A proposed guideline for adjudicating torture

[Orrex]

Working from the belief that a society's maturity can be judged by how it treats its inmates, I propose the following guideline:

Torture is defined as any method of a physical, mental, or spiritual coercion that would, if performed upon the President of the United States, constitute a crime.

What do you think?

[Warpy]

1. I think that's a great idea

Furthermore, any coercive treatment designed to extract information from unwilling detainees should be tested for efficacy upon the President and members of Congress.

[Orrex]

2. All else being equal, Bushco is trying to pull some sleight of hand here

Morally, their position is very week. They assert that torture is justified--the fact that they don't call it torture is, of course, irrelevant.

Fine. If they feel that torture is justified, then let them torture. But then they must face the consequences of undertaking the course that they feel was justified.

If a guy sneaks into my house late at night I may feel justified in shooting him, but that doesn't mean that I'm right. Therefore the justification for my action must be assessed by a neutral party. And so must the consequences of my actions.

Bush and his fellow torturers want to have it both ways.

"It's not torture because of reasons X, Y, and Z. But even if it is torture, we're justified in doing it because we say so."

Sorry--you don't get to write the laws and determine how they apply. Hell, the last I checked, the Executive branch shouldn't be writing the laws at all--not by strong-arming the Congress and not by issuing para-Legislative "signing statements." What a bunch of assholes.

And think about this: does it really seem likely that the GOP would be willing to give the President permanent, unchecked, and sweeping powers if they really thought that they'd have to face a Democrat in the Whitehouse any time soon? I'm not a tinfoiler, and I'm not actually positing a conspiracy, but the notion that the GOP would support such powers in the hands of President Feingold or Gore seems ludicrous to me.

Hmm...