Torture

President Bush recently said:

"I believe the questions he's been asked are unfair," Bush said in an Oval Office session with reporters. "He's been asked to give opinions of a program -- or techniques of a program -- on which he has not been briefed."

This has come after Attorney General nominee Michael Mukasey seemed to bypass or evade water boarding as torture. From most descriptions I have read of water boarding, it is torture----the big question we have to wrestle with is whether or not we condone torture.

Some have said that torture has led to us receiving valuable information. Others will argue that it makes any information we get very suspect.

Be that as it may, several observations.

First, the Congress not only has a right to ask Michael Mukasey his views on water boarding and torture, they have a responsibility. The previous Attorney General did approve of torture and water boarding. For the President to say that they are asking Mr. Mukasey these questions is unfair because he hasn't been briefed is beyond lame. Surely this man, an experienced attorney and judge has a clue. At least one would hope.

The problem I have with torture isn't about its effectiveness or its legality. It concerns the morality of it. As a Christian pastor my moral codes are defined, in part by my faith, my reason, and philosophical principles. There is an old philosophical adage that states that the end does not justify the means. Simply put, one cannot do something immoral in order to get to something good. We can make lemonade out of lemons, make the best out of a bad situation, but we cannot do evil in order to accomplish something we see as good.

What concerns me about this President is that he ran on a 'values' platform.

He claims to be pro-life, but he supports the death penalty---REALLY supports the death penalty.

He vetoes bills aimed to help the poor and even poor children.

He ignored most principles of the just war theory to launch a unilateral war against a sovereign nation.

And prisoners ARE tortured. They simply are.

Okay, he's opposed to abortion, an issue that impacts a very small percentage of the population.

He's anti-gay rights. To discriminate against a portion of the population because you don't accept their sexual orientation doesn't strike me as a great deal different from discriminating against people's genders, race, or nationality. I was born male, I have a heterosexual orientation, I am Caucasian, and I am half Italian, half Irish. Of these aspects about myself I choose:

a. To be male.
b. To be straight.
c. To be Italian and Irish
d. None of the above.

So, our current President ran on values. They certainly aren't the values of Christianity, they certainly aren't the values of mainstream ethical philosophy, so it makes me wonder just whose values he ran on and by whose values he governs.