| Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Re:Support from David Cameron | |
| Posted by: | Francis Rowe | |
| Date/Time: | 13/11/10 09:21:00 |
| 'What you do if you weren't certain or that the effect could be what Cameron says it was?' The reason I asked the question without the uncertainties of real life is to establish some guidelines. My guideline would always be the greater good. So if I was certain waterboarding would save a large number of lives I would do it. If I was uncertain then the issue becomes more complex. 'What are your limits to the torture you would condone or are there no limits?' Ultimately I would be of the opinion that the end justifies the means. However, that does not mean that I believe any form of torture should be legal or that this Government should condone its use. The law should give the individual clear guidelines. The issue of uncertainty works both ways as someone could use the vague possibility of an attack as a reason for torturing a person with a weak connection with the attackers. However, I'm sure situtations will arrive when individuals are put in a position in which they need to commit an illegal but moral act. |