For one thing, administration of it by someone who knows what he’s doing is not available to me. I’m also a bit agey for anything stressful, which undoubtedly waterboarding is. Apparently all Navy seals, special forces and a lot of Marines do, though. And, as I said, I have not read where lots of them, or any of them, have been damaged permanently by it.
And neither would I volunteer to be on the receiving end of airborne ordinance like hellfire missiles or napalm. But erstwhile moralists don’t address those things; possibly because Obama does them while three waterboardings occurred under George Bush’s administration.
But the real question in all of these “torture” arguments, and one that is never answered, is what the proper definition of “torture” really is, either just as a rational thing or from the Church’s point of view. The Church has never condemned waterboarding, specifically.
I realize defining torture is difficult because it’s so context dependent and subjective to most. And, really, asking someone like me whether I would undergo waterboarding is a request for a subjective answer, and without context. Would I undergo it for five minutes with a doctor standing by? Probably. Would I undergo it for hours? No, because I doubt I would survive that any more than I would now likely survive the fraternity hazing I underwent when I was in college.
Whoa. where???
