Legal Torture: The Upturned Moral Universe of Progressives

The topic of torture is in the headlines again, resuscitated by the Democrats, an assembly most grievously afflicted with the bane of idleness.

The reasons, of course, are manifold, leading among which is the fact that the Obama experiment is desperately in need of a compelling distraction from the dreadful economic results it has thus far yielded. There are also the latent vestiges of unresolved animus toward the previous administration from a boisterous fringe that refuses to be pacified. But one reason for having a renewed interest in this issue which liberal democrats can never be accused of is that they suddenly find themselves aggrieved with the unbearable burden of a heavy conscience. In fact there is not one lone liberal Democrat in Congress who cares one iota that prisoners of war have been or are being tortured. This may sound like a rather bold statement, but it is firmly grounded on historical fact.

To illustrate my point, imagine for a moment that you have been assigned a couple of prisoners whom you have been given complete freedom to torture. Neither prisoner is aware of the fate that awaits them. You enter the room of the first prisoner and begin by tearing off one of his limbs. The prisoner -- who is not privy to the reasons why you have committed such a dastardly act against his person -- writhes in agony. You then proceed to systematically sever other vital organs. The prisoner tries to flee in desperation, but you have blocked the only exit through which he may entertain any hopes of escaping his torturer. What the prisoner doesn't know is that prior to the moment you entered the scene you had already planned for him to die before being eventually removed from this chamber.

After the job is finished, you enter the next room in which your next hapless victim waits. He is also unaware that you are about to inflict intolerable pain upon him. But this time you decide to employ a more effective method. You bind this prisoner, and then dip him in a tank full of a corrosive solution that will gradually eat at his flesh, obstruct his breathing, and bring about a slow but certain demise. Within minutes of being submerged in this tank the prisoner expires. You could argue that his death was somewhat more merciful than that of the first prisoner.

Now imagine that you had been asked to torture these men, not because they were withholding actionable intelligence that could potentially save the lives of thousands of innocents threatened with imminent peril. It was not because they were active members of an itinerant terrorist organization responsible for wreaking havoc around the world. In fact, both these men were innocent human beings, physically incapable of defending themselves, who had been placed in these rooms through no choice of their own. To make matters worse, their painful deaths were commissioned by and discharged at the full behest of their closest family member.

What I have just described is a federally sanctioned procedure that is performed on a daily basis in one of the most vibrant democracies on earth, and which has been in place for almost forty years. It is part of the required curriculum for those who have demonstrated an interest in pursuing a medical career and it is methodically executed by highly trained professionals who are paid handsomely for their services. It is also executed strictly upon human beings who have committed no crime, and championed by liberals worldwide under the banner of reproductive freedom.

Millions of taxpayers are legally forced to finance this method of torture in their own country, and under the Obama administration, they now have to subsidize the lethal torture of thousands of other innocent human beings in foreign countries. And if that isn't enough reason for outrage, trained professionals who are conscientiously opposed to this gruesome practice will soon have to put aside their moral objections and provide this service lest they risk being sued by their less than satisfied patrons.

By now most of you know that I am speaking of abortion; a legal procedure which claims the lives of thousands of unborn babies each year and one that liberals in this country proudly endorse. In fact, opposition to this kind of torture is actually viewed by most liberals as a type of moral deficiency.

That is why I can unequivocally state that no liberal Democrat sitting in Congress truly cares that prisoners of war are being subjected to any amount of harsh treatment at the hands of U.S. military officials. Or else how could they justify their umbrage and still remain the willing accomplices in the virtual genocide of innocents taking place in their own backyard?

Forget their ostentatious claims that we are putting ourselves on a par with the very people we regard as barbarians. Dismiss their lofty rhetoric about betraying the fundamental ideals for which we stand as a free country. Ignore their admonitions on how torture not only robs us of the moral authority to accuse others of wrong doing, but compromises the core principles of human decency which undergird the very fabric of our society. Coming from the Democrats, these declarations are vastly disingenuous, the rhetoric rings hollow and such principles have long since been trampled upon from the time that we as a society affirmed in unison with them, that killing innocent human beings in the womb should be proclaimed the perpetual law of the land.

Just remember next time a liberal challenges you to discuss his moral objections against your implicit or explicit assent to torture, to simply look him straight in the eye and blithely respond that you have always been personally opposed to torture, but remain steadfast in your conviction that -- lest we jeopardize our freedoms -- torture should remain legal, safe, but rare.
If you experience technical problems, please write to