Land: ‘Waterboarding’ never ethical
- May 7, 2009 - 30 -
There is no room for torture as part of the United States’ intelligence gathering process, in Richard Land’s view. The practice known as “waterboarding” is torture, he said.
Land, president of the SBC’s Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, said there is no circumstance in which torture should be permissible in interrogations by U.S. officials, even if the authorities believe a prisoner has information that might involve national security.
Land’s position puts him among a minority of Americans according to a new Pew Research Center poll. Only a quarter (25 percent) of those surveyed said the use of torture “can never be justified” against suspected terrorists.
Nearly half of the sample (49 percent) agreed that torture is often or sometimes justified.
This article originally published by Baptist Press.
“I don’t agree with the belief that we should use any means necessary to extract information,” Land said in an interview with Religion News Service and Baptist Press May 4. “I believe there are absolutes. There are things we must never do under any circumstances.”
Furthermore, Land said, if he could not in good conscience “waterboard” someone, he would not — if he were a public official — have the right to authorize someone else to do it.
“For me the ultimate test is this: Could I in good conscience do whatever I am authorizing or condoning others to do? If not, then I must oppose the action,” Land said. “If I could not waterboard someone — and I couldn’t — then I must oppose its practice.”
Land said he considers waterboarding torture because included in the definition of torture is whether a procedure causes permanent physical harm, noting he is unable to “separate physical from psychological harm” in this instance. The practice contravenes an individual’s personhood and their humanity, he said.
“It violates everything we believe in as a country,” Land said, noting the Declaration of Independence says: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
In waterboarding, the captive is immobilized with his head inclined downward. Water is poured over the subject’s face and into their breathing passages, simulating drowning and near-asphyxiation.
While the term “waterboarding” is of rather recent origin, history is replete with examples of similar types of “water” treatment used to extract information from unwilling captives.
“I can’t imagine that being repeatedly subjected to the feeling of drowning would not in some cases cause lasting psychological trauma,” he said.
Land said that while he “appreciates the concerns and lengths to which the Bush administration went in limiting the use of any enhanced interrogation techniques,” the administration went too far in allowing waterboarding.
There is a distinction between an enhanced interrogation technique and torture, Land said, admitting for some it may be a “fuzzy line.”
“The line will be drawn differently for different people,” Land said, acknowledging he is not an expert on exactly what constitutes torture. He likened the effort to define torture to what the late Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart struggled with in defining pornography.
Land recounted that in the 1964 case, Jacobellis v. Ohio, Stewart wrote in his concurring opinion, “I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be [hardcore pornography] … But I know it when I see it….”
“I know the difference between an enhanced interrogation technique and torture when I hear them described,” Land said.
Land said the assertion that a procedure such as waterboarding is permissible, given the potential to save innocent lives, relies on faulty ethical reasoning: utilitarianism. “That is ‘the end justifies the means’ argument,” he explained, adding, “That is a very slippery slope to dark and dangerous places.
Waterboarding “goes beyond the line for me,” Land said, indicating he understands there are those who believe it is not.
“I understand mine is not the only position one can take on this,” Land said, “but it is the one I take.”
Land said that while Khalid Sheikh Mohammed deserves to be executed if found guilty of his alleged mastermind role in the Sept, 11, 2001, attacks on America, he should not have been waterboarded, “even if it did save thousands of lives.” According the media accounts about a 2007 Red Cross report, Mohammed underwent a total of five sessions of “ill-treatment.”
Likewise, Land said, “I could not support capital punishment if I were not willing to personally administer the lethal injection to a person convicted of a capital crime.”
News accounts revealed that senior Al Qaeda members Abu Zubaydah and Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri also were subjected to the waterboarding technique.
Land said there is a difference between many procedures known as advanced interrogation techniques and torture. He said he could “slap someone across the face with an open hand to extract information that would save lives,” saying that is not torture. He said making someone stand for an extended period of time, depriving someone of sleep or forcing someone to remain in an extremely cold room, practices included among those called advanced interrogation techniques, were not torture.
Torture is anything beyond temporary discomfort or pain, Land said. The risk of permanent damage is a “good guideline,” he continued, noting it is not a “hard and fast goal.”
