After we had a debate on torture I found this video. U.S. soldier casually talking about torturing Iraqi prisoners and raping a 15 year girl until she hang herself. I was pro torture for a good cause like someone mentioned earlier. I was pro torture because I thought if using torture could save millions of lives, I thought it is worth it. After watching this video, this is just wrong...
Tuesday, August 7, 2007
Monday, August 6, 2007
torture
after the debate in class my views on torture did change a little. i was first pro torture but after debating against anti torture i started to portray things differently. the arguments on both sides were both persuading. i thought the drug example, LSD, was a great example. that in my opinion is still considered torture because they do not want to take drugs. i enjoyed the debate today and i thought this was a good idea to have in class
Somebody, help! re: essay4
I'm confused as ever..
What are we supposed to do again in our 4th essay?
There are lots of prompts given
Are we going to pick one question from the many or take the question in bold?
What are we supposed to do again in our 4th essay?
There are lots of prompts given
Are we going to pick one question from the many or take the question in bold?
Torture again.
After today's class, i realized that i don't believe in torture anymore. I made a post about this last night after i read the essay and my initial reaction to it was that i support torturing also but today's debate changed a lot of things for me. When we were told to argue the opposite belief, i thought i was going to face many troubles in coming up with arguments but instead, i found that i had many reasons to not support torture. New ideas came to my mind and i realized that i was actually against torture and what Zack commented on my post last night made me think again also. Good job Zack, you made me change my mind haha.
After the debate, I still firmly believe that torture should be permissable (in the right circumstances of course, when innocent lives are at stake). Although my anti-torture team brought up some very good points, I still think that using torture as a means to save people's lives is totally worth it. Levin made a point that touched me close to home when he imposed the question, "What would you do if a terriorist kidnapped your baby?" To be honest, I would cut off their fingers and pull out their teeth, one by one, until I got some answers. And whether those answers are correct or not, I would still take that chance to get my baby back. And it doesn't even have to be my baby. It could be anyone's baby for all I care. Anyway, I value everyone's opinion but ask yourself this...if it was your family or someone you loved was on that ship about to be blown up by a terriost, wouldn't you do everything in your power to get some answers and stop the bombing...even if it meant torturing the person who was behind it all? Yeah...I thought so.
Torture debate discussion...
During class today, we had to choose side to debate on torturing. I chose to be for torture but then Maxwell switched sides. Instead of being for torture, I was against torture. It was kind of hard coming up with claims, ideas, and examples to debate against the other opponent. I think I do want to change sides saying that torture is a good idea. I also agree to Levin's discussion on Torture. What really got me in class was the Medicine torture. When Han (sorry if i get your name wrong), discussed about drug torture such as LSD, i thought to myself, that is part of drugging someone. When someone is drugged when when he/she doesn't want to, I believe that is also torture. When secretively someone puts a drug in your drink and later on take you to spill out information, I do think that it is part of being torture. My position will change probably because I have more claims to the other side.
Class and essay questions.
1. This seems pretty straightforward now that I'm reading it again, but I'm still gonna ask this question I had about this part of the assignment for essay 4:
"...draw from and quote from any of the readings assigned to you in the course (AT LEAST THREE OF THESE), from lecture, and/or from your media monitoring work."
Does that mean we have to have at least three quotes from the readings, plus any quotes we want from those other sources? Or is it three quotes minimum from any source?
2. Do we publish our works cited lists in the eportfolios?
3. Can we see what our grades are soon?
"...draw from and quote from any of the readings assigned to you in the course (AT LEAST THREE OF THESE), from lecture, and/or from your media monitoring work."
Does that mean we have to have at least three quotes from the readings, plus any quotes we want from those other sources? Or is it three quotes minimum from any source?
2. Do we publish our works cited lists in the eportfolios?
3. Can we see what our grades are soon?
Torch 'er
My opinion on the torture issue didn't change as a result of the debate. I'm still firmly rooted in the same place as before, I don't believe torture is "never permissible" because there are instances when it is. The hard thing about being made to argue the opposite of what I believe is that I couldn't come up with an argument on the opposing side that would change my mind. However that wasn't why I kept quiet during the debate. I was hoping to give the people with participation deficits a chance to earn points (and that worked out gloriously). One moderately retarded idea I had was that, as an alternative to torture, we could just give into all the demands of the terrorist - either outright, or as a ruse. That might succeed in saving the lives of the innocents at risk. But it would certainly piss the terrorists and their supporters off considerably/ have obvious ramifications if we hadn't been lying, and be the kind of thing we could only likely get away with once...
Like I said before, I pretty much agreed with all the arguments, reasons, evidence and assumptions made in the essay. It was like preaching to the converted.
