Wednesday, June 17, 2009

Support or Accept It?

I was reading an article about the torture debate at the Relevant Magazine website.

The article itself was titled The Torture Question.

It is a piece written about how there is growing debate over the torture issue in the Christian community.

What really struck me about what I was reading and what prompted me to write about it was a comment posted on the website.

It was written by a person with the "screen name" skevin. He writes:

"...i don't believe you can say that a person necessarily 'supports' a position if they merely see certain instances where they can accept that the position may be effective. I think using the term 'accept' would be much more truthful and less divisive, especially as we discuss this with our brothers and sister in Christ."


He has said in this few sentences something I have tried over and over to say in several blogs. The point is simple, I can 'accept' something (in this case torture, or for another example, the War in Iraq) but not necessarily 'support' that something.

Way to go skevin, Whoever you are.

By the way, for those of you that are interested, Relevant Magazine is a magazine that discusses the combination of faith and pop culture into our daily lives.

7 comments:

  1. This article makes one giant leap (not for mankind) in that it assumes the so-called "enhanced interrogation" techniques are in fact "Torture".

    Some line must be drawn as to what is torture and what is not. Everything cannot be torture.

    I conclude that unless some bodily harm is done... ie blood, bruise, burn, scarring, hearing loss, tooth decay, etc then simply being uncomfortable is most certainly NOT torture.

    So I disagree with the premise of the argument as does the US Military and the Obama administration who declared those techniques not illegal or torture.

    It is a straw-man argument.

    But they lost me in this article when they said "Representative Dr. Ron Paul has stated"
    Ron Paul's foreign policy is to not have a foreign policy.

    ReplyDelete
  2. BTW- I commented on the NW progressive site post about their hypocrisy post and also put up a response of my own to it... hope to see you there.

    ReplyDelete
  3. strange. i can not see your comment on their post. come to think of it, i posted a comment on one of their posts a while back and still don't see that one either.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I was very polite trying to get it past the truth detector. But they smelled truth all over it apparently and deleted it. Oh well I wrote a piece about their article at my blog and had my say.

    ReplyDelete
  5. And this is just another reason why I hate comment moderation.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Anywho, the techniques known as "enhanced interrogation" have been determined by experts and lawyers to NOT be torture.

    So the argument about whether one approves of America using torture is moot, not relevant, a false premise.

    ReplyDelete