Torture

Calling waterboarding "enhanced interrogation techniques" is like beating your wife and calling it "enhanced communication techniques."

While we're on the subject, I'd like someone who supports the use of waterboarding, and who is also against stem cell research, to reconcile something for me.

The rationale for waterboarding seems to be: it was a morally difficult practice, but it was the right thing to do because it resulted in valuable information that saved American lives.

I'll grant you this retrospective justification, since you surely could not have known before engaging in the practice whether or not it would work.

Stem cell research has the potential, although unknown at this time because we have NOT done it, to yield important information that would save American lives. In fact, should it yield information that cured a disease, it would save all affected human lives in perpetuity.

If this ends-justifies-the-means argument is rationalized based on the number of American lives saved, wouldn't it have been an even better choice to forbid torture but allow stem cell research?