Before continuing let’s get a better understanding of what the act of torture is. Article 1 of the United Nations Convention has defined torture as “any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as …show more content…
As in the United Nations definition, the act of torture is pretty much breaking the will of a human being. Whether a person is a suspected terrorist or the individual is a common thief, people must understand that the right of a human being should not be infringed upon. Organizations like the Human Rights First state that torture provides no “strategic advantage to torture”. Torture in of itself is morally reprehensible. The act of torture can lead to a path that will make it easier and acceptable in society to be used in the future. When in fact techniques like waterboarding to make a person feel as if they were drowning, depriving a person from sleep for days or weeks or even beating an individual is just in gruesome, in humane and goes against all that is morally and ethically right with society. “Some have suggested that torture is worse than killing, and that torturing the innocent is morally worse than murder” …show more content…
In these types of scenarios advocates often call the ticking bomb. In these extreme cases, like the above mention one, torture can be justified, when all things are considered. For an example of extreme cases, think of the heinous acts that were carried out on the United States on September 11, 2001, commonly referred to as 9/11. Society would have approved the use of torture if it meant that it would have saved the lives of roughly 3,000 people that were killed as a result of the nineteen-terrorist hijacking four airliners and crashing them into the World Trade Center Towers, the Pentagon and the field in Shanksville, PA. Fifty seven percent of Americans think that waterboarding “provides reliable information that helps terrorists attacks”