Compromise

It is now clear that the "compromise" on torture going through Congress will allow the President to use torture on United States citizens, or people from anywhere in the world, at his discretion. He is also allowed to detain them without trial indefinitely if he deems them dangerous.

Sounds more like a capitulation than a compromise.

So, what are we going to say to China when we don't like them locking up their dissidents without trail? Can we even so much as put sanctions on them without being hypocritical? How will we tell them that we are torturing and holding people without trial for good reasons, but they are not?

Oh, and the so-called "Family Research Council" took time off from raging about the homosexuals to make sure its members called their congresspeople to support torture and detainment without trial. Apparently, torture is now a family value.

I thought the religious conservatives would limit their support for torture to silent assent. But no, Dobson and company are all for it out loud. I would like them to show me what evidence in the teachings of Christ there is to support torture. Or are the teachings of Christ irrelevant in the modern age? Perhaps they are relevant only when it comes to keeping your kids in check? Or condemning people you don't like?

I think many of the modern pop theologians have gotten so lost in the notion of substitutionary atonement that the actual teachings of Christ really aren't important to them. In fact, many of them seem to think Christ's teachings are secondary, mystical, sort of not to be taken seriously, perhaps even misleading to those untrained enough to take those parts of the Bible literally. The real matter is that Christ was sacrificed for the sins of mankind. The crux of Christ's ministry was his torture and death and the legal transaction it represented, not any of his inscrutable teachings.

So I suppose if you share that theology, the present situation isn't the first time torture would be a good thing.

Also: the angry emails I have gotten about my column against torture, including one note which said, "thank GOD President Bush understands. One day you will!" have all been from women. I mention that because one other anti-torture blogger--a nationally known one--has noticed the same trend. What is that about? Does it have something to do with knowing that one is unlikely to ever have to face torture themselves?

Oh, and would Donald Wildmon, James Dobson and company be as eager to hand a President Hillary Clinton the right to torture and detain without trial? I doubt it. I know I don't want any president to have that right.

Fact of the matter is, Bush is getting a free pass from a segment of people who think he was chosen by God to do the job and as such, he is to be free of criticism. We are to trust him completely. This whole Constitution thing and all these liberal judges and all those reporters asking impertinent questions just get in the way of our Big Daddy taking care of us.