The Transitive Property of Torture

Update: CIA director: Waterboarding necessary, but potentially illegal
Update: We Waterboarded

The idea of torturing is repugnant to me, I truly mean that. The definition of torture is sometimes confused, or narrowed for the benefit of the ‘interrogator’. Here’s Webster’s definition. Or Wikipedia has a whole article about it. So when current Attorney General Michael Mukasey last year also said he found torture repugnant, it was a breath of fresh air.

In a CNN article today concerning some Senate hearings Mukasey seems to not speak-out against water-boarding. As if it might not be torture. Edward Kennedy asked, “would water boarding would be torture if it were done to you.” Mukasey’s answer, “I would feel that it was.”

New rule of thumb: If it feels like torture, it’s torture.

Now we get to a topic called metonymy. Please allow me to explain. We say, “Bush attacked Iraq.” Nobody anywhere contests this. What has George W. Bush done in Iraq that is an act of war? Nothing, all acts of war are carried out by men and women under Bushes authority. We accept that Bush is responsible for the commands he gives, and may one day be held accountable in international court for some of those decisions.

If Bush is responsible for the actions of those under his authority (when those actions are commanded by or known by the president). Who gives the president his authority and who does he answer to? I will give you a moment to look it up in the constitution.

The answer is the people. We the people. Now as fun as democracy is, this is sort of the rub: We Americans, voting and non-voting alike are morally responsible for the actions of our government.

A=B, B=C, therefore A=C.

If Bush is responsible for torture and I am responsible for Bush, than I am responsible for torture.

Some things to consider with our newfound responsibility:

All the Republican candidates gave the nod to torture except McCain, who was once a tortured POW. As far as I know, no democrat candidate has ever said it was permissible.

Huckabee is something of a mystery to me. He claims to be the values vote, but he endorses torture.

Back Fired!

This story says Hussein wanted the world to believe he had WMDs.  The man knew how to play a joke.  Boy, the egg is on our face.

Stallone used Human Growth Hormone for the new Rambo movie

Congress has held several hearings over the use of steroids and other performance enhancing substances in baseball.

Why? Please take some time to answer why the federal legislature would care before I weigh in.

Baseball, they say, is iconic of America. The unnatural enhancement creates an inflated standard;if steroid use is permitted it becomes a requirement by deduction. All athletes not doping would be at a gigantic disadvantage. In order to compete, drugs would be necessary. Not just at the professional level. High school football comes to mind.

HGH and steroids are bad for you. Look here. And are thus illegal.

So we get to Stallone. Read here. Using HGH to get big for his reprisal role. In the article he talks about using steroids after forty as part of a healthy life-style. Dr. Spaceman comes to mind.

Does doping create an unattainable standard in America beyond competitive sports?

extra things:
Analyzing the Ethics of Steroid Use in Professional Sports
Rambo Trailer

January Prayer Letter

This is my prayer letter, no sense in not sharing it.

1_08.pdf

Young Earth Creationism

Tomorrow I will be attending a creation science seminar my dad told be about. True, it mostly serves to get me out of the house while a little girl has a birthday party at my parents house (don’t ask, I will explain another time). This is the site given on the flier: www.pointsoforigins.com

But it got my dad and I talking about the literal understanding of the creation story and the short comings of that view of prehistory. I always feel the need to to point out that what is commonly called the “literal” understanding is actually a narrow view of scripture. Such as “the son of” means both the next generation male descendant and any male descendant. This makes the time line much more vague. The book of Genesis is not a science text book nor is it a history text book, but for this understanding to prevail we must understand it to be that. And ignore the poetic nature of the tome.

My father also pointed out that it would be very strange, even out of character, for God to have created fossils and carbon-14, but nothing is ever out of the question. And what of genetic mutation, which we can measure and track in contemporary specimen? This is all very strange.

To what end? If the Earth is proven to be around 6,000 years old the Bible is accurate and the god of Abraham, Issac, and Jacob is the one true god, and his son came to the earth and lived as a man, died, on the third day rose, and assended into Heaven to sit at the right hand of the Father, and will judge the living and the dead? Or, if the Earth is billions and billions of years old, is all faith bunk?

Seems we have much faith in science, any bit of science that makes us appear to be correct. This theme is woven through many a hot debate.

Another time I will think about “Intelligent Design”.

New Beginings

This is not my first blog. No, I once used a blog as a personal journal made public. Even I found some of my personal writings lame and pathetic. This, I hope, will be more idea centric; simply a place for me to weigh in and for some discussion.

I look to make this part video log. Which will be fun.