Torture legalized in the US ?

[Jipay]

Just wanted to have the advice from american citizens on the latest little text voted that allows tortures when it comes to "enemies of the nation". From a European perspective this seems rather weird *wacko* After the great weapons thread, it's time for another nice debate ! *sweet*

[Lost Viking]

Just wanted to have the advice from american citizens on the latest little text voted that allows tortures when it comes to "enemies of the nation". From a European perspective this seems rather weird *wacko* After the great weapons thread, it's time for another nice debate ! *sweet*

Well you allow torture here dont you? :-P

[Jipay]

Of course, still that's a tad different, and remember that we almost only torture kids, so it's not THAT bad :-D

[snefroe]

i heard this as well... it seems they're allowing the use of torture for people suspected of terrorism, but i don't know if it's already aproved by both legislative chambers, if that's needed anyway. still, i can't think that any nation will ever transfer suspected terrorists to the US with this type of rule...

[JINZONINGEN73]

After the great weapons thread, it's time for another nice debate ! *sweet*

Which I feel I "won", as discussion came to a screeching halt. lol

X-D

[JINZONINGEN73]

This topic can't be "won". It's wrong, for many reasons.

What comes to mind first is that information gained through torture is bound to be shitty.

Reminds me of the classic representations of Salem witch hunts.

"Are you a witch?"

"No."

"Wrong answer, smack her in the face." *SMACK* "Ok, are you a witch?"

"No."

"You sure? Poke out her eyes!"

"OK OK, GEEZ. I'm a witch!"

"You are? Burn her at the stake!"

"Wh-wha? I mean no, no, I'm not!"

"But you already said you did! HA! Burn her!"

The second (obvious) thing that comes to mind, I understand the disgust towards the religious wackos, running around doing suicide bombings and all that jazz... but if you (justifiably, perhaps) hold them in a regard as if they were barbaric cavemen in the wrong era of earth's history... you're NOT going to be helping their mental evolution along by being just like them.

I hate cartoons where the good guys always pass up a perfect opportunity to OBLITERATE their enemies, on the grounds "that we'll be no better than they are".

But really, it does apply.

Allowing torture is just adding ammunition to the enemy's justification for their acts.

The worst thing about all this perhaps is that, to me anyway, this all appears just to be a cheap way of exonerating morons in the chain of command... AFTER they've already done terrible things.

September 24, 2005:

http://hrw.org/english/docs/2005/09/25/usint11776.htm

The soldiers

[JINZONINGEN73]

It gets better.

Now Bush is trying to get the laws changed so that he and his administration can't be tryed as war criminals.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MoRjbIQMXGQ

Sad times.

[Kahgarak]

Of course, still that's a tad different, and remember that we almost only torture kids, so it's not THAT bad :-D

And then still,it is not torturing on this board,it is rather punishing for SPAM and such.

[Jipay]

It gets better.

Now Bush is trying to get the laws changed so that he and his administration can't be tryed as war criminals.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MoRjbIQMXGQ

Sad times.

OMG, that is amazing ! Seriously, there is a problem with your country right now... 5 years ago I was going there every year and now it just seems to me like if it wasn't the same place anymore :-(

[gylman]

I have generally been very pro-american in the past, even as recently as 2 or 3 years ago, but the past few years have been truly depressing. I think we are witnessing the decline of an empire and a once great nation. It does not seem reversible, even when Bush is voted out of power in 2008. Incredibly, creationism is being taught in many schoools in the USA. It boggles the mind, and I can think of no better example of American decline, although it is but one of many.

It is sad, because the US has been hijacked by a social/religious philosophy which probably does not reflect hte opinion and philosophy of a majority of US citizens, but which is well organized and cohesive enough to defeat the divided opposition.

Sigh. There is no one to replace the USA as a world leader, sadly. All other alternatives are worse. The future of our civilization does not seem as bright now as it did 10 years ago .

The roman empire was destroyed by a combination of disease and external enemies, as well as a loss of the "Roman ethic" that created it in the first place. Exactly the same will be true of the American empire. History always repeats itself.

[JINZONINGEN73]

I have generally been very pro-american in the past, even as recently as 2 or 3 years ago, but the past few years have been truly depressing. I think we are witnessing the decline of an empire and a once great nation. It does not seem reversible, even when Bush is voted out of power in 2008. Incredibly, creationism is being taught in many schoools in the USA. It boggles the mind, and I can think of no better example of American decline, although it is but one of many.

