What Is Torture Ethical
Torture and Ethics
Karen D. Davis
University of Phoenix
Ethics of Justice and Security
530
Eddie Koen
October 24, 2010
Torture and Ethics
The purpose of this paper is to analyze whether torturing enemy combatants or high-value targets violates standards of morality in an American free society. Examine whether the act of torture violates basic human rights and if it could have global implications. Also it will discuss ethical theories that justify torture.
Torture used to be contrary to American values. Cruel and unusual punishments were forbid by Our Bill of Rights. Americans and our government have historically condemned states that (practice) torture; we have granted asylum or refuge to those who fear it” (Lucan, …show more content…
When they enter society they surrender only such rights as are necessary for their security and for the common good. Each individual retains fundamental prerogatives drawn from natural law relating to the integrity of person and property (natural rights).Every prisoner, May it be terrorist or not, do also has his rights and liberties like every normal citizens have. A prisoner has the right to be fair trial, not treated as animals, and also right to eat meals. They should not be punished in customs that not according to the law, as law is said to be the protector of our life and liberty. In this regard torture is regarded as the greatest violation of human dignity of the victim and greatest possible debasement of the perpetrator. From moral and philosophical point of view, therefore, torture is unconditionally …show more content…
And again, like it or not, it is still a part of history being made. The arguments for and against torture show, more than anything, that it is a phenomenon that should still be reckoned with today. Why? Because it still exists, and it is actually practiced. And turning a blind eye to it will not make it go away. Rather than deny its existence and shout empty invectives against its use, or put against it an absolute ban that cannot be as absolutely followed, its exercise, whenever permitted by foreign government policy or the exigencies of the situation, should be tightly circumscribed.
When torture is utilized in order to protect national security, it is not necessarily legal, but the acts of the torturers are given a color of legality, and their prosecution for whatever human rights violations they may commit is up to the government which allowed them to do so. Therefore, torture remains as something immoral, but not necessarily as something illegal. When this is done, the earlier definitions of torture under the Roman regime as an “edict” echo in contemporary times. If the government does not punish its use, it will go
Karen D. Davis
University of Phoenix
Ethics of Justice and Security
530
Eddie Koen
October 24, 2010
Torture and Ethics
The purpose of this paper is to analyze whether torturing enemy combatants or high-value targets violates standards of morality in an American free society. Examine whether the act of torture violates basic human rights and if it could have global implications. Also it will discuss ethical theories that justify torture.
Torture used to be contrary to American values. Cruel and unusual punishments were forbid by Our Bill of Rights. Americans and our government have historically condemned states that (practice) torture; we have granted asylum or refuge to those who fear it” (Lucan, …show more content…
When they enter society they surrender only such rights as are necessary for their security and for the common good. Each individual retains fundamental prerogatives drawn from natural law relating to the integrity of person and property (natural rights).Every prisoner, May it be terrorist or not, do also has his rights and liberties like every normal citizens have. A prisoner has the right to be fair trial, not treated as animals, and also right to eat meals. They should not be punished in customs that not according to the law, as law is said to be the protector of our life and liberty. In this regard torture is regarded as the greatest violation of human dignity of the victim and greatest possible debasement of the perpetrator. From moral and philosophical point of view, therefore, torture is unconditionally …show more content…
And again, like it or not, it is still a part of history being made. The arguments for and against torture show, more than anything, that it is a phenomenon that should still be reckoned with today. Why? Because it still exists, and it is actually practiced. And turning a blind eye to it will not make it go away. Rather than deny its existence and shout empty invectives against its use, or put against it an absolute ban that cannot be as absolutely followed, its exercise, whenever permitted by foreign government policy or the exigencies of the situation, should be tightly circumscribed.
When torture is utilized in order to protect national security, it is not necessarily legal, but the acts of the torturers are given a color of legality, and their prosecution for whatever human rights violations they may commit is up to the government which allowed them to do so. Therefore, torture remains as something immoral, but not necessarily as something illegal. When this is done, the earlier definitions of torture under the Roman regime as an “edict” echo in contemporary times. If the government does not punish its use, it will go