|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2011 5:50 pm
With some of what has transpired on the forums and in some guilds and what some of the "Christians" that are shown on the media portray, I decided that I would ask about a few things that makes me wonder about the level of accepted hypocricy.
First: Torture. Some of the biggest "Christians" in the media in the last decade have said that torture is absolutely okay and there is nothing wrong with it. I do not with to go into how I am almost positive that torture does not yield positive results, but I am really asking how can a Christian actually be for this? With Jesus being tortured as befitted a criminal of the state, how can people who say they follow Jesus' message be for this? Is there something in the bible that said Jesus or even Paul for that matter would not oppose it? Some people on a certain news channel said that as long as it is not done on American citizens, but members of Al Aqueida then it is perfectly acceptable.
Second: The Death Penalty. This one gets me thinking especially when people who claim to be pro-life are also pro-death penalty and pro-less funding for birth/sex education. Also, is this something else that I missed in the bible as something Jesus or Paul or any of the them were for?
Wars: I seem to remember something about Jesus not wanting to lead people against the Romans, however, I am less concerned with this particular thing than any of the others. I won't post why.
If this all seems rambled, please ask for clarification.
I would post this in MR, but since certain atheists and a self proclaimed Christian hater would jump in and try to make all sorts of illogical assertions, I fealt that this guild would be better for it.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2011 7:57 pm
Because of the nature of the questions put forth by the OP, and the multiple issues presented, I will be multi-posting... just a warning...
Well, I don't think Christianity is without violence...
I mean, Jesus went into the temple and threw a bunch of stuff around in Righteous wrath, that wasn't a meek action by any means, and in fact, it drew allot of attention to Him and helped lead to the crucifixion... and I think that there is a spiritual war going on around us that is more violent than anything we can see with our own eyes...
As to wars, soldiers, and torture: because wars lead to soldiers, and having two side who need info to win the war for their side, you get torture.... Here's my thoughts... (They ARE complex)...
I feel that soldiers are doing a service to the people they protect... Several Christians have argued with me against that fact... that joining the service with the knowledge that you will be trying to defeat an enemy by lethal and inhumane means is against everything that Christians should stand for...
My argument against that is that soldiers trade their own safety for the safety of the people they love and the people of their country, and they are going against others who have made the same sacrifice... it sets them apart, because they know what the possibilities are, and they know that those they go against are aware of those same possibilities... They know what will happen to them if they are captured, and likewise, their enemies know what could happen if they are captured... Thus, either side is devoted to the greater ideal of their cause, and they have to do what they must in order to achieve what they devoted themselves to...
The fact of the matter is that torture does accomplish what it is meant to do... I am not saying it is right, but I am not saying it is wrong either... It is what I consider one of those facts of life... as long as there are wars, there will have to be ways to gather the information needed to end them...
Wars are bad, but they don't go away when we deny their existence, they swallow pacifists... So, that is when we must acknowledge the lesser of two evils, and bless and pray for those who take it upon themselves, not only to sacrifice their safety, time, comfort, and lives, but also because they are willing to sacrifice their conscience at times and sometimes even more than that...
Our soldiers do that for us and for our nation... They are the epitome of Christ in many ways... They take upon themselves the things that so many of us cannot or will not do, they sacrifice themselves for us... and although you might not agree with the means, well you can't rightly judge the situation if you are not there...
There has been time in war, where information gathered through the means of torture of an enemy has saved thousands of people all at once... It is not a loving thing to perform torture, but then you are not the one doing it... and many of the men who do, don't enjoy it, but they would rather damage one man than possibly lose people that they care about...
But all that said... the same goes for those on the other side... they think they are fighting for a cause that is worth the fight... They go into war as soldier with the same grim realizations, the same possibilities, and the same expectations of those on our side... They are fighting for ideals, for country, and for loved-ones... and they are going to do the same to any of our men that they capture... in fact, they are not beholden to many of our "humane" policies, so our men normally experience worse...
Thus, the harsh realities of war are a different world than where we live... We don't have to condone the evils, but if you have no experience in it, it is better to pray for those standing in your place on the front lines, and allow them to do what they have to... As long as there is war, there is going to have to be ways to fight and win, and none of those are things that any Christian should rejoice in...
All of that said.. as Christians, we are not to rejoice at the fall of our enemies, but to pray for them...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2011 8:03 pm
As to the pro/con life/death thing... I am a moderate there as well...
I feel that there are times when unpleasant things are necessary... I am not completely for or against abortion, but I do believe it should be restricted to certain situations. I have expressed my views on another thread in this guild, so I won't go too much in depth here in this thread....
