President Bush believes in situation ethics. The end justifies the means. Is this a Christian position? Is?

Question

there no ultimate litmus test for good and evil? Can torture be justified under any means? Can one be a Christian and condone torture? Is the Geneva Convention just a quaint outmoded ideal? I think we are losing our soul in trying to win the battle. A battle taken litterally, against a concept. Have we created more terror?

Answer 1

The Geneva convention doesn't apply to terrorists, which I think is appropriate because I don't believe they honor it anyway.

I don't believe the ends justify the means. However I also believe that the idea of "rules of war" is bad. War is bloody business for which there are no rules. The object should be to destroy and demoralize the enemy until they cannot harm you any more. Worry about your allies' welfare more than you worry about the welfare of your enemies. Moral superiority, as a weapon, has no potency against people who want nothing but to kill you.

Consider WWI and WWII. WWI ended in an armistice, no real penalty for aggression. In WWII, the US, GB, and France were reluctant to fight with Germany when it was taking over the countries to the east of it, and tried appeasement, which didn't work and led to France being rolled right over and London getting the crap bombed out of it. When the allies finally started winning the war, how did it end? Controversially, citizens were slaughtered. Dresden was firebombed, killing ~30,000 civilians. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were nuked, killing ~200,000 civilians. Niether Japan nor Germany have started any big fights since.

This is a stark contrast to today, where wars seem to be fought to kill soldiers/militants only, sparing civilians as much as possible, even when those very civilians give comfort to our enemies. I don't think we can win this war on terror unless we define who the enemy is and crush them utterly.

I am sad to be so grim on the subject, and I look forward to the day when swords are beat into plowshares and men don't learn war any more.

Answer 2

the top would not ever justify the potential by potential of which it is complete. ever, era. Now you ask if Christians have faith this or not, properly the priority is you're speaking approximately human beings so i'd wager which you will discover some Christians who do have faith that the top does in actuality justified the potential. yet that would not lead them to suited. so be careful. although this brings up the question, is the respond I gave you suited, and if so why? think of approximately it this style if the top justified the potential then as long as I win (gain a sociably perfect purpose) then how I did that is not correct, and this would desire to be genuine for something. If I carry out a little wonderful learn that scientific care Aids yet in doing so I torture tens of millions to take action as this is okay. this would not make any experience. by potential of the same token the way you gain some thing is as important (some circumstances greater so) as what you gain.

Answer 3

Read Machiavelli's "The Prince". In politics, beneficial ends always justify the means. As for your litmus test for morality, one does not exist, as good and evil are relative terms. Morality must be determined on a personal, not political, level.

Answer 4

I don't believe that Bush's relativism is Christian. He seems to believe we can sacrifice our own values in order to save them. Crazy and shortsighted, if you ask me.