General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWHO WOULD JESUS TORTURE?
............
In short, the same people who lied to us about weapons of mass destruction are now lying to us in the aftermath of their criminal abuses of detainees. It's as if they've not heard that we know they lied to us to get us into the war in the first place. It's as if they've decided the best course of action is to stick to the party line, goosestep along with a unified denial of proven facts, and hope their asses don't end up in front of war crimes tribunal at the Hague.
And that's exactly what should happen next.
If there were any justice in this nation, we would insist that those responsible for taking us down this immoral rabbit hole be held accountable before an international tribunal. We would insist on nothing less if it had been our sons or daughters being waterboarded, or if our own soldiers were sexually, physically, and psychologically abused while in the captivity of another nation's security forces. We can't indignantly point out the inhumane crimes of others and insist upon international condemnation of those acts if we're not going to come clean and punish those who committed criminal abuses in our names.
We owe it to the world and to our nation's honor to offer up the war criminals we're currently shielding from international prosecution.
In the meantime, it would be helpful if the people who sanctioned, ordered, and carried out these crimes stopped invoking the name of Christ whenever they want to point to our superior moral authority around the world. We should either stop using the guy's name, or start living up to His teachings.
http://www.squatlo-rant.blogspot.ca/2014/12/who-would-jesus-torture-listening-to.html
kydo
(2,679 posts)Happens when I try to read without my glasses. I thought it was "who would torture Jesus?" So my answer was Cheney.
Then I re-read this thread with glasses.
Sorry about that.
msongs
(67,371 posts)KingCharlemagne
(7,908 posts)words of the Nazarene in the four gospels. I believe the doctrine was established and settled upon around the time of the Council of Nicaea (ca. 325), although its roots may trace back to Pauline epistles.
Jesus might reserve torture for today's 'moneychangers' like Jaime Dimon, et. al.. But even that requires reading a lot into what took place when Jesus drove out the money changers.
I'm an atheist, so I don't have a dog in this fight, save to note that Jesus was a Communist (or, more acccurately, 'communalist').
99th_Monkey
(19,326 posts)I'd could go with that, for the likes of Jamie Diamond and Chuck Paulson.
Bragi
(7,650 posts)I recall from my Catholic youth that we were supposed to believe both in hell, and in purgatory, both of which promised pain and suffering for entrants.
As I recall, if we sinned horribly (mortally) we would get everlasting torture in hell. If we sinned moderately (venialy), we'd go to purgatory, where we'd be tortured, but only for a temporary period, before being rescued.
On reflection, this suggests to me that the Church was/is of the view that the threat of torture was a useful tactic to get people to do what they wanted.
Which may be of little relevance to anything happening right now, but it does make me wonder if the religion of Christ and the Christian bible is maybe not a good place to go to find an unequivocal, anti-torture viewpoint.