I apologize for not grasping your implication. I wish you had made your position explicit to begin with.
Anyway, this idea of punishment leaves me even more confused about your morality than before. Are you saying it's immoral for a judge to issue a life sentence, unless he's willing to be punished with a life sentence himself? Punished for what? Sentencing someone?
What about jailers? Is it immoral for them to keep someone in jail, if they are not willing to be punished with jail time themselves? Punished for what? Keeping a convicted criminal in jail?
I think perhaps your moral framework around torture is circular--it's immoral, therefore it should be punished, therefore it's only moral if the torturer accepts your prescribed punishment for his immoral acts.
And who would punish the torturer, anyway? Anyone who waterboards a waterboarder is just as immoral, and just as deserving of waterboarding. In order to satisfy your morality, it would have to be torturers all the way down.
What becomes of justice in your world, if your morality demands that any act be answered with punishment in kind?