I also feel the same way about the death penalty... I think there are times when it is for the greater good of society that people who would kill again (I am talking serial offenders here), or destroy others lives, despite the fact that they have already done it, and have been paying for it...
I don't think it is any more humane to lock people up behind walls for possible decades of the rest of their life, facing a probably violent death at the hands of another inmate that is as demented as they are, than it is to let them die in a controlled and less violent manner so that they do not have the chance to destroy other families, or become more tormented than they already are...
The argument usually goes, "Well, if you don't give them a chance to rehabilitate, then you don't know whether they will kill again." But my counter to that is, "Why should a person get the opportunity to prove that they are capable of killing again, when they have already proven that they will do it? Why let another family suffer, for the sake of the possibility that a serial offender might not be serial anymore?"...
Again, I don't find happiness, or contentment in the fact that people die through the death penalty... I don't rejoice in their downfall... In fact, the thought makes me feel heartbroken... A person so tormented that their consciousness has snapped... Those people have families too, that must ask why everyday, and if they don't have families that care, it is all the more heart-wrenching... and then to think of the families whose peace has been violently destroyed by the man sentenced... Well, there really is no justice, or silver lining, or satisfaction... nothing at all to rejoice in.
I think the death penalty is preferable to other alternatives in some cases, although I do not necessarily condone it... I feel it is just another means to an end really... No pun intended...
The law of the land that is in place governs penalties, and those who put the follow-through to those laws are the ones who must live with it most... Either way that a judge must rule in such situations will weigh heavily on their consciousness... If they rule to let a serial killer live, they stand to let the injustice of that killer living when the families of those who were taken forever call for justice... I they rule the death penalty, they understand that they are responsible for the life of a person...
It isn't a pretty scenario either way, and a judge has to make a decision to try and distinguish the lesser of 2 evils with every ruling they make...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2011 8:29 pm
Now, in closing on this thought, I want to point out that our Christian walk is a personal one... We are called as individuals to walk and act in Love... We are to show the Light to the world...
But as a relationship is a personal thing, it cannot be expected to apply to an entire group of people in the same form... That is by definition, NOT personal... Personal refers to individual... not group...
As Christians, we must weigh our own ideas of right and wrong against the way we promote them... Before we stand up and denounce soldiers for torturing an enemy, or defame a doctor who preforms an abortion, or damn a judge for sentencing a prisoner to execution, we need to ask ourselves if we are really demonstrating love by doing so...
To be honest, I can't see how any of those situations show any kind of love... Just righteous zeal for the ideals on the part of those who are "standing-up" for what they believe in... Zealous opinions that ignore the fact that there are even real people involved... Once Christians who are standing up against one side of no-win issues take their side, they forget about half of the people affected by those no-win scenarios, and thus love is no longer a consideration. It becomes an argument of who's right/wrong and those standing in the middle of the actual issue, aren't even given a second thought.
What good does it do to condemn a soldier who was ordered to extract information from an enemy to save a city? What kind of love does it show to a man who sacrificed his conscience against one man for the good of hundreds of people he was doing it to protect? Does it ever occur to anyone that he already has to deal with that? What if he didn't get the info, because it was 'wrong' to torture another person? Would it have been more morally upright for him to have let a city get destroyed?
It isn't up to the Christian Church to fight worldly wars... It isn't up to the Christian Church to administer courts of law... We should do what we can to make sure that things stay fair, but that is the duty of every citizen, whether they are Christian or not... We need to pray for our country and it's policies... but we also need to remember the people on either side of those policies, and those who must administer them.
