“Analyzing the Text” Michael Levin’s, “The Case for Torture” argues that there are various reasons for allowing torture in the United States of America. Michael Levin believes that torture is justified when victims are at risk, claiming that torture is not merely permissible but morally mandatory. The author makes hypothetical scenarios in which people’s lives are in danger and preventing future events from occurring. Then stating his position on torture when people’s lives are placed in danger. Levin’s target audience is Americans because his use of American symbolism such as “July 4,” and “unconstitutional.” In addition, the United States is not the only victim of terrorist attacks.
Once a person has served the sentence for his or her crime they should be allowed to become productive members of society. However, there should be rules and requirements put into place for the individuals, it should not disenfranchise them completely. Speaking from experience it was hard being released from the Penal System. Gash 2 A lot of companies will not hire felons, different apartment complexes will not allow felons to rent housing nor will certain parts of the government give assistance regardless of the rehabilitations that has been acquired. Being released to Charleston, S.C., in 2008; I was given the right to vote.
The Bill of Rights is important because it protects the rights of United States citizens. One Amendment that is important to the balance of the law system is the Fifth Amendment. The Fifth Amendment states that people should not be thrown in Jail with out trial. This is important because it guarantees people rights that we should have in our government. If the Fifth Amendment did not exist, United States citizens would not have the rights that are current in our government.
Global Issues Carter 20 February 2012 Realism vs. Idealism Realism and Idealism are the two major contending theories of international relations which are debated at the local and international level today. Realists believe that human nature is bad and individuals cannot be trusted. On the other hand, idealism states that there is a relationship between all the countries and as such relationships need to be formed between individuals. They also believe in morality and that human nature is good so they involve themselves in many world affairs. These relationships appear to change as quickly as actors in a soap opera.
“Unsung Heroes” follows the same line of thought. It enumerates explicitly false heroes that are often found among former US presidents and military people. Zinn reminds us of the crimes each of them has committed. He suggests that these undue idols be taken off their pedestals and be replaced by real heroes, people who have sacrificed something to make a change, even if it was a small one. Being a war-opponent and social activist, Howard Zinn’s most likely intention in writing “Unsung Heroes” was to educate people about the mistakes (and deliberate lies) that are, in his opinion, very common in the perception of American history.
By doing this, the reader gains a connection with Jennifer and helps them understand her motivation for her actions. This also helps Silvers arguments later on, using Jennifer’s story as a reference or an example as to why cloning is acceptable. “Narcissus Cloned” however, begins by stating Washington D.C’s concerns with the “ethical issues” and “moral values” that cloning with cause in society. Just from the beginning of both pieces, the reader can already see the bias of both authors, Silver being for cloning and Conley being strongly against it. Both Silver and Conley also disagree on the value of a cloned person’s life.
Is Torture Morally Justifiable? Torture has always been debated regarding its ethical and moral justification. The largest and still on going debate is whether or not torture is effective enough to disregard international and domestic laws such as the Geneva Conventions. In the past, and especially during wartime, atrocities have been committed in ill regard to these laws. Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo are prime examples of how the use of torture can become unlawful if not properly controlled.
Is Torture Ever Justified? Terrorism and Civil Liberties The Economist In this piece “Is Torture Ever Justified?” the issue of torture being used on enemies during interrogation is the focus and it seems to me the author argues that it is not justifiable but only in certain circumstances. I would argue with him on his claim, I do not feel that torture is ever justifiable regardless of how dire the situation. According to this article torture is banned from almost everything. There are treaties set in place such as the Geneva Conventions, the UN Convention against Torture that are against it “consider it along with genocide, torture is the only crime that every state must punish it no matter what”.
The Honorable Carl Levin, I am writing to express my dismay at the reports by journalists and government officials of inhumane treatment, torture and even deaths of prisoners held in U.S. custody of foreign affairs. It is clear we have deviated from the standard American value of humane treatment. That is why I am asking you to support clear, detailed guidelines for all U.S. personnel on acceptable interrogation procedures, and to stop the practice of sending prisoners to countries that use torture. I support an Executive Order by former President Bush to stop the practice of sending these prisoners to countries that use torture and to make the 1992 Army Field Manual on interrogations the minimum standard for all U.S. personnel of all detainees held anywhere in the world. The Army Field Manual was written by military interrogators and contains the wisdom and experience of generations of military personnel.
With this being said, society only has the right to restrict behavior on the basis of justice, and not because society deems it to be immoral. Within the Principle of Liberty, Mill also claims that it is not acceptable for society to put restrictions on an individual’s conduct, for reasons that they feel would be in the best interest of that person. The majority only has the right to develop laws that confine the conduct of individuals with the purpose of protecting the basic rights of others; otherwise they would be obstructing that person’s right to individuality. Mill believes that everyone is entitled to certain moral rights that cannot be denied. Every member of society is entitled to rights of security of his person and property, as well as basic liberties such as freedom of opinion and the right to live his life as he so chooses.