Like I said before, I pretty much agreed with all the arguments, reasons, evidence and assumptions made in the essay. It was like preaching to the converted.
The Debate
Debates are only fun when you actually have a strong point to argue. I don't think that switching sides was the best idea... more interesting points would have surfaced if we hadn't.
Anyway, in regards to the whole "drug" comment... that was all me... don't blame the group!!!! But, it did give us something more interesting to debate about than just going in circles and repeating everything that we had just covered right? Oh well, anyway, seemed like a good idea at the time. And for the record, I do believe that it is a type a torture.
I was surprised to see that the class was almost split down the middle on such a harsh subject. I have always been for torture when it comes to certain situations. Most of the arguments made referred to the war, but when I think of torture I think about it more as in what we do to our own people, not our enemies. I know... that sound horrible right? But what if a child molester, a rapist, or a serial killer got caught, immediately confessed, but had hidden a few of their victims? Should you cut them a deal because they're EXTRA evil???? NO!... You should find other means to save the victims and punish the evil person and if that means torture, then so be it! You may say... wow Emily, you watch too much Law & Order and CSI... but the truth is that there are a lot of bad people out there in the world and they shouldn't necessarily be protected by our government.
One thing that did tip my view a bit was the outcome of torturing an enemy of war, knowing that in return our soldiers would be bestowed with the same type of treatment. One question though, are out soldiers safe from torture (even if we don't use it on our enemies)? If I knew the answer to that question, I would be able to make up my mind pretty quickly. It is because of all the different consequences resulting from torture that I would change my vote on the subject, not because of morals or "humane treatment."
Anyway, in regards to the whole "drug" comment... that was all me... don't blame the group!!!! But, it did give us something more interesting to debate about than just going in circles and repeating everything that we had just covered right? Oh well, anyway, seemed like a good idea at the time. And for the record, I do believe that it is a type a torture.
I was surprised to see that the class was almost split down the middle on such a harsh subject. I have always been for torture when it comes to certain situations. Most of the arguments made referred to the war, but when I think of torture I think about it more as in what we do to our own people, not our enemies. I know... that sound horrible right? But what if a child molester, a rapist, or a serial killer got caught, immediately confessed, but had hidden a few of their victims? Should you cut them a deal because they're EXTRA evil???? NO!... You should find other means to save the victims and punish the evil person and if that means torture, then so be it! You may say... wow Emily, you watch too much Law & Order and CSI... but the truth is that there are a lot of bad people out there in the world and they shouldn't necessarily be protected by our government.
One thing that did tip my view a bit was the outcome of torturing an enemy of war, knowing that in return our soldiers would be bestowed with the same type of treatment. One question though, are out soldiers safe from torture (even if we don't use it on our enemies)? If I knew the answer to that question, I would be able to make up my mind pretty quickly. It is because of all the different consequences resulting from torture that I would change my vote on the subject, not because of morals or "humane treatment."
Torture
Well I finally got a gmail account so next time (evil laugh) I will flood the internet as I did the classroom. Since I am still stuck in the protorture mode from the debate I will show case that side.
information-although torture does not guarentee correct information, it does give more then doing nothing. In addition the different lies that have been recieved can help show what is the answer they are trying to avoid. Watch Numbers if you don't believe it is possible.
it's unconstitutional- trust me on this one the constitution is like a treaty- it is obeyed until broken. The constitution has been broken and "interpreted" repeatedly and torture is technically forbidden in cruel and unusual punishments. However it has been used in the past until the constitution was applied to the states. This is using an authority to justify your position, but it doesn't work against people who have read the constitution and know history.
Drugs- how you guys consider addling someones brains with drugs not a form of torture is beyond me. I am pretty sure that if you said drugs only they would use them recklessesly because it gives you the option to manipulate other peoples mind. Not a power you would want to give anyone.
It is evil-The only real objection, all others are justification for it. And its true. My counter? So is killing innocent people, and unprovoked wars and stockpiling nukes and well you get the idea. We are quite literally running out of atrocities. We already torture people for the heck of it in Gitmo; the only difference is we are using a case where it will get results.
information-although torture does not guarentee correct information, it does give more then doing nothing. In addition the different lies that have been recieved can help show what is the answer they are trying to avoid. Watch Numbers if you don't believe it is possible.
it's unconstitutional- trust me on this one the constitution is like a treaty- it is obeyed until broken. The constitution has been broken and "interpreted" repeatedly and torture is technically forbidden in cruel and unusual punishments. However it has been used in the past until the constitution was applied to the states. This is using an authority to justify your position, but it doesn't work against people who have read the constitution and know history.
