Princeton Seminar on Torture and Law
Hey guys,
George Hunsinger recently convened a seminar at Princeton on torture and religion from Christian, Jewish, and Muslim perspectives. Here's a few quotes:
"Danner said the often cited "ticking time bomb theory" (the scenario that a terrorist holds the key to an imminent plot to unleash a nuclear attack on New York City and torturing the terrorist could theoretically avert the attack and thus save millions of lives) is not only unrealistic but also situated "in an utterly bleak world of utilitarian ethics which I think has very little relation to the world we live in." But the utilitarian argument against torture -- that it has not been proven to extract useful intelligence -- concerns Danner as well. Rather than argue about torture's usefulness, he urges those opposed to the practice to argue that it reduces human beings to mere means, which is exactly the point of the terrorism that coercive interrogation techniques are meant to prevent."
"Torture's degradation of the torturers, who are stripped of their capacity both for sympathy and for empathy, and the way torture encourages the broader culture, through self-deception and rationalization, to think the unjustifiable is justified troubles ethicists, philosophers, and religious thinkers. Based on his study of the Holocaust, David Gushee, professor of moral philosophy at Union University in Jackson, Tennessee, said he is convinced that torture morally destroys the perpetrators. "Some people feel so guilty and ashamed of what they've done, it's very hard to recover. Even worse, some end up succumbing to sadism that is almost inevitably a byproduct of routinely inflicting that misery on someone else. The idea is to break down the morality of the captive, but it ends up breaking down the morality of the torturer."
"Gary Haugen, president of the human rights agency International Justice Mission, said that evangelicals are largely unaware of the problem and trust the president's good faith. "They are not scared of their government. They are scared of the terrorists," he said. They are also wary of arguments against torture that appear politically motivated. To convince evangelicals to oppose torture, said Haugen, "clear, unadorned, precise facts" uncovered by journalists and human rights organizations linked to theological reflection will work better than broader critiques of the Iraq war, the Bush administration, or presidential power. "The factual stuff -- it is building a huge case" against torture, Haugen suggested, and "it is undermining the confidence" of torture proponents. "The administration is trying to hold a precise policy position that has zero support in Christian ethics," he added, saying that the Bush administration is itself divided over pursuing a policy of torture. "What we don't need is new theology or new metaphors," said Haugen. For evangelicals under 30, "it's just 'Jesus doesn't torture.'"
"The Princeton conference's final statement, endorsed so far by 35 members of Christian, Jewish, Muslim, and Sikh communities, condemns torture as violating the "basic dignity of the human person that all religions hold dear. ... It contradicts our nation's most cherished ideals. Any policies that permit torture and inhumane treatment are shocking and morally intolerable." It declares that "nothing less is at stake in the torture abuse crisis than the soul of our nation. What does it signify if torture is condemned in word but allowed in deed? Let America abolish torture now -- without exceptions." Organizers of the religious campaign against torture hope to get 100,000 signatures by the end of 2006."
Read more at:
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/religionandethics/week921/exclusive.html
George Hunsinger recently convened a seminar at Princeton on torture and religion from Christian, Jewish, and Muslim perspectives. Here's a few quotes:
"Danner said the often cited "ticking time bomb theory" (the scenario that a terrorist holds the key to an imminent plot to unleash a nuclear attack on New York City and torturing the terrorist could theoretically avert the attack and thus save millions of lives) is not only unrealistic but also situated "in an utterly bleak world of utilitarian ethics which I think has very little relation to the world we live in." But the utilitarian argument against torture -- that it has not been proven to extract useful intelligence -- concerns Danner as well. Rather than argue about torture's usefulness, he urges those opposed to the practice to argue that it reduces human beings to mere means, which is exactly the point of the terrorism that coercive interrogation techniques are meant to prevent."
"Torture's degradation of the torturers, who are stripped of their capacity both for sympathy and for empathy, and the way torture encourages the broader culture, through self-deception and rationalization, to think the unjustifiable is justified troubles ethicists, philosophers, and religious thinkers. Based on his study of the Holocaust, David Gushee, professor of moral philosophy at Union University in Jackson, Tennessee, said he is convinced that torture morally destroys the perpetrators. "Some people feel so guilty and ashamed of what they've done, it's very hard to recover. Even worse, some end up succumbing to sadism that is almost inevitably a byproduct of routinely inflicting that misery on someone else. The idea is to break down the morality of the captive, but it ends up breaking down the morality of the torturer."
"Gary Haugen, president of the human rights agency International Justice Mission, said that evangelicals are largely unaware of the problem and trust the president's good faith. "They are not scared of their government. They are scared of the terrorists," he said. They are also wary of arguments against torture that appear politically motivated. To convince evangelicals to oppose torture, said Haugen, "clear, unadorned, precise facts" uncovered by journalists and human rights organizations linked to theological reflection will work better than broader critiques of the Iraq war, the Bush administration, or presidential power. "The factual stuff -- it is building a huge case" against torture, Haugen suggested, and "it is undermining the confidence" of torture proponents. "The administration is trying to hold a precise policy position that has zero support in Christian ethics," he added, saying that the Bush administration is itself divided over pursuing a policy of torture. "What we don't need is new theology or new metaphors," said Haugen. For evangelicals under 30, "it's just 'Jesus doesn't torture.'"
"The Princeton conference's final statement, endorsed so far by 35 members of Christian, Jewish, Muslim, and Sikh communities, condemns torture as violating the "basic dignity of the human person that all religions hold dear. ... It contradicts our nation's most cherished ideals. Any policies that permit torture and inhumane treatment are shocking and morally intolerable." It declares that "nothing less is at stake in the torture abuse crisis than the soul of our nation. What does it signify if torture is condemned in word but allowed in deed? Let America abolish torture now -- without exceptions." Organizers of the religious campaign against torture hope to get 100,000 signatures by the end of 2006."
Read more at:
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/religionandethics/week921/exclusive.html
posted by Chris TerryNelson at 12:07 PM
2 Comments:
thanks for the blurb nelly, very thought provoking...esp in regards to thinking about the new season of 24, as i've come to see it, really is a sort of testing ground/decensitization for the public...perhaps this is too much conspiracy theory but the storyline hits too close to home and warps our views of how to act under certain circumstances. tv as public opinion control mechanism.
Yeah, a total shame since I love a good suspense/thriller. By the way, you should watch The Constant Gardener. It's amazing, though very intense and at times depressing.
Post a Comment
<< Home