4 ms·

So what you're saying is, you'd pardon someone who broke a law against torture and saved lives by so doing. After all, the torturer "[broke] a law to bring ligh

by aaronem 13y ago

So what you're saying is, you'd pardon someone who broke a law against torture and saved lives by so doing. After all, the torturer "[broke] a law to bring light to greater wrongdoings", and "the only just thing to do is pardon the original transgression." (If you reply at all, you will of course weasel out of this with "torture never works and you're a horrible person besides", but I find it amusing enough, to point out that your argument easily justifies torture, that I'll do so despite the near certainty you'll dodge the point instead of considering it.)

talmand 13y ago
Granting a pardon does not justify the crime. Let's say we have a convicted murderer that committed the act when they were very young, he admitted to it with remorse, the victim's family has no vengeance in their hearts, and he spent 50 years in prison for the crime. Just because the governor issues a pardon to let the old man out to die in peace with family doesn't mean the governor is justifying the original crime.
Karunamon 13y ago
I find it amusing enough, to point out that your argument easily justifies torture The moral standard behind the various "torture is not allowed" laws and proclamations is twofold: 1) Destroying people is bad mmkay? I think we can all agree on that. 2) It recognizes that any intelligence needs can be met by forms of interrogation that don't use such tactics. And a not-at-all-morally-related but still valid reason is: 3) Using it carries very bad consequences for the perpetrators, PR, public support, support from allies, giving people who don't like you a reason to attack you. So no, my argument justifies no such thing. If you reply at all, you will of course weasel out of this by willfully twisting my words again to fit whatever you think they meant instead of what I actually wrote.

by aaronem 13y ago

talmand 13y ago

Granting a pardon does not justify the crime. Let's say we have a convicted murderer that committed the act when they were very young, he admitted to it with remorse, the victim's family has no vengeance in their hearts, and he spent 50 years in prison for the crime. Just because the governor issues a pardon to let the old man out to die in peace with family doesn't mean the governor is justifying the original crime.

Karunamon 13y ago

I find it amusing enough, to point out that your argument easily justifies torture The moral standard behind the various "torture is not allowed" laws and proclamations is twofold: 1) Destroying people is bad mmkay? I think we can all agree on that. 2) It recognizes that any intelligence needs can be met by forms of interrogation that don't use such tactics. And a not-at-all-morally-related but still valid reason is: 3) Using it carries very bad consequences for the perpetrators, PR, public support, support from allies, giving people who don't like you a reason to attack you. So no, my argument justifies no such thing. If you reply at all, you will of course weasel out of this by willfully twisting my words again to fit whatever you think they meant instead of what I actually wrote.