It is not up to us to judge one side or another of something that cannot be right as long as there is even a reason to consider the rightness of it... 1 Timothy 2:1-4 I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men; For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty. For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2011 8:42 pm
I like to look at the catechism concerning this razz 1) 2297 Kidnapping and hostage taking bring on a reign of terror; by means of threats they subject their victims to intolerable pressures. They are morally wrong. Terrorism threatens, wounds, and kills indiscriminately; it is gravely against justice and charity. Torture which uses physical or moral violence to extract confessions, punish the guilty, frighten opponents, or satisfy hatred is contrary to respect for the person and for human dignity. Except when performed for strictly therapeutic medical reasons, directly intended amputations, mutilations, and sterilizations performed on innocent persons are against the moral law. 2)2267 Assuming that the guilty party's identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor. If, however, non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people's safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and more in conformity to the dignity of the human person. Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm - without definitely taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself - the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity "are very rare, if not practically nonexistent." 3)2307 The fifth commandment forbids the intentional destruction of human life. Because of the evils and injustices that accompany all war, the Church insistently urges everyone to prayer and to action so that the divine Goodness may free us from the ancient bondage of war. 2308 All citizens and all governments are obliged to work for the avoidance of war. However, "as long as the danger of war persists and there is no international authority with the necessary competence and power, governments cannot be denied the right of lawful self-defense, once all peace efforts have failed." Well Catholicism seems to speak very clearly and in general negative on these topics. Gotquestions is surprisingly quiet on the issue of torture and gives a non-answer "trust your government", though it does assert that the death penalty is A-OK. I found a few parody websites giving an A-OK to torture and pew surveys saying that most Christians in the US are okay with torture but I haven't found any churches officially saying torture is okay. Torture is okay (parody)What's scary is that to the untrained eye, this could actually look legitimate, and growing up in the South, I could actually imagine someone giving this argument as justification for torture. Anyway, I find myself leaning with the Catholics on this. I am against the use of torture and cannot see any sort of scriptural or secular justification for it. I am against the death penalty except in very rare circumstances like with the case of Ed Gein. I do not endorse war but understand the necessity of national defense. I do not see invasions of third world countries as promoting national defense. Edit: Spelling - Why does "r" and "f" have to be so close to each other on the keyboard. sweatdrop
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Dec 04, 2011 9:31 am
I agree with most of those statements. And I am Pro-life and against the death penalty for most cases. I am going to join the US Army as an enlisted right out of college, and according to a friend of mine who just recently retired, new recruits tend to aim high because they aren't used to death yet. I believe it was General Robert E. Lee who said that "It is well that war is so terrible, or else we would grow too fond of it". As a Catholic, I believe in doing what we can to avoid war, but I also believe in St.Thomas Aquinas' "Just War Theory". As far as torture, I would have to agree, its not right, but it does get us the intelligence we need.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Dec 04, 2011 5:30 pm
For those heralding the necessity of torture: I'm curious how useful is a confession obtained by torture? Does torture actually get an honest confession? I here that it's useful in obtain needed information but sort of success rate does it actually have? I mean I think back to confessions obtained from medieval torture interrogations and looking back we find that most of them were just the accused saying whatever the authorities wanted to hear. How is this any different now?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Dec 04, 2011 8:23 pm
jaden kendam With some of what has transpired on the forums and in some guilds and what some of the "Christians" that are shown on the media portray, I decided that I would ask about a few things that makes me wonder about the level of accepted hypocricy. First: Torture. Some of the biggest "Christians" in the media in the last decade have said that torture is absolutely okay and there is nothing wrong with it. I do not with to go into how I am almost positive that torture does not yield positive results, but I am really asking how can a Christian actually be for this? With Jesus being tortured as befitted a criminal of the state, how can people who say they follow Jesus' message be for this? Is there something in the bible that said Jesus or even Paul for that matter would not oppose it? Some people on a certain news channel said that as long as it is not done on American citizens, but members of Al Aqueida then it is perfectly acceptable. Second: The Death Penalty. This one gets me thinking especially when people who claim to be pro-life are also pro-death penalty and pro-less funding for birth/sex education. Also, is this something else that I missed in the bible as something Jesus or Paul or any of the them were for? Wars: I seem to remember something about Jesus not wanting to lead people against the Romans, however, I am less concerned with this particular thing than any of the others. I won't post why. If this all seems rambled, please ask for clarification. I would post this in MR, but since certain atheists and a self proclaimed Christian hater would jump in and try to make all sorts of illogical assertions, I fealt that this guild would be better for it. Well, I think the first and most important thing to acknowledge is that people who genuinely believe in Christ will disagree dramatically on most issues. And whether a voice is loader or more vocal about their Christianity has nothing to do with whether or not their understanding of Christ is better than anyone else's. Now I can only speak for myself, but I personally, 1. Am horrified and revolted by torture which I find inconsistent with Christ's message. 2. Have always been passionately opposed to the death penalty. Abortion--I consider a very difficult issue, on abortion I find legitimate arguments on all sides. 3. Very anti-war.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Dec 05, 2011 9:31 am
rmcdra For those heralding the necessity of torture: I'm curious how useful is a confession obtained by torture? Does torture actually get an honest confession? I here that it's useful in obtain needed information but sort of success rate does it actually have? I mean I think back to confessions obtained from medieval torture interrogations and looking back we find that most of them were just the accused saying whatever the authorities wanted to hear. How is this any different now? The info that led to Osama Bin Laden's death came through water boarding. Deny it if you will, but I think that was well worth it. I still don't think that torture is okay, but it does get results.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Dec 05, 2011 10:24 am
Lysander the silent rmcdra For those heralding the necessity of torture: I'm curious how useful is a confession obtained by torture? Does torture actually get an honest confession? I here that it's useful in obtain needed information but sort of success rate does it actually have? I mean I think back to confessions obtained from medieval torture interrogations and looking back we find that most of them were just the accused saying whatever the authorities wanted to hear. How is this any different now? The info that led to Osama Bin Laden's death came through water boarding. Deny it if you will, but I think that was well worth it. I still don't think that torture is okay, but it does get results. With what amount of frequency? How do we know if this was a one time fluke? Game theory seems to suggest that the success rate of torture is very low but I could be off. Would you be willing to provide some more information on its effectiveness?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Dec 05, 2011 11:04 am
Well, I come from a very military family, and I have several friends that are in now...