I agree, saying that as an American... and more or less a conservative one.

But religion isn't the answer, it's the problem.

It's the problem in the middle east that has bled over into the rest of the world, and it's the problem that rallies people in America under a false umbrella of divine justification.

Religion will destroy this world.

I do have some glimmers of hope for mankind though.

If we can get our megablocks into space fast enough, a global weapons disaster will blow, but won't mean our total end.

And look at the technology we have now. All fit for our doom, yes, but it can be used in other ways, to speed up our evolution.

We're heading fast for a time when our organic bodies won't be everything. In 20 years (less?), we're going to be able to dl entire realms of knowledge through our cortex. Our dreams and memories stored on holographic crystals. Our bodies more or less replaced with nanite restructuring. Hell, women don't even need men anymore to reproduce, thanks to artificial sperm.

We're on the verge of TRUE science fiction.

I think all this silly crap going on in the world now are the death rattles of religion, getting shaken off every day by new breakthroughs that make our current world look like a cave with animal etchings on the walls.

Religion.

Just say no.

Edited October 2, 2006 by JINZONINGEN 73

[gylman]

I think we agree that the problem is religion. That's what I meant by "hijacked by a social/religious philosophy". The US has always been more religious than other western countries, but they took the separation of church and state very seriously, and really meant it. Now it seems that the social and political agendas are clearly being driven by specific ideas of specific religious groups, and those who can best enlist the support of these groups are most likely to win office.

But it's more than just religion. The old American ethic was "work hard, try to succeed, don't expect others to take care of you, live and let live". Now the American ethic is Crispy Kreme and Arby's, Trailer Park Boys, "Sue the Bastards", and "bully whoever doesn't agree with us". That's a society in decline.

I don't think, however, that we are seeing the death throes of religion. I wish it were so, but what I see is increasing religiosity all over the world. The religious have faith to drive them, and are willing to make sacrifices to advance their faith. The non-religious just want to be left alone, and aren't willing to fight for their non-faith. Yet. By the time they realize that they should have fought for their non-beliefs, and their right to non-belief, it will be too late.

Only China and some of the East seem somewhat immune - in part I think it is the relatively non-aggressive nature of Confucianism, Taoism and Buddhism (they don't have an equivalent of prosletysing missionaries and jihad to my knowledge), and in part that they have been geographically spared from Christianity and Islam until now. Even the anti-religious stance of communism gets some credit. As the decadent West dies off due to obesity and lack of interest in reproduction, and Islam drags another third of the world down into intolerance and lack of intellectual and social progress, only the East will remain as a place where the next human advances will come from.

The fact that the West's reproductive rate is between half and a third of that of the non-developed world is the final nail in the inevitable burial of Western (i.e. European/North America) civilization, ending a 2000 year cycle that began with Rome. The ascedancy of nearly 2 billion disciplined, well motivated, and increasingly educated and confident people from China and India is inevitable.

I just hope it all doesn't fall apart in my lifetime or in the lifetime of my children.

[Asuka]

But religion isn't the answer, it's the problem.

Religion.

Just say no.

I cannot say at all how much I would wish myself it would be so simple. I could cry however it

[gylman]

Essentially, it is nothing other than a body of collective beliefs and practices endowed with a certain authority.

Religion provides social control, cohesion, and purpose for people, as well as another means of communication and gathering for individuals to interact and reaffirm social norms."[/color]

We can define religion as any cohesive set of beliefs that do not require proof, just faith. But humanitarianism is such a set of beliefs, yet does not have the evils of religion . Humanitarianism is based on a view that all human beings deserve respect and dignity and should be treated as such. Humanitarianism is not anti-religion, but a strict adherence to this principle, and to the "golden rule" (do unto others...) would avoid most of the evils of religion.

We can all have the "religion" of humanitarianism, with sub-sects that believe in various deities, but respect the right of other to believe in different ones. This is the Western ideal, sadly not achieved by most of the West, and certainly not by most of the rest of the world.

Or, we can adopt the "religion" of utilitarianism, in one or more of its many variants, which says that the quantitative maximization of good consequences for a population is the way to decide upon our beliefs. From this principle certain sub-prinicipals arise, most familiar to us, like "don't kill", "don't steal" (rule utilitarianism).