Land said he could not strike someone with a closed fist or beat them even if he believed the individual was harboring information that might possibly save thousands of lives. “I could not do it, thus I cannot condone others doing it,” he said.
The Pew Research Center study, conducted in late April, revealed that support for torture in some circumstances was higher among white evangelical Protestants than the population at large. More than six in 10 (64 percent) individuals in this demographic said torture was often or sometimes justified in the interrogation of suspected terrorists. That compares with 49 percent support among all those polled.
A poll of Southern evangelicals, released last September (Sept. 11, 2008), indicated their support for torture in some cases involving possible terrorist suspects was softer, with 57 percent saying torture could often or sometimes be justified. The poll was commissioned by an organization named Faith in Public Life and by Mercer University.
Land said he expects many Southern Baptists will disagree with his stance on waterboarding, although the SBC is formally on record as opposing torture. “I am speaking to Southern Baptists on this issue, not for them,” he said. “I am speaking only for this Southern Baptist.”
In 1977, the convention adopted a resolution condemning “any use of torture as a sin against God and a crime against humanity” and affirming that “torture demonstrates the very opposite of love and violates the will of God revealed in Jesus Christ.”
Land sharply disagreed with the Obama administration’s decision to release Bush administration memos from 2002-05 involving a legal review by the Bush Justice Department that approved the use of waterboarding and other enhanced interrogation techniques.
President Obama made a “horrible mistake” in releasing the memos, Land said, noting the president claimed he wanted to move forward and not look back. Land also faulted Obama for not releasing similar memos that argue that these advanced interrogation techniques produced results.
“Why the selective release of classified memos? Where is the transparency or consistency in a selective release of these documents?” Land asked.
“If [the release of the memos] were to lead to trials of some sort, it would rip the country apart domestically,” Land warned.
Obama banned the waterboarding procedure soon after taking office.
Land recalled the motion picture, “Judgment at Nuremberg,” in which German government officials were on trial for their complicity during the Nazi reign. He said these officials were seduced by “the end justifies the means” argument and that during the trial the American judges were being pressured to go light on the Nazi-era officials in hopes of maintaining goodwill among the German people as Russia was threatening war.
Land said a character (Judge Haywood) played by Spencer Tracey in the 1961 film rejected the arguments of those who argued that the Allies needed German support against the Soviets, so their former leaders should be given lighter sentences.
In the film, Haywood replied: “A country isn’t a rock. And it isn’t an extension of one’s self. It’s what it stands for, when standing for something is the most difficult! Before the people of the world — let it now be noted in our decision here that this is what we stand for: justice, truth and the value of a single human being!” Land said in quoting from the film.
“I believed that when I was 15, when I first saw the movie, and I still believe that America is different,” Land said. “We hold ourselves to a different standard,” he said. “Each human being is of incalculable value.
“There are some things you should never do to another human being,” Land said, “no matter how horrific the things they have done.
“If you do so, you demean yourself down to their level,” he said.
Civilized countries should err on the side of caution, Land said. “It does cost us something to play by different rules than our enemies, but it would cost us far more if we played by their rules,” he said.
Dwayne Hastings is a vice president with the Southern Baptist Ethics & Religious Liberty Commisssion.
This article originally published by Baptist Press.
Further Learning
Learn more about: Citizenship, Human Rights, War, Issues, ,
The comment thread for this article is now closed. Please use our contact form.
{comment_total} comments
1 On May 8th, 2009, at 12:59pm, Doug Bingham wrote:
I have always respected Dr. Land, but now I am rethinking this as he now agrees with of the Obama administration, with McCain who lost the election because he no longer stood for working from a position of strength, and with the enemies of this great nation who behead people on camera, who fly airplanes into buildings, who have sworn to destory both this nation and God’s people Israel. They would certainly agree with you, but they will never think that this rule applys to them, they will torture without mercy. Dr. Land you are getting weak as you age and stood think about stepping down in order to let someone who will not compromise with the weak politicians and with the enemy. This is not only a horrible opinion from Dr. Land, it is asking our nation to cowardly compromise and weaken itself in this very real war.
