Southern Baptist ethicist Richard Land, a leading Christian conservative who helped advance the Bush administration’s agenda on a range of social issues, said Monday (May 4) that the formerly sanctioned practice of waterboarding of suspected terrorists is torture and “violates everything we stand for.”
Land, who is president of the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention, repudiated the simulated drowning techniques in an interview with Religion News Service.
According to recently released memos, federal agents under Bush waterboarded two suspected terrorists 266 times in attempts to extract information.
“I consider waterboarding torture,” Land said. “One of the definitions of torture is that it causes permanent physical harm. I can’t separate physical from psychological. And I can’t imagine that being repeatedly subjected to the feeling of drowning would not, in some cases, cause lasting psychological trauma.”
But Land also criticized President Obama for publicly releasing Bush-era documents that authorized particular interrogation techniques.
“To leave open the possibility of prosecuting men for what the Justice Department had declared was legal, I think is a horrific mistake,” Land said. “If it were to lead to trials of some sort, it would rip the country apart.”
Land’s comments come amidst ongoing public debate about what constitutes torture, whether harsh interrogation techniques result in useful information, and what should happen to Bush administration officials who advised that waterboarding was legal, not torture.
Land explained that while he supports capital punishment for convicted killers, he denounces torture in all cases because he’s compelled to honor the image of God as reflected in all human beings — even suspected terrorists. To justify waterboarding on the grounds that it helps save lives is to suggest that ends justify means, Land said, adding: “that is a very slippery slope that leads to dark and dangerous places.”
“If the end justifies the means, then where do you draw the line?” Land said. “It’s a moveable line. It’s in pencil, not in ink. I believe there are absolutes. There are some things we must never do.”
Former Vice President Dick Cheney has defended waterboarding as part of a “remarkably successful effort” to gather information about the al-Qaida terrorist network. Support for Cheney’s position has come from such prominent Christian conservatives as former U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft, who is Pentecostal.
G. Jeffrey MacDonald
Religion News Service
Copyright 2009 Religion News Service. All rights reserved. No part of this transmission may be distributed or reproduced without written permission.
Beliefnet
Advertisement
posted May 5, 2009 at 7:19 pm
Well, so glad to hear from the Southern Baptists on waterboarding. Now, if they’d just allow for the fact that homosexuality ISN’T something “sinful.” That must be harder than being against waterboarding.
posted May 5, 2009 at 7:23 pm
Land was speaking as an ethicist when he said waterboarding was torture. As what was he speaking when he said it was wrong to let the public know what the Bush administration did in its name.
I think Obama made reasonable distinctions, vowing not to prosecute those who depended on and followed the legal opinions but I think not promising relief to those who wrote them. And I hope this goes on up the chain of command. If presidents do egregious things such as torture and are not punished future presidents will feel free to do still more egregious things. And any of us could find ourselves on the receiving end.
It seems to be questionable whether information gained by torture is particularly valuable given how much error there is in it and how much can be gained by other methods. But anyway the key fact is, torture is illegal in the US and if an official feels it’s necessary that official should be willing to sacrifice himself to order it.
This is, and must be, a country of laws. And the same laws have to apply to high officials and people commentators like to suck up to as apply to you and me.
posted May 5, 2009 at 7:43 pm
Too late. you’ve already aligned yourself and everyone knows it.
While it is possible to say you now disdain it and try to make amends, your credibility is damaged.
To me, you spoke the truth of where you stand on the issue. I’m glad you’re recanting but to say you have our trust is another thing entirely.
posted May 6, 2009 at 12:28 pm
The truth is Land points in whichever direction the wind blows (an ironic twist of name and imagry – maybe he is one of those island clouds from Miyazka’s fantasy films). His credibility is just as ephemeral. But at least it shows he is paying attention and not anchoring himself to a flawed and faulty chain of reasoning.
posted May 6, 2009 at 5:27 pm
Calling the hateful, lieing, smarm-master RichrdLand an “ethicist” made me spew my coffee.
Anyway, it doesn’t matter. The “queers” (to quote Joe the Plumber) are winning:
http://www.365gay.com/news/gay-marriage-becomes-law-in-maine/
posted May 6, 2009 at 6:25 pm
A grade school student asked Condalezza Rice, who was visiting the class, why we used torture for the prisoners, and she told them President Bush ordered it and it was done legally. ??????????Doesn’t she read the news?
posted May 13, 2009 at 3:12 pm
Richard Land’s comment coincides with the latest Pew Forum on Religious and Public Life study, which looks at how many people think torture of terror suspects is justifiable, breaking it down by religious denomination and frequency of worship service attendance. According to the stats, white evangelical Protestants and people who attend church at least weekly are more likely than the general public to say that torture is often or sometimes justified when dealing with suspected terrorists (mainline Protestants like Lutherans and Episcopalians were least likely). Richard Land’s views on torture remind us that we can’t stereotype Baptists, or individuals belonging to any other faith.