[lit-ideas] Re: Is torture wrong by definition?

  • From: Paul Stone <pas@xxxxxxxx>
  • To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Thu, 06 Apr 2006 09:55:18 -0400

At 09:44 AM 4/6/2006, you wrote: 

There's an expression in the psychological community that says, behavior
first, feelings will follow.  If we behave in a civilized way, which is to
say never allow torture of any kind, then the civilization *has* to follow.
There is no way that one can say let's act like barbarians and civilization
will follow.

Well until the barbarians are all dealt with, we can't turn the other cheek either.
Isn't it peculiar how all these great people (MLK, Ghandi) who actually live their live with incredible ideals and
who preach the love of peace etc. are assassinated? "You want peace? We have to KILL YOU!" The height of irony don't you think?

Maybe we should start killing the would-be assassins first before we let all the good people become victims.

Once again, it's a fundamental difference in opinions here. I will never convince anyone who is fundamentally against torture, murder, killing, violence that it is EVER necessary, just as that person can never convince me I'm wrong that in some cases, it's okay.

Paul

##########
Paul Stone
pas@xxxxxxxx
Kingsville, ON, Canada 

------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html

Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. lit-ideas
  3. Archive
  4. 04-2006