GOD & MAN IN THE 21ST CENTURY
"There are only two ways of telling the complete truth—anonymously and posthumously."—Thomas Sowell
I'm still wondering if we can't discuss the whole gitmo = gulag analogy.
Probably not if we can get any gulag survivors to play. They're liable to get pissed off.
>>shrug<<Frankly if they aren't convinced of the inhumanity of torturing prisoners after their own ordeal I have little sympathy for their feelings.
if the claim is so laughably ludicrous as the right claims why is the topic so untouchable? Usually people are eager to argue the points they believe they will win handily.
If you read accounts about the Nazi concentration camps, the Russian gulags, and the Chinese laogais, then the idea of debating the kids stuff at Gitmo seems a little ridiculous.
I refuse to take a homophobe named "Hindrocket" seriously. I just can't do it.Oh, and Hunter? I suppose the alleged forced sodomy of young boys at Abu Ghraib doesn't qualify as "gulag-like?" Eh?
Alleged would be the operative term.
"If you read accounts about the Nazi concentration camps, the Russian gulags, and the Chinese laogais, then the idea of debating the kids stuff at Gitmo seems a little ridiculous."Thats a rationalization like saying "if you think about the world must be flat!" Either you are prepared to defend the assertion or you are not.
Defend which assertion, T?
the assertion that Gitmo is not in anyway comparable to a gulag. Saying the comparison is ridiculous doesn't make it so.Are you prepared to defend the assertion or will you retract it? Or will you continue to make it knowing you cannot actually support it?
I think the burden is on you to show that it is. The United States has not compiled the sort of record China and the Soviet Union did in the field of civil rights.Oh, by the way, your concern over whether or not people are being tortured completely proves my point about the underlying moral law. If I agreed with you about the facts of what is happening, I'd share your outrage.
"I think the burden is on you to show that it is."That's fine but I'm first trying to just get people to agree to address the topic."The United States has not compiled the sort of record China and the Soviet Union did in the field of civil rights."According to whom? The state department? Funny enough if you look on the various international agency rankings (red cross, human rights watch, amnesty international) the US doesn't really do all that well when it comes to human rights."Oh, by the way, your concern over whether or not people are being tortured completely proves my point about the underlying moral law."No it doesn't. I don't argue against torture because it is universally wrong but because it is A)ineffectiveB)illegalC)morally wrong to me (and most americans)
Why should you care about the law? Why should you care if torture is effective? Why should anyone care what you think is moral? We're dancing in circles. I'll let this waltz end.
"Why should you care about the law?"because without that constraint the US government is simply an atrocity factory. As I am an American I very much am concerned by the actions carried out in my name , with my money, and that may very well come back to hurt me personally."Why should you care if torture is effective?"Because I'm evaluating it as a tactic. Were it effective but morally questionable to me than I could engage in an ethical calculus of figuring out whether it might in some instance be "worth it." As it is not effective it lacks even that argument for it's use."Why should anyone care what you think is moral?"You certainly don't have to but unless you are going to come out and say that you are a pro-torture christian I think you may be raising a false argument here. Either you accept torture or you don't. If you don't then all my arguments for me apply to you. If you do then I think you have deeper problems than this argument.
Post a Comment