocaine, meth, heroin, … yes

 

[PolarGuy]

(name removed by moderator), all men are children of God.

So what?

Your statement really doesn’t assist in answering the question we’re discussing…

…in part because, although men are doubtlessly children of God, that does not entitle all men to the same treatment by others as a result of their actions. I am required as a Christian to try & love all people. I am not required to treat all men the same. I can sit on a jury and throw one into jail when his/her conduct warrants it. I posit that I can even morally torture someone.

 

[Tomdstone]

I was looking for a specific list from the Church detailing forms of torture.

From the link that I gave above: “Torture assumes many guises, from electric shocks and burning with cigarettes, to sexual humiliation in various forms, even rape. Detainees may be threatened by attack dogs, or told that unless they cooperate their family members will be harmed. Detainees may be beaten, deprived of sleep, hooded for long periods.”

 

[starshiptrooper]

Starting an apologetics discussion is informative, but it doesn’t answer question. Why is torture moral or immoral? Is this because the Catholic God says so? How are you going to convince people who aren’t Catholics that torture is wrong?

 

[GEddie]

Starting an apologetics discussion is informative, but it doesn’t answer question. Why is torture moral or immoral? Is this because the Catholic God says so? How are you going to convince people who aren’t Catholics that torture is wrong?

I guess you can’t get beyond the reverse golden rule: Do not impose on others what you do not want done to you (or your citizens).

Of course, our current public enemies use torture as a matter of course, so that doesn’t really work…

ICXC NIKA

 

[GEddie]

From the link that I gave above: “Torture assumes many guises, from electric shocks and burning with cigarettes, to sexual humiliation in various forms, even rape. Detainees may be threatened by attack dogs, or told that unless they cooperate their family members will be harmed. Detainees may be beaten, deprived of sleep, hooded for long periods.”

So threats are torture?

Hooding may be perfectly legit in some situations. When controlling someone is imperative, as in transportation, removing the sense of sight by a hood is the easiest means of doing so.

And you can’t claim that humiliation is torture. You can’t imprison somebody without causing humiliation.

ICXC NIKA

 

[Rayvin]

(name removed by moderator), all men are children of God.

So what?

Your statement really doesn’t assist in answering the question we’re discussing…

…in part because, although men are doubtlessly children of God, that does not entitle all men to the same treatment by others as a result of their actions. I am required as a Christian to try & love all people. I am not required to treat all men the same. I can sit on a jury and throw one into jail when his/her conduct warrants it. I posit that I can even morally torture someone.

If you can love your fellow man while torturing him, then perhaps you’re right. For myself, I am not sure I have that capacity. Also, would not the torture and pain inflicted on another person take it’s toll on your soul?

Love one another - I think you can only torture someone if you are acting out of love for them. Retribution certainly is not allowable, and not of God. I do not believe it is for us to judge people.

Apologies if this is a far too simplistic assertion. I do not believe torture to be justifiable, especially given that the people we determine to be terrorists in the West feel they are doing their own religion’s work. They are acting out of faith, however misguided we may feel that to be. Even if they do this unto us, we should turn the other cheek.

 

[Frank_Drebin]

If you can love your fellow man while torturing him, then perhaps you’re right. For myself, I am not sure I have that capacity. Also, would not the torture and pain inflicted on another person take it’s toll on your soul?

Love one another - I think you can only torture someone if you are acting out of love for them. Retribution certainly is not allowable, and not of God. I do not believe it is for us to judge people.

Apologies if this is a far too simplistic assertion. I do not believe torture to be justifiable, especially given that the people we determine to be terrorists in the West feel they are doing their own religion’s work. They are acting out of faith, however misguided we may feel that to be. Even if they do this unto us, we should turn the other cheek.

I consider not being able to see my daughter the hardest thing I can endure. Is it not torture to force someone to be kept from their loved ones?

Mental anguish pretty much covers every aspect of improsnment, so by definition, imprisonment itself is torture. Yet, the Church allows imprisonment? Why?

 

[Rayvin]

I consider not being able to see my daughter the hardest thing I can endure. Is it not torture to force someone to be kept from their loved ones?

Mental anguish pretty much covers every aspect of improsnment, so by definition, imprisonment itself is torture. Yet, the Church allows imprisonment? Why?