I know that several people I know have been present if not participant in many things that are not pleasant, and definitely questionable when it comes to war... and I have heard stories that no civilian should probably hear.
I know that there is a difference between torturing to get a faulty confession from someone (such as medieval era inquisition tactics), and getting information from sources who have it... I do know that our military targets specific individuals when they feel torture is a likely means of gathering intel, and that it has a very high success rate...
Like I said, I don't feel torture is right, but I don't think war is right either, and when it comes down to it, both are in a different realm... The realm of the lesser of two evils... and those of us who aren't there, aren't really in a great position to judge which is which.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Dec 05, 2011 12:26 pm
rmcdra Lysander the silent rmcdra For those heralding the necessity of torture: I'm curious how useful is a confession obtained by torture? Does torture actually get an honest confession? I here that it's useful in obtain needed information but sort of success rate does it actually have? I mean I think back to confessions obtained from medieval torture interrogations and looking back we find that most of them were just the accused saying whatever the authorities wanted to hear. How is this any different now? The info that led to Osama Bin Laden's death came through water boarding. Deny it if you will, but I think that was well worth it. I still don't think that torture is okay, but it does get results. With what amount of frequency? How do we know if this was a one time fluke? Game theory seems to suggest that the success rate of torture is very low but I could be off. Would you be willing to provide some more information on its effectiveness? I will have to look for the information, but I believe that the one guy who was water boarded over a hundred times actually gave most of the substantial information before the torture took place. I agree with Jessie Ventura with regards to a lot of this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Dec 05, 2011 6:10 pm
jesseventuraanother sourceCall me a little biased, but I have not found anything saying torture actually works other than from websites who do not even understand what torture really is. Water boarding is a hell of a feeling as anyone who has ever had it done to them or have watched the videos demonstrating it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Dec 05, 2011 6:43 pm
If you could show me real information that shows torture works, I'll change my tune. But right now, it serves no purpose other than Hedonistic gratification on the part of the torturers and of others. Christ wasn't simply executed, but crucified. He was tortured on the cross for hours, and what was it? A show for the entertainment of others, as well as a message to other people who would try to go against the King.
Incidentally, it didn't dissuade anyone then, and it doesn't dissuade anyone now.
This is also why I am firmly against the Death Penalty. I'm in a minority of Christians who does not believe in hell. I am in a larger group of people in general who do not believe in hell. Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the Death Penalty supposed to be punishment for crimes? What punishment is their in death?
Perhaps it's, like torture, a way to show what happens to you if you follow a certain path. Well, again, it doesn't work. Crimes worthy of the Death penalty are often crimes done by those who either understand the consequences, or don't care.
Now, what if we took Wall Street Bankers who gave people loans based on faulty information, filed them electronically without the deed, sold them in pieces in packages so that nobody knows where the money is, and crashed the global economy when nobody could pay up for mortgages the banks had no right to sell, put them on Death Row.... Well, that might make people change their minds.
Point is, the Death Penalty has no purpose, outside of bloodlust. The only areas where it could be implemented effectively to discourage people would be cases like I mentioned. Referred to as "Thinking Man's Crimes". These are the people who could be dissuaded by the consequences. They have a lot more to lose.
The Bible says "Thou Shalt Not Kill". It also says "Thou Shalt not Bear False Witness". We can all agree, of course, that if a man came up to us, and asked to know the location of a friend he wanted to kill, we would lie.
If their is a moral exception for lying, their must be one for killing as well. Sometimes we have to go to War. If not, we'd all be speaking German. Those of us who weren't Jewish, Black, Asian, Mexican, Arab, or Gay that is. The rest would be pretty much dead about now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Dec 05, 2011 7:03 pm
http://newsblogs.chicagotribune.com/steve_chapman/2009/03/does-torture-work.html
news for thought
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
