During Medieval times, torture was used as a form of public punishment and, most dreadfully, as not only a deterrent, but also as entertainment.
3. Torture is absolutely immoral. No conditions or circumstances would ever justify such terrible actions towards a person's fellow human beings. No crime or offense merits the terror, pain and humiliation inflicted upon a human being. No purpose is high or important enough to justify such actions. Along with the rest of the civilized world, I most strongly condemn this form of punishment. While the focus here is torture today, I am particularly horrified by the concept of torture as entertainment. It is the deliberate infliction of severe and unbearable pain upon another human being for the entertainment of others. It cannot be condoned in any civilized world. I believe that modern torture should be viewed in the same light.
Some would argue that the greater good could be served by using torture when all other avenues had been unsuccessfully explored. A popular example is the one of the person who knows how to detonate a bomb that is to kill hundreds of people. If such a person refuses to provide his information, proponents suggests that he should be tortured to save many lives. The lives of hundreds weigh more heavily in this argument than the human rights of a single person.
In my view, however, even such a utilitarian approach is not acceptable. Torturing even one person in order to serve the greater good of saving many lives is still a violation of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, regardless of its purpose. As such, torture violates the very principles upon which the country is built. The danger behind this is the erosion of the way of life promised by the Constitution to all citizens within the borders of the country. Even saving hundreds of lives does not merit such an erosion of public trust and peace.
The pragmatic approach is also not acceptable to me. According...
This would then merit the torture of one person for the good of the many. A further danger in such an account is however that the torture of a single person, when entirely disconnected from anything but its practical use, might encourage more uses of this form of punishment in similar situations.
Torture in all its forms and manifestations should be discouraged in the strongest terms. All interrogations and investigations should be done according to the Constitution and the principles set by the UN Convention. Only in this way can officials ensure greater public trust and loyalty. In this way, all citizens within the United States, together with the government, can ensure the health and longevity of the U.S. reputation as a country built upon human rights rather than utility.
4. The UN Convention Against Torture clarifies that its stipulations extend to both torture and other forms of severe pain and suffering that are deliberately inflicted. I find it particularly interesting that it stipulates that all involved in such actions should be prosecuted in a lawful manner. They should be treated according to the Constitution, in being provided with legal counsel and the right to defend themselves against the charges.
There is not much I would change in the UN document. I believe that it is written in a very clear and concise way, taking into account all the circumstances under which torture might take place. The document is very clear that no conditions or circumstances merit the use of torture in any way. The only change that I might make is in enforcing the Convention. Even publicly known occasions such as Guantanamo and the Iraqi video are justified under the circumstances of war. Personally, I would have preferred the UN Convention to be supplemented by legislation that enforces it much more strongly.