2 On May 8th, 2009, at 2:31pm, Lara wrote:
“Land said that while Khalid Sheikh Mohammed deserves to be executed if found guilty of his alleged mastermind role in the Sept, 11, 2001, attacks on America, he should not have been waterboarded, “even if it did save thousands of lives.â€
I must disagree. I believe that the lives of thousands are more important than the one life of one unrepentant murderer who will continue to murder God’s children in the name of God. We have to take a stand somewhere and I am drawing my line at coddling mass murderers. I am quite certain that “lasting psychological trauma” was inflicted on this man long before we ever heard of him.
3 On May 8th, 2009, at 4:58pm, Roger Owen wrote:
Dr. Land, I’d like hear more of your “feelings” regarding water-boarding. Especially compared to other acts of war like shooting, knifing, bombing, using “the bomb”? All having the secondary effect of torturing the living enemy combatants, their comrades, nation and families toward surrender. What else wouldn’t you feel like doing to protect your family, neighbor and country?
4 On May 8th, 2009, at 5:50pm, Richard Gruetter wrote:
I do not believe Dr. Land gets it.
Waterboarding is not done to punish people, it is done as a last resort to gain the critical intelligence needed to protect our citizens from another 911, or our solders in battle with terrorists who are violent beyond our understanding and as demanded by Islam.
It worked and saved Los Angeles from a terrorist attack.
Regarding any physical harm - there is none. Many of our own solders are submitted to waterboarding as part of their training.
And lastly, regarding Land’;s statement, and it “contravenes an individual’s personhood and their humanity.”, that is a small price to pay in order to save the lives of our citizens or solders.
I would do that in a heart beat to get the intelligence required to save my Marine son-in-law’s life.
I ams sorry that Dr. Land would not!
5 On May 8th, 2009, at 5:54pm, George wrote:
I do not agree with Dr. Land. When it comes to protecting and defending the national security interests of our country I am in favor of doing whatever it takes to get necessary information from terrorists. These are the same people who have beheaded people, who have planted road side bombs and who have utilized suicide bomber. They are deserving of no courtesy or mercy and I see nothing wrong with waterboarding, and yes, I would be willing to do it myself.
6 On May 8th, 2009, at 8:18pm, Garland Stueart wrote:
Mr. Land,
I think that you are way off base about waterboarding.As individuals who may decide on their own to waterboard someone - I would consider this to be an inapproiate act. But as a nation what is suppose to protect it’s own - waterboarding is a humane way of getting information needed to protect this nation.
7 On May 9th, 2009, at 1:57pm, Bruce Cameron wrote:
Dr. Land:
Thank you for your faithful Christian stance on this issue. While Romans 13 gives the sword to the the government to act—conduct warfare, even execute—whenever someone is in our custody, HOW we act is answerable to the Lord.
People acting out of their duty to us, do not become infallible, as if, “We KNOW that this person has this information” is inerrantly true. If it is not, then we have tortured an innocent man, created by God, in order to obtain a false confession. This has happened in our police work, where false confessions have been coerced out of innocent people. We have a a common language, a common culture, and it is still possible to get it wrong.
“Oops!” is not a sufficient response. Law and accountability and the processes of law are the structures that we have set up, so that we can put great power into the hands of sinful men.
A nation under God may not torture.
8 On May 9th, 2009, at 5:07pm, Robert Lockhart wrote:
Dr. Land if the terrorist were holding your wife and children and you knew that they intended to kill them in a horrible way like beheading or blowing them up with a bomb straped to them, would you then agree to waterboarding? Please respond, I would like to know your thoughts on this.
9 On May 9th, 2009, at 5:14pm, Dick Buckley wrote:
I think it well that Dr. Land stick to things he knows best and leave the business of intelligence gathering to those who do that primarily. Dr. Land, consider muslim beheadings of innocent non-muslims and the suicide bombs that target anyone and everyone, not to mention flying two airplanes into the twin towers (Remember?)killing thousands of our fellow citizens: if these events don’t call for gathering intelligence (by whatever means available IMHO), then what does?
