In his essay, "The Case for Torture", Michael Levin argues that if law enforcement/military is put into a situation where if the only way to find/stop a terrorist from attacking and killing many people, that they should be able to torture him if he refuses to tell the information needed to stop the attack. He goes on to talk about the points of views where it can be rationalized to torture the terrorist, and the other point of view where he reasonably argues against someone refusing to let the terrorist be tortured.
I for one fully agree with Michael Levin in this essay. If i was the one that had to make the call on whether or not the terrorist needed torturing, i would easily say "yes, torture is necessary". Not saying that it wouldn't be a difficult decision, but i would much rather torture one evil man to a near point of death vs letting millions of innocent people die. Quite frankly, it seems like a no-brainer to me. Unless you don't have a conscious and you could live the choice of letting all of those innocent people die.
No comments:
Post a Comment