I and my parents attneded a memorial day parade and then a sort of memorial service in the local cemetary. Something like 25 men from my county have died overseas since 2001. I wasnt sure how to feel. The speaker definitely tied Memorial day in with the War in Iraq. He seemed to think that the two went hand in hand, supporting the war and supporting troops. But, that asside, I wasnt sure how to feel about the armed forces in general. I am very close to being a pacifist. What should my response be to those who, against the principles that I want to strive for, die for me. The speaker said that these men had fought for me and died for me. Well, a large number of them had also killed for me. Can I reap the benefits of their death while denying any repsonsibility for the consequences of their less glamorous actions? I want to remember men and women who were good, men and women who made the world a better place. Can you blame me for not being exactly gung-ho about applauding men who died for no other reason than that they died?
I talked to some friends of mine who are Menonite and asked them about their thoughts on Memorial Day. They have been pacifists their whole lives, maybe they had some insight. They sort of split things up. They very much want to remember the dead. One even participates in Civil War re-enactments.
I dont know what to think. And, the problem is that I dont have anyone to talk to. I tried talking to my parents, but they werent any help. Somehow, we got onto the issue of torture. My mom actually supports the use of torture! If I cant convince my parents that torture is bad, how can I even begin to talk about pacifism?
In the end, when it comes to the troops, I want to be grateful. I want to thank the people who died to make my life better. The men who died in the Civil War, WWI, WWII, etc. did indeed make my life much better. But, yet again, Im not sure how to live with my pacifist tendencies without splitting the consequences from the benefits. (something that I do not think can be done) Maybe I will be forced to conclude that pacifism is a pipe-dream, a vision of the way that the world should be, not a practical political ideology. Maybe...
Oh, and one more thing. Talking with my parents did change one thing, I am now questioning the use of torture. I was very strongly against its use in all shapes and forms and in all circumstances. However, I am not absolutely sure of that anymore. What is there were an extreme situation where 1 million people could be saved through torture. One week ago, I would have said, "Never use torture, EVER!!!" Now, I am less sure. It is 1 million people after all...
Any thoughts?
I was reading my journal a few days ago. It was pretty detailed. I also have been looking through some pictures. I miss you all SO much: the conversations, the smiles, the fellowship, the arguments, everything. It is almost too much to bear. Keep in touch, I hope to see some of you at Julia's Wedding. : )
Peace my friends, Peace
4 comments:
Let's say a country uses torture to get what it feels is critical information. How will that country be able to ask for justice if its people are tortured by another country for what that country feels is critical information?
Not using torture is a means of goodwill to humanity and recognizes that people, sinister as they may be, are fundamentally human beings and deserve basic respect.
How can you determine that 100% of the people you're torturing have relevant information? Do the ends justify the means? How do you compensate the inoccent? And what does society do with the ones who were ordered to carry out the torture? Those doing the torturing will also suffer psychologic scars. Who wants to know that their daddy is a monster?
People that want to tell you that torture is ok have serious problems and agendas you don't want to wind up following.
Hey Micah,
I feel you on the whole Memorial Day thing. I disagree with the war, but the troops are doing something that I at times admire. I see it as the troops are for the most part good, but htey are a tool. It's the politicians that miss use them, and play with their lives as well as others. That's all I could come up with.
In reference to torture...well, we've always used torture. At least now we are publicly confessing something we've always done, but I do agree with David.
I've been reading this book called Resurrecting Empire, and the author noted how it was the military that leaked the information about the US and Gitmo. The author made the case that most military officials do not like the use of torture, for like David said how can we ask for justice when our people are tortured? Therefore, it is good for the US to abide by the Geneva Convention because it actually PROTECTS our troops.
I have some readings on this if you want to see them from my Terrorism Studies class I took this past semester. I can also e-mail a friend of mine who has some readings that support the use of torture as well if you'd like me to. Take Care.
I used to have somewhat ambiguous feelings on the use of torture...you know, feeling ashamed that my country does use methods like that, but recognizing the need for violence to protect the innocent.
But, in the end, "the myth of redemptive violence" is the true pipe dream, I'm beginning to see more and more. I'm not a pacifist yet, not ready to make that step, but at least in relation to torture, it's clear to me that what we're doing is morally reprehensible. No matter the odds. We believe that every human being is made in the image of God. To torture and kill another human being is to say that that image is worthless. To say that we must use torture in order to protect others is to put ourselves in the place of God. Our first responsibility is to act with justice in all that we do.
And what's more, torture, especially of the type which the US practices at Gitmo, isn't even strategic...it produces false intelligence, as those being tortured are willing to say anything to stop what's being done to them. From a purely strategic perspective, leaving aside moral questions, what we're doing in Gitmo is unproductive.
Anyway, so that's a little of what I think about torture...
"the myth of redemptive violence", that sounds really cool. It seems to me that maybe this earth isn't capable of laying down violence because of our nature. However, I don't think there's a certain instance when torture should be used. Even if it saved 1 million people from death, I feel like a society that tortures is a worse fate than death, in all honesty. And we're all connected. One person being treated inhumanely means that we're all debased. Torture just leads to more torture and more torture. Perhaps if torture and violence weren't condoned by society there wouldn't be people intending to destroy it with violence. How can that ever be redemptive. And I'm pretty sure I am a pacifist. Yep.
Post a Comment