Dr. Land, you might also do well to remember that the muslims will slash your throat in a wink and they have vowed to kill all of us infidels. To me, that justifies sleep deprivation, waterboarding, cartoons, and defiling the koran on a regular basis.
10 On May 9th, 2009, at 7:51pm, Michael John in Arkansas wrote:
Link to actual poll- Pew Finds 62% of Evangelicals Approve of Torture”
http://oxdown.firedoglake.com/diary/5074
Imo, contrasting 25% who say absolutely no to torture with all who have at least an exception in their mind is a bit unfair.
I think Mr Land’s disappointment with the Presidents decision to release documents is flawed. The ACLU was in court and Obama may have released them because he felt he would be compelled to do so by a court.
I think the claims of existing documents which are supposed to prove torture garnered valuable information comes from folks like former Vice President Cheney. But he and others fail to provide any information as to the name, author(s), or location of said documents Where are they, Mr. Cheney?
When hypocrisy rises to the level of defending/covering up the most evil of crimes human beings can commit upon each other… the truth must be made available.
If crimes were committed, justice must be served.
Even the ugly truth shall set you free.
11 On May 9th, 2009, at 8:13pm, Diane wrote:
Thank you for opening up this article for posting our thoughts. Nowhere do I see it mentioned that there is 1000 character limit to my response. Sorry mine is longer. I will divide my post and you may edit as you need.
Several things bother me about Mr. Land’s position.
As president of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, when he speaks, he needs to be careful using absolutes… “there is no circumstance”. I don’t believe this practice was used randomly. I believe it was used when our government felt that is was highly likely to be successful. It seems there is information to support this.
12 On May 9th, 2009, at 8:20pm, Diane wrote:
Part 2 “I could not do it, thus I cannot condone others doing it,†Sorry, I could not push the button on the electric chair… I could not cut open a brain for surgery… I could not kill a cow… but I am thankful for those folks that can do it and should do it. What about the countless families that are missing a loved one due to a terrorist strike? I bet prior to 9/11 some of those families would have said they couldn’t waterboard either. But I would suspect their position would have changed now.
I can imagine Mr. Land administering this torture. What if the people God entrusted him to protect were endangered… like his wife & children. Authorities told him using this method he might get the necessary information to save their lives (&let;‘s don’t lose site that using this method DID save lives). Would he just say I don’t want to ‘psychological harm’ anyone? NO! When you realize YOU are responsible for protecting people, you see things differently.
13 On May 9th, 2009, at 8:27pm, Diane wrote:
Part 3.
Mr. Land sits in the comfort of his office, compliments of US citizenship… & chooses to criticize a practice authorized by the most actively Christian President in my lifetime. That I just don’t understand. There is no doubt that President Bush practices his faith in a way supported & encouraged by the SBC. I believe that President Bush prayed about all decision & received guidance from God. I think for us to second guess his decisions… in hindsight… without having any of the heavy responsibilities of protecting people… & without the multitude of information he had available as President… is just wrong. With his thought, “the administration went too far”, I believe he should offer an apology to President Bush.
14 On May 9th, 2009, at 8:34pm, Diane wrote:
Finally, part 4.
He might as well apologize to Southern Baptist as well, for offering his opinion on a subject that he himself has proclaimed “he is not an expert on exactly what constitutes torture”.... admitting it to be a “fuzzy lineâ€... and “The line will be drawn differently for different people.†... and “I understand mine is not the only position one can take on this.†The article even notes “Land’s position puts him among a minority of Americans.” With all due respect, in my opinion, maybe this time Mr. Land should have NOT offered his unsubstantiated thoughts and perhaps reflected and researched a little more.
15 On May 9th, 2009, at 8:54pm, Brenda Dunn wrote:
Where are those of you commenting on the effectiveness of torture getting your information? It has been proven time and time again that torture does not give us accurate knowledge and that those tortured will provide whatever information is needed to stop the torture. In fact, most of what is obtained can be assumed to be false information.
Do you not get that torturing others only gives them permission to torture our soldiers? I really wish some of you would read history and take into account the knowledge that has already been gained from this sadistic and immoral behavior. Oh, that’s right, you hate intellectuals and history and science while picking and choosing verses in the Bible to justify your beliefs.
