Commentary

Which is more cruel and immoral? Waterboarding or abortion?

7 Comments

UPDATE: Hot Air reports: Sweden legalizes sex-selection abortions! Sweden, the most secular nation on the planet!

Dr. Frank Turek has a post here, examining whether pro-abortion Democrats are inconsistent for calling waterboarding torture, when the procedures used to kill the unborn can be far more cruel and painful. Turek is a former naval fighter pilot (8 years served), who served in the Pacific, the Indian Ocean and the Persian Gulf.

Turek actually was waterboarded as art of his SERE training, in case of capture and interrogation. He’s now a full time Christian debater, and he now debates people like Christopher Hitchens. Christianity is definitely a step up in terms of excitement and danger from his previous job, where I imagine he spent time on dull chores such as landing on pitching carrier decks at night, dodging SAMs and triple-A, etc.

He writes:

Now, despite decades of its use on American service members, President Obama declares that waterboarding is torture when used on terrorists.  Is it?  Reasonable people cannot disagree whether scalding a person’s skin, dismembering him, or beheading him constitutes torture.  Those are undeniably torturous acts that our enemies have inflicted on Americans.  But since waterboarding leaves no permanent physical damage, reasonable people can disagree over whether or not it’s actually torture and should be used on terrorists.

He then goes on to talk about whether the Democrats are being inconsistent on what counts as torture.

Despite being against waterboarding, President Obama does not seem to think that scalding, dismembering, or beheading is torture in all circumstances.  In some circumstances, the President actually approves of such treatment, so much so that he is now exporting it to other countries with our tax dollars.  He’s even thinking of forcing certain Americans to inflict it on the innocent.

In fact, the President along with most in his party and some in the Republican Party, think that such brutality is a Constitutional right, which they cleverly disguise with the word “choice.”  Choice in these circumstances actually means scalding, dismembering, or de-braining a living human being—which is literally what saline, D&C, and partial birth abortions respectively accomplish.

I won’t give the whole article away, but you must read it. I don’t link to Turek a lot, but this is awesome.

Further study

7 thoughts on “Which is more cruel and immoral? Waterboarding or abortion?”

  3. Good post. I’m with you, Neil.

    On an aside, this waterboarding debate is a little like the one over dropping the bomb on Japan in WWII. If you come to believe waterboarding is torture, you still have the issue of what would you do if you had the choice b/w waterboarding one guy or watching 1,000s of people you are responsible for dying. In that scenario, I’d waterboard.

    If the Bush Administration had waterboarded everybody willy-nilly that cycled through the CIA at one time or another, I might think what they did was disgusting. But they obviously exercised extreme caution when they used it on the few people they did, and they spent a great deal of time considering the legal ramifications. There is something to be said for that.

    I’m not in favor of willy-nilly waterboarding, but I do not disagree with what Bush did. What he did kept us safe and prevented attacks. Period.

    Like

    Reply

  4. …btw, as much as I would love the country not to be as polarized as it is, I can’t help but enjoy watching Nancy Pelosi squirm over this waterboarding debate. She’s so arrogant, she’s getting her just desserts. Hope they prove irrefutably that she knew about this program. In my book, they already have, but I wish they had a tape or something of the briefing that would just end this speculation.

    Like

    Reply
  6. Pingback: Torture, the Real Conclusion « The Pugnacious Irishman

Leave a reply to Stephen VanNuys Cancel reply