Debate:Is "Coercive Interrogation" consistent with Christian Values?

File:Brainradio.gif

"I must kill Frank Drebin"

"Coercive Interrogation" can refer to a number of methods currently being used in the War Against Terror. Some are "minor"(e.g. sleep deprivation), others "major" (e.g. waterboarding, physical abuse). Sometimes they are used to extract immediately vital information, sometimes for less immediate needs. Where do Christian values intersect with these practices?

Of course it is. "Coercive Interrogation" has a long and proud history of being used to fight evil. Without the use of the rack and the thumbscrew, how could the witches of the middle-ages been convinced to admit to such crimes as flying through the air, shapeshifting, cursing cattle, stealing men's er... 'members' by magic, eating babies, or having actual physical 'biblical intercourse' with Satan? Who Would Jesus Waterboard? --BobD 13:31, 14 April 2007 (EDT)

"Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets." Matthew 7:12. Not consistent with waterboarding unless ye would that men should waterboard you. No exceptions made for hypothetical situations in which waterboarding someone would prevent a greater evil. Dpbsmith 21:33, 14 April 2007 (EDT)

It's all done with mind control through brain chip implants and nowadays. We've come along way since old fashioned waterboarding. And that stuff was never needed, anyway. Heroin in your breakfast Cornflakes does the trick, they'll sell their own mother for another bowl of Cornflakes. Most of this stuff you read about waterboarding is just disinformation. RobS 15:49, 19 April 2007 (EDT)

No

I just can't picture Jesus beating someone up to make them confess, or piling up naked prisoners and take a picture of it.

Middle Man

All I could think of when I read the question was... "forty lashes". Although, I guess, they weren't asking questions, they were trying to get away with not executing him for the Pharisees purposes of silencing him. How can anyone even mildly versed in the stories about Jesus even think this could be a debate? Human 02:49, 25 April 2007 (EDT)

Get people scared enough, and they can rationalize ANYTHING, as long as it's being done to someone outside their Monkeysphere. --Gulik2 02:54, 25 April 2007 (EDT)

Transference

This is not even relevant for argument. Christian values are inapplicable with coercive interrogation. As unrelated to Christian values as using a bayonet on someone or flying a civilian airliner into a building full of civilians. What is being attempted here is just another attempt to attribute coercive interrogation with Christian values. Maybe we can give the Christian value attribute to ritualized decapitation, mutalization, use of human shields (non-combatants). But tell me honestly, which values did you use when someone came to murder you and your family because their leaders ordered them too? Of course there weren't any exept the value of your life over your would be killers. It is only those that hold a hatred for Christianity who will use a war that someone else is waging to devalue it. It is absolutely just another way to make political rants about two things that someone has absolutely no knowledge about. This propaganda technique is known as TRANSFER (Institute for Propaganda Analysis, 1938). This technique of trying to attribute something negative to an apposing religious view is only too common in the religion debate category and usually with all of the usual suspects.--Roopilots6 11:09, 9 October 2007 (EDT)

I do not see anyone arguing "Christian values support torture" or even "Christians torture".... seems to me that the question under discussion is "ought Christians support torture" -- and the answer immediately presents itself, Thou shalt not!! for "Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me." Matthew 25:40.... it is better that we should allow ourselves to be the recipients of torture than to inflict it upon another, better that we should allow ourselves to be murdered than murder another.... for the torture of another is a sin that will not be washed off our hands, and those that condone it, in their hearts, words, or acts, are as guilty and as condemned as those who beat, burn, and humiliate, no matter the "value" of the information sought!! Pandeism 12:06, 9 October 2007 (EDT)

The debate question is whether coercive interrogation is consistent with a certain ideology. Meaning are the two compatible with each other? Nothing about torture is being mentioned here, by the way. Let's not misdirect on the topic of discussion. Also that Matthew 25:40 has nothing to do with the application of coercive interrogation techniques used to save lives during a time of war is only proving one of my points perfectly. Make sure that your not wanting to sin isn't an act of sedition that causes others to suffer for it. I hope you'll see the value of this information and to apply it accordingly.--Roopilots6 19:41, 9 October 2007 (EDT)