The first, is the sad truth that it is possible for an American administration to even start to equivocate on what is, and what is not, torture. As with most moral gray areas, if you have to ask yourself that sort of question, you are clearly no longer above reproach. And if there is any one individual or institution that should be above reproach, it is the Presidency of this country. Worse, when the entire rest of the civilized world agrees that what has been proposed 9and now passed in the new Bill) violates the Geneva Convention, we’re way past the gray area, with abundant reproach incoming from all directions. We are no longer the beacon of decency and fairness that led the nations in the World Wars. The fact that someone can weather the shame of even having this conversation with Senator John McCain who was, in fact, tortured is just inconceivable to me.

The second appalling aspect is that there is such a clear double standard in the definitions. We can use methods “FOR OTHER PURPOSES” (aggressive interrogation techniques no characterized as torture even by our allies) on “ENEMY COMBATANTS” but not on American citizens. This is an explicit institutionalization of a biased treatment that specifically undermines the spirit of the Geneva Convention which is that fair treatment is the right of all people and should be reciprocated even in war. Now you can certainly argue that the Iraqi insurgents are not signatories of the Geneva accords, but the “we only did it because that other guy was already doing it” argument isn’t even remotely acceptable as a defense in our nation’s civil courts. So I think it is pretty clear that it is not acceptable from our government. Ultimately I believe the bending of the moral standard as to what comprises torture combined with the clear dual standard with respect to citizens vs. others (a fact that is clearly and unambiguously called out worldwide) serve only to undermine any moral claim to fairness or leadership we can either make, or expect from any international partner for the next generation.

Given that any number of intelligence experts have testified that intelligence gained under torture is typically of very limited worth (because typically at some point the victim just starts to tell you what you want to hear to end the mistreatment) I think it was a very poor trade indeed. The sooner we can correct the situation, the better. Sadly, even if we start today, I think it will take decades if not longer.

There seems to be an inconsistency in the fact that we, as a nation, can identify a moral quandary when it comes to using medical knowledge gained by torture, but we do not seem to be equally capable of identifying the same moral quandary when it comes to using “intel” gained by torture.

There seems to be another inconsistency in the fact that the movement to legalize some (yet to be clearly defined) forms of torture is being spearheaded by a bunch of people who believe in the literal truth of the bible when it comes to creation, but not (apparently) when it comes to our treatment of other living, breathing people.

One question I have addresses the use of the term “American values.” What are those? The values of our nation’s founders do not seem to (in far too many ways) coincide with the values of the current nation’s elected leaders, and by extension, the majority of people who voted them into office.

I fear that “American values” have simply evolved to an extent that they no longer express my own. I only hope (without knowing how futile this hope is) that it is possible to recapture the original version before we sink any further.