Drugs- how you guys consider addling someones brains with drugs not a form of torture is beyond me. I am pretty sure that if you said drugs only they would use them recklessesly because it gives you the option to manipulate other peoples mind. Not a power you would want to give anyone.
It is evil-The only real objection, all others are justification for it. And its true. My counter? So is killing innocent people, and unprovoked wars and stockpiling nukes and well you get the idea. We are quite literally running out of atrocities. We already torture people for the heck of it in Gitmo; the only difference is we are using a case where it will get results.
torture
If by using torture we can save millions of live, I think it is worth it. The essay made a lot of sense to me, but it is a little uncomfortable speaking out my opinions on this subject. I have never seen someone being tortured before and the closest thing to that would be watching all the SAW movies. The point is, since I don't know the agony of being tortured and torturing someone, I don't feel like I have enough evidence to support whether torturing a person is right under certain circumstances.
Supertorture
Torture is a definite no no. so many of our freedoms and rights have been impeded in the name of protecting lives and justice. i dont know if anyone here has heard of the patriot act or not but i believe is a prime example of what BS the government can think of doing to protect us. Post the destruction of the World Trade Center, the government decided domestic spying would help prevent such terroristic events. If the government can spy on its own people and take away our privacy so we wouldn't plan attacks on ourselves what's next?
I suppose the legitimization of torture would be the next step in eradication of our rights endowed? Who is supposed to know who to torture? Who is supposed to be monitoring those torturing its people? true it may save thousands lives one day, but what about those who would be innocently tortured everyday until they day it "might" payoff? This torture business is bringing us one step closer totalitarianism. Yesterday they were allowed to spy on us, today they can torture us "with good reason, possibly reasonable doubt" and tomorrow who knows? maybe they can just kill us on the spot if we aren't using our newspeak dictionary correctly.
I suppose the legitimization of torture would be the next step in eradication of our rights endowed? Who is supposed to know who to torture? Who is supposed to be monitoring those torturing its people? true it may save thousands lives one day, but what about those who would be innocently tortured everyday until they day it "might" payoff? This torture business is bringing us one step closer totalitarianism. Yesterday they were allowed to spy on us, today they can torture us "with good reason, possibly reasonable doubt" and tomorrow who knows? maybe they can just kill us on the spot if we aren't using our newspeak dictionary correctly.
More Torture
Do we all really belive that if, for the safety of this nation, our leaders would not torture? If that is so, we have way too much faith in our "just" government. I do not believe that torture would work, but have no doubt in my mind that torture would take place. Just because our government says they do not do a thing, does not mean that they are honest.
If we had the true situation of a bomb in Manhattan, I belive our leaders would do everything to prevent the explosion. Yes they may be violating the Constitution, but it would be for a good cause. If the Constitution were to be amended to allow torture, it would be used excessively. Police forces would use it on the innocent and many people deserving torture would walk free. Trusting torture to the government would be a very dangerous risk. Would you want to be tortured in the name of national security, if they deemed you were a threat?
If we had the true situation of a bomb in Manhattan, I belive our leaders would do everything to prevent the explosion. Yes they may be violating the Constitution, but it would be for a good cause. If the Constitution were to be amended to allow torture, it would be used excessively. Police forces would use it on the innocent and many people deserving torture would walk free. Trusting torture to the government would be a very dangerous risk. Would you want to be tortured in the name of national security, if they deemed you were a threat?
Sunday, August 5, 2007
No Title
Between us
Why is it that
We have a constant struggle
in who will be the one to rise to the top?
Between us
Why is it that
We have a constant fight
to prove who is said the one to be right?
Between us
Why is it that
Through religion and politics
We have created such a battle
Without care to its inevitable results
of misery, war and tragic sadness?
Why is it that
We have a constant struggle
in who will be the one to rise to the top?
Between us
Why is it that
We have a constant fight
to prove who is said the one to be right?
Between us
Why is it that
Through religion and politics
We have created such a battle
Without care to its inevitable results
of misery, war and tragic sadness?
Case for torture ..
After reading the case for torture by Levin. I thought that essay is very real. Is torturing terrorist to give information ethical?
My opinion is that sometimes you have to do what you have to do in order to save lives. I don't like torturing and stuff but sometimes it must work. It is unethical and illegal a violation of international laws. The bad thing about it is that if one of our soldiers is ever captured he might end up with the same fate.
My opinion is that sometimes you have to do what you have to do in order to save lives. I don't like torturing and stuff but sometimes it must work. It is unethical and illegal a violation of international laws. The bad thing about it is that if one of our soldiers is ever captured he might end up with the same fate.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