These are some of the less destructive means of creating social cohesion, morals, norms, etc. They are religions, of sorts.

But why we need a "deity", I do not know. I do know that the very notion of an all powerful god and a divine messenger inevitably leads to conflict and destruction - it is neither humanitarian, nor utilitarian. It will be the end of us.

And smart though Mr. Marx might have been, ultimately we have clear proof that he did not really understand human nature, because the society he thought would be the ultimate evolution of human interaction was an utter failure within 20 years (Stalinist Russia), and collapsed of its own weakness and inconsistencies within less than 100 years. I'd say Thomas Jefferson was smarter. Too bad the nation he created has become dominated by the stupid.

[Asuka]

But why we need a "deity", I do not know. I do know that the very notion of an all powerful god and a divine messenger inevitably leads to conflict destruction - it is neither humanitarian, nor utilitarian. It will be the end of us.

And smart though Mr. Marx might have been, ultimately we have clear proof that he did not really understand human nature, because the society he thought would be the ultimate evolution of human interaction was an utter failure within 20 years (Stalinist Russia), and collapsed of its own weakness and inconsistencies within less than 100 years.

Well, it

[gylman]

Ouch. Some of that hurt my brain.

I looked up "neurotheology", which basically is the theory that there is a biological basis for spiritualism. I have to say that I have a hard time accepting this notion, and as far I can tell it is not mainstream thinking.

Here is my humanitrianism:

We hold these truths to be sacred & undeniable; that all men are created equal & independent, that from that equal creation they derive rights inherent & inalienable, among which are the preservation of life, & liberty, & the pursuit of happiness; that to secure these ends, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that whenever any form of government shall become destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, & to institute new government, laying it's foundation on such principles & organising it's powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety & happiness.

Finest words ever written, as long as we substitute "people" for "men". Corny, but true. And I am NOT American. I used to wish I was.

And, by the same man, although not as well known: '

No man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burdened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer, on account of his religious opinions or belief; but that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinions in matters of religion, and that the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge, or affect their civil capacities

[Asuka]

Even good words were always somewhat cheaper than good acts.

Wikipedia/Thomas Jefferson

"There must doubtless be an unhappy influence on the manners of our people produced by the existence of slavery among us. The whole commerce between master and slave is a perpetual exercise of the most boisterous passions, the most unremitting despotism on the one part, and degrading submissions on the other [34]."

In this same work, Jefferson advanced his suspicion that blacks were inferior to whites "in the endowments both of body and mind" [35]. He also wrote, "Nothing is more certainly written in the book of fate than that these people are to be free. [but] the two races...cannot live in the same government. Nature, habit, opinion has drawn indelible lines of distinction between them." [12] According to historian Stephen Ambrose: "Jefferson, like all slaveholders and many other white members of American society, regarded Negroes as inferior, childlike, untrustworthy and, of course, as property. Jefferson, the genius of politics, could see no way for African-Americans to live in society as free people. He embraced the worst forms of racism to justify slavery."[36]

Most of Jefferson's slaves were sold after his death to pay his many debts. Edmund Bacon, the chief overseer of Monticello for twenty years, told his biographer that he believed Jefferson would have freed all his slaves in his will, but was too far in debt.

In reality, you can not pay with words, and you can not eat them too.

The way to hell is paved with good resolutions.

[gylman]

Ah. The old slavery bugaboo. That always comes up when Jefferson is mentioned. Frankly, he was totally sexist too, right? Women did not vote in Jefferson

[Asuka]

.

Still, he was a man of his times. There is no one of the past

[gylman]

So what you are saying is that we judge philosophies, and people who preach those philosophies, by their actions and outcome of their actions, because the base nature of humans often does not work well with noble ideals, especially those involving self-sacrifice for the benefit of others. Agree fully.

While religions (mostly) preach peace and spirituality>materialism, the fact is the RC church is one of the richest organizations in the world, has never sought to use their wealth in any consistent fashion to help their adherents, and through much of human history has been a torturer and conqueror. Other religions do even worse. I guess the Amish do well (so sad what happened there).

