- by Alan Adaschik

During the last Republican Presidential debate, Republicans were asked if a nuclear device had been detonated somewhere in the United States and more attacks were planed, would you use torture to get information that may prevent future attacks? In other words, the moderator wanted to know if torture was an acceptable option when it came to the possible saving of lives of a large number of Americans? This is an interesting question because in past wars, despite the carnage and toll in human life, Americans overwhelmingly held that torture is wrong under any circumstances. However, today, as was made evident by Congressman's Tom Tancredo's much applauded reply, many Americans now condone torture if it will save American lives. What has changed?

Several things! First and foremost, 9/11 happened and 3,000 Americans were killed in less than an hour's time on prime time television with the entire Nation watching. Second, the technology to make small nuclear devices is now available to third world nations increasing the possibility of one falling into the hands of a terrorist organization. Finally, our government has already made the decision to use torture to protect Americans and many people hold that if our government does it, it must be okay. In other words, there are two elements at play that has made torture acceptable to Americans; fear and the fact that our government has already resorted to torturing suspected terrorists. To be sure, it is the fear of a nuclear terrorist attack that is being nurtured and stroked by our government to not only justify its use of torture but to also justify pre-emptive war and the trashing of the inalienable rights of human beings, both foreign and domestic.

Congressman Tom Tancredo summed it up best when he said; it is almost unbelievable to listen to this, a nuclear device has gone off, more are planned and we are wondering if waterboarding (torture) is a bad thing to do. Under these circumstances, anything we can think of doing, including torture, is permissible. We are the last best hope of Western Civilization. When we go under, western civilization goes under. We better respond in a way that makes them (terrorists) fearful of us, otherwise we guarantee something like this will happen. Upon concluding these statements the applause was deafening. However, the great irony of the situation apparently lost upon Congressman Tancredo and those applauding was that by resorting to torture, even under the circumstances describe, Western Civilization has already gone under for us and instead of being its last hope, we have become its murderer.

Although the hypothetical question asked during the Republican debate is appropriate to the times, there are grave implications associated with its asking which must be considered. If citizens condone evil (i.e. torture) on the part of our government to save American lives, even in a hypothetical manner, then Pandora's Box has been opened and the evil we only accepted hypothetically becomes real because our government will act upon the license we gave it. The thinking of government officials proceeds as follows: If citizens condone the use of torture to protect them from a nuclear attack and if terrorists had a nuclear weapon they would certainly use it to attack us. Then it logically follows that citizens condone torturing terrorists or people who we think are terrorists. This is where we inevitably end up! Torture has become a legitimate tool of government and this is no longer hypothetical. Not so you say! Then why are we torturing people in Iraq and in our war on terror? The truly regrettable and despicable aspect of this line of reasoning and its inevitable course of action is that we have become what we despise most and to posture that this transformation leaves us as the last hope of Western Civilization is absurd and ludicrous. No person or group of people who torture are civilized and this is true no matter how the decision to use torture is rationalized.

Congressman Tancredo's views in this matter not only speak for Right Wing Conservatives but most Fundamentalist Christians as well and this being the case a fair question to ask is what would Jesus say? If Jesus were here today and we asked him should we torture other people to prevent a nuclear attacks on the United States, do you as a Christian really think in your wildest dreams that Jesus would say "sure" that is best course of action and our Father in heaven would approve? I am sure that if you are really honest with yourself, you would have to admit that the response Jesus would most likely give is that it is wrong to fight evil with evil and if you do, you will be condemned. This being the case, why do the so called Right Wing Conservatives and their Fundamentalist Christian allies condone torture? The answer to this question should be obvious, Fundamentalist Christians are not Christians and right wing conservatives are not Americans. Instead, they are both closet Fascists and Totalitarians.

I am a Christian. Death is not a comfortable thought for me but I do not fear it because by believing in Jesus Christ I have been promised eternal life. I am also an American. Being American, whatever our government does is done in my name. As a Christian, an American, and a human being, I deeply resent the fact that a group of Godless Fascists have taken over my government and with the support of so called Fundamentalists Christians, are now doing evil throughout the world for the sake of saving Western Civilization. All of the foregoing being my true and sincere beliefs, let me state for the record that:

• I bitterly condemn our government for doing evil in my name and on my behalf.
• I would rather be dead than to give license to my government to do evil.
• Those of you who feel differently are cowards who are American in name only.

 Constitution Forum.us - Copyright © 2008