Depends on what the meaning of "torture" is

Your Name -

1. How would you know that the terror suspect could save your child? How could you be certain?

2. What if the terror suspect you "knew" had information that could save your child didn't have such information, and you tortured him?

3. How far would you go in torturing a suspect that you thought had information?

And, don't forget this corollary to the hypo:

When someone else sincerely believes your child may have information that could save her child, would you find her waterboarding of your child not necessarily morally grave sin (objectively)?

Our legal system assumes that people when accused are not trustworthy on the question at hand.

If the accused in a murder trial says, "but I didn't do it," we don't toss out all that evidence that says otherwise. On the other hand, when we find the person guilty of murder, we don't follow it with a perjury trial.

Yeah, Bill Clinton lied under oath about his sex life in an investigation to see if he granted favors to someone who got him into a deal that lost money.

Is an investigation on an issue license to look at every aspect of a person's life? That begins to sound like a police state.