That’s a very fair point. Perhaps one can be imprisoned compassionately. In which case I believe that the slant of this discussion, for me at least, would be to argue that certain forms of torture have no apparent ‘compassionate’ element to them. You could feasibly imprison someone out of love for that person, despite the mental anguish it may cause them - even arguing that this protects both themselves and their family from actions that they would undertake. Could you make the same sort of assertion with water-boarding?

I must confess however, that my argument is somewhat laboured - especially given that I do not believe the Church would argue for people to be imprisoned purely out of love for said people. Therefore I suppose we must assume that it is partly/chiefly to do with either punishment (which would be disappointing to me personally, but would seemingly give weight to the idea that torture is morally justifiable) or protection of others.

If the latter, maybe you could argue that preventing this individual from committing further sin is the justifiable action.

 

[Tomdstone]

I consider not being able to see my daughter the hardest thing I can endure. Is it not torture to force someone to be kept from their loved ones?

Mental anguish pretty much covers every aspect of improsnment, so by definition, imprisonment itself is torture. Yet, the Church allows imprisonment? Why?

I agree that some types of solitary confinement might be torture. With math it is 1+1=2 and not 1+1=2.0001. But in real life, there is not such a sharp dividing line between what constitutes a legitimate penalty for a crime and what is torture. And there are various types of torture, ranging from minimal to extremely harsh.
It could be torture to force someone from seeing or communicating with their daughter. Yes, that would be a way to torture someone.
In the meantime, I read in the news just now about two boys who shot dead a one year old baby in a stoller because the mother did not have any money for them.
jacksonville.com/news/crime/2013-03-21/story/baby-fatally-shot-stroller-brunswick-street-mother-wounded
cnn.com/2013/03/22/us/georgia-baby-killed/?hpt=hp_t2
Well, in cases such as that, I might have to rethink my objections to torture.
I don’t know how you are going to deal with these pathetic cowardly criminals who are such big boys with their guns going around shooting defenseless and innocent people.

 

[Frank_Drebin]

That’s a very fair point. Perhaps one can be imprisoned compassionately. In which case I believe that the slant of this discussion, for me at least, would be to argue that certain forms of torture have no apparent ‘compassionate’ element to them. You could feasibly imprison someone out of love for that person, despite the mental anguish it may cause them - even arguing that this protects both themselves and their family from actions that they would undertake. Could you make the same sort of assertion with water-boarding?

I must confess however, that my argument is somewhat laboured - especially given that I do not believe the Church would argue for people to be imprisoned purely out of love for said people. Therefore I suppose we must assume that it is partly/chiefly to do with either punishment (which would be disappointing to me personally, but would seemingly give weight to the idea that torture is morally justifiable) or protection of others.

If the latter, maybe you could argue that preventing this individual from committing further sin is the justifiable action.

Which would then mean torture is accpetable by the Church, if it was done to protect the person or others. Which brings us full circle.

 

[Frank_Drebin]

I agree that some types of solitary confinement might be torture. With math it is 1+1=2 and not 1+1=2.0001. But in real life, there is not such a sharp dividing line between what constitutes a legitimate penalty for a crime and what is torture. And there are various types of torture, ranging from minimal to extremely harsh.
It could be torture to force someone from seeing or communicating with their daughter. Yes, that would be a way to torture someone.
In the meantime, I read in the news just now about two boys who shot dead a one year old baby in a stoller because the mother did not have any money for them.
jacksonville.com/news/crime/2013-03-21/story/baby-fatally-shot-stroller-brunswick-street-mother-wounded
cnn.com/2013/03/22/us/georgia-baby-killed/?hpt=hp_t2
Well, in cases such as that, I might have to rethink my objections to torture.
I don’t know how you are going to deal with these pathetic cowardly criminals who are such big boys with their guns going around shooting defenseless and innocent people.

Believe me friend, it is times like these in reading those articles that being Catholic is most difficult. When you hurt children, or the defenseless, my instinct is to want to react in a way I know I cannot.

If someone harmed my daughter, I can only hope my years of trying to be a good Catholic would override my paternal love for her.

 

[Rayvin]

Which would then mean torture is accpetable by the Church, if it was done to protect the person or others. Which brings us full circle.

Yes, but then hence my point that you then have to question whether that statement can be applied to all forms of torture. For instance I find it hard to imagine that any violent torture could be morally justifiable.