|
Post by Admiral Lithp on May 10, 2009 23:27:48 GMT -5
You've forgotten one of the fundamental principals of Christianity; the Bible's laws only apply when dealing with other Christians. The homos and Musleems are to be dealt with by the God-sent Republicans. And, quite frankly, no one with any basic knowledge of the respiratory system could or would truthfully say water-boarding is not torture. Hell, you ever done that nasal irrigation stuff? Essentially squirt saline up your nose? I have trouble convincing my body I'm not going to die doing that. Controlled circumstances standing over my sink, doing it to myself. Personally, I kinda freak out if I get water in my nose bathing. Might be linked to a bad experience I had one time. But that's not important. What gets me is all of those "it's not torture, there are professionals present!" What're those professionals called? Torturers? Honestly, that has to be the worst defense ever. Of COURSE there are medical professionals on the scene: The entire objective of torture is to supply the pain without killing the person. You can't get anything out of a corpse, and the balance is much easier to keep if you have people who know what they're doing present. "Realistic risk of death" really isn't a prerequisite for torture. In fact, the most effective methods would have very nearly no such risk.
|
|
|
Post by David D.G. on May 11, 2009 10:32:30 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Caitshidhe on May 11, 2009 10:45:03 GMT -5
Easy. They aren't True Christians. True Christians approve of the torture of Ebil Ebil Moozlimz. *rolls eyes* I can honestly say, I actually like what the article's saying. How 'bout that, Christian people acting... Christian. It is unfortunate that they hadn't said anything about this sooner, but you know, people who support torture will do so regardless.
|
|
|
Post by NoLeafClover on May 11, 2009 10:52:09 GMT -5
If it gets any mainstream attention, Hannity and Limbaugh and his ilk would ruin that guy so bad he'd have no choice but to renig on what he said. That's what they do--they even have to shove their insane ideals own their own supports throats. Like I said, everyone KNOWS waterboarding is torture, but they just have to be contradictory to what they feel is the "left-wing" point of view, as opposed to the common sense, sane point of view.
|
|
|
Post by Nutcase on May 11, 2009 12:39:52 GMT -5
What I found most interesting about Richard Land’s position is this: "For me the ultimate test is: Could I, in good conscience, do whatever I am authorizing or condoning others to do? If not, then I must oppose the action. If I could not waterboard someone--and I couldn't--then I must oppose its practice." Land may feel he is incapable of torturing someone, but a lot of other people easily could – and they might be inclined to ignore his warning precisely because they fail his “ultimate test.” Land’s heart is in the right place, and his head isn’t far behind, but it’s unfortunate he failed to see how an appeal to his own conscience might be insufficient to sway other people. The rest of his statement, though – now that was bang on. ( Emphasis mine.) Land said he considers waterboarding to be torture because the definition of torture includes the determination of whether a procedure causes permanent physical harm, noting he is unable to "separate physical from psychological harm" in this instance. The practice contravenes an individual's personhood and their humanity, he said.
"It violates everything we believe in as a country," Land said, reflecting on the words in the Declaration of Independence: that "all men are created equal" and that "they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights."
"There are some things you should never do to another human being, no matter how horrific the things they have done. If you do so, you demean yourself to their level," he said.
"Civilized countries should err on the side of caution. It does cost us something to play by different rules than our enemies, but it would cost us far more if we played by their rules," Land concluded. If only the SBC had found torture worthy of condemnation back in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, or 2008.
|
|
adoylelb90815
Full Member
I'm the feminist intellectual fundies warned you about
Posts: 120
|
Post by adoylelb90815 on May 14, 2009 14:42:35 GMT -5
I've found that fundie or apologetic boards ban anyone that doesn't agree entirely with them, or who asks questions.
|
|