Not that I am obsessed with Thomas Jefferson or anything, but excepting the last 10 years, the USA that Thomas Jefferson created (probably more than any other single individual) was a positive force in the world. It still is, but obviously there are issues now. And it did this by adhering to the key principles of the constitution: separation of Church and State, individuals' rights, respect for others, freedom of association.... No reliance on altruism or self sacrifice, just basic common sense principles that allow humans to live together in society without conflict - a kind of rule utilitarianism.

Well, I've come back to where I started. Maybe we should stop the discussion before it gets repetitive (if it hasn't already). I've enjoyed the thread. Too bad no one else joined along.

Peace.

[Minifig Lecturer]

Even good words were always somewhat cheaper than good acts.

In reality, you can not pay with words, and you can not eat them too.

The way to hell is paved with good resolutions.

You can eat words if you buy Heinz alphabet spaghetti

[Asuka]

You can eat words if you buy Heinz alphabet spaghetti

I already knew that there is Buchstabensuppe and Wortsalat.... so this is not totally new for me.

[dviddy]

Why a visiting Christian 'guest' (as in, unregistered EB reader) would ever want to take residence here on this forum after reading this topic is beyond my comprehension.

Yes, there have been bad things done in the name of religion.

There have been bad things done in the name of no-religion as well (persecution of the faithful [any faith] in Communist Russia, China, etc).

The problem with America isn't religion. It's selfishness. Arrogance. And the religious are not the only ones to be blamed for this. Oh no.

Honestly? If true Christian principles (and not this pseudo-Christianity crap the 'religious right' keep throwing out there) were to be implemented by any country in the world, life'd be better. It would. The problem is, humans are naturally selfish beings. True Christianity is hard, because it emphasizes the other over self, to such a point where my life is forfeit if it means my enemy lives.

It's not easy, and if you think it is, you've never been truly involved with any Christians.

You know what? It's not any easier to believe in God than not. Yes, we'll cite personal experiences (and I have many I could cite from my own life), but how long do you think that sticks with us? We as humans are fickle beings, and even a divine intervention still yields an unfaithful person a few years later. Doubts aren't easy, and they exist far more often than you seem to think.

I'm not going to lie, I think the Church (especially the modern church) has done almost nothing in America to prove it's worth. Selfish and greedy, the modern American church is a product if it's environment. And this is a shame. The Church shouldn't be wealthy, but poor as dirt because it gave it's fortunes away to those who needed them.

But you won't get your religion-free world anytime soon. Because I can see it here, Christianity, at least, is being reborn. Amongst the Christian youth, there's a big resurgence in living out what we claim to believe. Volunteering in places where it's needed. And not just the 'once a month so I feel good about myself' thing. I have friends living with the poor, so they can give, and share, with the poor.

Yes, bad things have, and will, happen because of religion. But just because you can't understand why some of us would choose to put our entire lives under a being you don't even believe in's control, doesn't mean it's worthless.

But hey, go ahead and think less of my intellect because I'm a Christian. I'm part of the problem or whatnot. I won't condemn you for being 'faithless,' and I'm not going to think less of you for making what my faith considers to be the biggest mistake possible. It would be great if you would afford us the same courtesy.

*n*

<<DV>>

[Asuka]

Why a visiting Christian 'guest' (as in, unregistered EB reader) would ever want to take residence here on this forum after reading this topic is beyond my comprehension.

.... you don't even believe in's control, doesn't mean it's worthless.

But hey, go ahead and think less of my intellect because I'm a Christian. I'm part of the problem or whatnot. I won't condemn you for being 'faithless,' and I'm not going to think less of you for making what my faith considers to be the biggest mistake possible. It would be great if you would afford us the same courtesy.

*n*

<<DV>>

And what

[gylman]

I don't think what I said was directly anti-religious.

Jefferson was a devout christian, and what he said about freedom of worship was not anti-religious.

The problem with religion is the "compulsion".

People who try to show how peaceful Islam is often quote the Koran as saying "There is no compulsion in religion", and this as being proof of the peaceful nature of Islam.

However, that's only part of the phrase. What it actually says in Koran is:

"There is no compulsion in religion, for the right way is clearly from the wrong way."

And that's where the problems come from... the notion that someone is right, and therefore those who do not believe same are "wrong". From there it's a short hop, skip, and jump to crusades, concentration camps, and the grim future of religious and cultural warfarre that will be coming to a country near you in the next 10-50 years.

I don't see too many militant atheists blowing themselves up in the name of nonbelief.