Apr 28 2009

Torture debate deserves broader context

 

A column written by copy editor Paul Clegg of The Sacramento Bee prompted a discussion in my news editing class about the word “torture.”

Clegg takes the position that news coverage of the torture issue has become sanitized and generic. In fact, the word “torture” for some time rarely got used in news stories. He cited several examples of language used by writers and editors to soften the word or to call what happened to people subjected to torture something else — most notably the word “abuse.”

As much as people would like, the torture issue will not go away — and perhaps it should not. Now the word punctuates news stories daily.

Torture raises several questions about the rule of law in the United States, whether the U.S. has an obligation to treat others as it would treat its own, whether torture achieves its desired end and what should happen to those who employ it illegally.

These questions go beyond an exercise in the Socratic method. They speak to what America is and should be, and to the observation by some — including me — that defending our actions in other countries with America’s duty to “impart democracy” throughout the world requires America to practice what it preaches.

It seems the debate over the use of torture cannot escape the sting of terrorism and the events of Sept. 11, 2001, a day which drastically changed how America governs and which lends some credence to the viewpoint that we might not always have to treat “others” as we treat ourselves.

When the “war on terror” became merged with the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, and “prisoner of war” became co-mingled with “enemy combatants,” “terrorists” and “detainees” and “insurgents” the torture issue became as murky as the language news stories use to describe it.

The writers of the Constitution were no strangers to torture. They came from a place that used it in many forms over many years to keep the public in line. They saw its application in the colonies by the British, the French and Native Americans. And they created the Eighth Amendment of the Bill of Rights in order to prevent it from making its way into practice: “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.”

Yet, more than 200 years later, we know torture — increasingly and deceptively called many other names — exists.

Like many say about torture, the issue comes with many legal implication and signatures. But it also touches on the larger issue of what it means to be an American and the role of America in the 21st century — an America supposedly on the forefront of the human rights battle.

So, what thoughts do you have on torture?

Resources:

Filed Under: