Pew Forum: The Torture Debate: A Closer Look: "It shows that currently, more than six-in-ten white evangelical Protestants (62%) say that the use of torture against suspected terrorists in order to gain important information can be often or sometimes justified. This is significantly higher than the number of white mainline Protestants (46%) and religiously unaffiliated (40%) who say torture can be often or sometimes justified. Additionally, those who attend religious services at least once a week are much more likely than those who seldom or never attend religious services to take this view (54% vs. 42%)."
These counter-intuitive data are interesting. Briefly, religious and weekly church going individuals are more prone to agree that torture could be used than religiously unaffiliated people. About 25% agrees that torture can rarely be used and about 25% claims that it should never be used. The data are from April-May 2009. Personally I am religious but on the rarely or never side.
In USA Today one reads that a Rasmussen poll last week claimed that 70% of respondents either says that waterboarding of the underwear bomber is OK or are unsure of which and this is after an unsuccessful attempt. 30% are for Obama's standpoint. This tend to verify David Brook's assumption that the situation in the USA is currently a little sensitive.
The New York Times, called Yes, it was torture, and illegal, ran yesterday an editorial that discussed if it was not time to remove the right to torture individuals from the executive branch and make it constitutionally impossible via the supreme court. It should be of some interest for Swedes, since we do have troops in Afghanistan presently. In any case, it does not take much for the mood to swing in this issue. Perhaps, the more important that it is clarified as illegal?
Amorteringskravet är symbolpolitik – artikel i UNT
19 timmar sedan