16 On May 9th, 2009, at 9:45pm, Garry Upton wrote:
I agree with many of the comments above stating it is time for Mr. Land to resign from his current position as he no longer is representative of Most SBC believe. I for one believe that the types of integration used to get information that keeps America safe is certainly acceptable. In particular Water Boarding which is not to death of the person being integrated. I don’t really care what Mr. Land’s personal opinion on the subject is as he is allowed to believe what ever he wants however he should not be allowed to express that opinion as representing me as a Southern Baptist. To do so shows like of good judgment and I think he should redeem himself my resigning post haste. If not he should be removed…
17 On May 9th, 2009, at 10:01pm, Michael John in Arkansas wrote:
The facts begin with an administration who did not do their work properly before 9-11. They ignored intel warnings of attacks. Did nothing.
They then used the attacks to justify taking our country into needless war.
Then they justified the illegal secret use of torture in attempts to garner a confession (even a false confession) to justify their previous incompetence and lies.
A definite a pattern of immorality and criminality that cannot withstand fact based scrutiny.
It’s well known the Chinese used water torture (as we all used to properly call it a few decades ago) on our troops to garner false confessions.
It was a war crime a crime against humanity to the core then, as it should be now.
18 On May 10th, 2009, at 1:00am, Gary Johnson wrote:
What has happened to this country? It is OK to punish someone by lethal injection but you wouldn’t waterboard that same person if you could save lives?
19 On May 10th, 2009, at 10:29pm, Kay Griffith wrote:
Mr. Land should do more praying and less talking on a subject he is not an expert on.
Persecuted Christians around the world can tell him a lot, I’m sure, about torture. In my opinion they would be experts and I truly believe waterboarding would be a picnic compared to what some have endured for Christ.
These terrorists and others like them would like nothing more than to see America as well as Israel destroyed and will use what ever means they can including straping bombs to themselves to blow up as many of their enemies as they can.
If someone took one of my children and there was a person who knew where they had taken him and I needed that information and waterboarding would encourage the person to tell me how to save my child from the kidnapper let me assure you I would use it without hesitation and I dare say Mr. Land would too if he cares about his loved one. As far as we know, the information received from these prisoners may have saved thousands of lives.
Kay Griffith
20 On May 11th, 2009, at 2:27am, S. L. Collins wrote:
I’m so sorry that Dr. Land has taken this position. As a mother as well as Southern Baptist, I strongly disagree. I can’t even begin to imagine considering waterboarding as unethical when it preserves the life of the individual(they are not permently harmed) as well as provides us with valuable information to protect our citizens. If anyone wants to define torture, I think it would be tearing the unborn limb from limb, or sticking scissors into their little skulls and suctioning their brains out. Waterboarding our enemies shouldn’t even be an afterthought.
21 On May 11th, 2009, at 2:33am, Isaac Goodman wrote:
Dr. Land,
I respect you for who you are and what you stand for. I served 22 years in the United States Marine Corps, enlisted. I have been a Southern Baptist all my life. I disagree with your position on “waterboarding” being torture. I respectfully ask you to visit Marine Corps Bootcamp “Swim Week” at either of the training depots; Parris Island or San Diego, and see for yourself how our Marines are trained. If that does not change your mind, visit any of our “Special Operations” training centers. Before you go public about a subject, you should educate yourself first. I also would like to bring to your attention Psalms 144;1 “Praise be to the Lord my Rock, who trains my hands for war, my fingers for battle.” God gives us the ability to fight against evil. All men are created equal, some become United States Marines. Semper Fidelis, and may God continue to bless you.
Respectfully submitted,
Isaac Goodman, MSgt USMC (R)
22 On May 11th, 2009, at 4:56pm, Herschel Richard wrote:
I am an Ordained SB Pastor. I also believe that Mr. Land is wrong on this issue. Does he not know that some of our own service men have been water boarded as part of their training? It is said to say, but for some reason when move up in our society as Land has, Satan’s old tool of pride and stupidity seems to always show up in people. If Land knew that his family would die if one of these terrorist was not water boarded, you could add liar to the above list, if you think he would not want it done. The reason we are getting ungodly men in the Congress, Senate, and the White House is because of the leadership that is in the Pulpits.
