Posted: 10/11/2006 5:26:11 PM EDT
|
From World Magazine interview with Balmer, some evangelical liberal. World Magazine (by the way, is a Christina mag) told him that "we agree torture is sometimes useless, but if a nuclear bomb was set to kill millions of people, and if to apply physical pressure on a terrorist to gain something and lead to the disarming of the bomb, would do it?" Balmer responds, "No! Absolutely Not! And I am surprised that you would even suggest such a thing!" __ That's a guy who I know I don't want in our government. |
|
Balmer's lament Interview: How others see us: An evangelical liberal lashes out at the religious right WORLD: You complain that "the torture of human beings, God's creatures—some guilty of crimes, others not—has been justified by the Bush administration. . . . The use of torture under any circumstances is a moral issue." Agreed that torture is terrible and sometimes useless in gaining information, but if the imminent explosion of a nuclear bomb would kill millions of people, and if by applying some kind of physical pressure to a terrorist you could gain information that would lead to its location and disarming, would you do it? BALMER: No, absolutely not, and I'm surprised that you would even suggest such a thing! I was under the impression that conservatives were allergic to utilitarian arguments; certainly that is what I learned from Paul Ramsey in graduate school. No Christian, he insisted, ever made an ethical decision solely on utilitarian grounds—what is the greatest good for the greatest number of people—especially if it compromises the worth and dignity of an individual. http://www.worldmag.com/articles/12240 |