When it comes "moral bearings," Barack Obama is not the man I measure against. Not the man who, as president, accepts the willful killing of baby girls moments before they are born as a right. Yet, here I am in agreement with him about a moral issue - waterboarding.
My argument against waterboarding isn't its effectiveness. That's not a moral argument. That's about efficiency. What if it could be proven terrorism was deterred by this? Or that genuine, useful information could be elicited from this technique? Still wrong.
Sooner or later, if the practice continues, some poor sap will be thought of as a terrorist, tortured in the name of the state and psychologically and physically damaged for life, and then found to have an ironclad alibi, complete with video of him leading a passionate pro-American rally in a Peoria grammar school.
We have plenty of evidence that the death penalty has killed innocent people along the way.
But, that's not why. That's quality control. QC can be fixed, and only the most guilty are tortured. Still wrong.
It is wrong is because it purposefully hurting a defenseless person. If a defended person charges me with a gun, I feel comfortable stopping him. However, this is the intentional hurting of a person strapped down.
The ends to do not justify the means. No cause is so worthy as the torture of another man.
Simple as that.
Now, if only President Obama would remember Cuba and Venezuela's weak view of human rights, or the scream of a young girl just before she dies by an abortion surgeon's hand.
Human Rights Books on Amazon