23 On May 11th, 2009, at 6:02pm, LEROY BATES wrote:
I too have always respected Dr. Land and his position on various issues, but Dr. Land is completely wrong on the subject of waterboarding. We must use the Bible as a whole when we try to justify our conduct. Yes, Jesus taught love for others, but He took at stand when it was needed. Please make it clear Dr. Land you are only offering the belief of Richard Land and not Southern Baptists. I am a Southern Baptist Pastor and I think you have stepped over the bounds on this one. You are wrong, wrong wrong.
24 On May 11th, 2009, at 8:01pm, John D Bernard Jr wrote:
This is just another example of SBC trying to have a “big tent” and comprimise conservative values in order to welcome in a more diverse membership. Land should have kept his mouth shut on this issue his comments are ridiculous. SBC needs to get back to the charge at hand. PREACH THE WORD.
25 On May 12th, 2009, at 10:36pm, Michael John in Arkansas wrote:
The purpose of submitting U.S. service members to voluntary education of what they might expect if captured and tortured someday (which we started doing in response to chinese water torturers in the Korea era).. is a far cry from turning that same agency in the U.S. military into a agent of torture.
Preparing soldiers to ward off the effects of torture (as best they can)..and that we don’t torture because we are the good guys, is a far cry from turning those same teachers and doctors into a monster who trains to commit torture.
How any person can spiritually defend or promote torture is just beyond me or any idea of the spirit of Christ I ever imagined.
26 On May 14th, 2009, at 5:00am, Steve Cowan wrote:
With all due respect to Dr. Land (whom I greatly admire and agree with on most ethical issues), I think he is mistaken here. Others have pointed out some of the reasons why. I will respond simply to his claim that those who think waterboarding is permissible are guilty of utilitarian (ends justifies the means) reasoning. It is not utilitarian to think that a practice that is usually impermissible may be, under certain conditions, permissible. Most who endorse waterboarding some terrorists would not think that the end justifies any and all means, but they would likely endorse a non-utilitarian principle along these lines: Torture is morally impermisible except when necessary to obtain intelligence of an immanent threat of deadly violence to mass numbers of civilians, the subject is complicit in that impending violence, and the torture will not result in permanent physical damage.
27 On May 27th, 2009, at 8:21am, Rodney Flynt wrote:
After reading the link three times,this caught my attention. Do we as a people really support “Innocent untli proven guilty!” Read the comments, let me know what you think! I think I may be moving from a slippery slope that I was tempted.Since I have learn from history that “the end justifies the means.” fails to work.rdf
28 On May 27th, 2009, at 8:29am, Rodney Flynt wrote:
Germans massacred unharmed POW’s in WWII. It got around.
When allies learned of what Germans did to Jews formed a mind set for justice with Americans that led to victory.
Torture makes our enemies strong—we already know they celebrate death.
Being at their level is not in our best interests.
29 On May 28th, 2009, at 2:34pm, Diane wrote:
“Being at their level is not in our best interests.”
I strong disagree that this is at their level.
At their level would be strapping bombs on them and pushing them out of the plane to KILL innocent people leaving children without parents, spouses without partners and Moms & Dads without their children.
BIG difference. We didn’t give them any permanent physical harm. HUGE difference.
30 On May 28th, 2009, at 5:34pm, Michael John in Arkansas wrote:
The evidence in many memos, reports, photos, and books, suggests waterboarding was not conducted as the only quick means of torture. There was a long process of numerous methods leading up to and after waterboarding. Waterboarding is often the focal point in American discussions, but it is far from a complete description of our torture programs. Remember we and the rest of the world called it Chinese water torture for decades. The 2001- 2008 republican message machine changed that for a reason.
As for “levels”, clearly the levels have fallen far below definitions of pure evil and legal thresholds… though I couldn’t agree more with calls for innocent until proven guilty. Appoint a special prosecutor today!