My apologies. I guess I didn't grasp that torture only produces completely trustworthy information. It sort of puts the whole Gulag Achapelago and the Inquesition into a new light...bunch of guilty whiners.
You are correct in that it doesn't
only produce trustworthy information. What bothers me, still, is that some want to say that it
never produces trustworthy info.
I still feel it's an attempt to demonize it more than it already deserves. I'm going to make an example here, but I don't want to be acused of Godwinning because I'm not comparing anyone involved in this with Hitler. But I want you to consider the following statements:
"Adolph Hitler was the leader of the Third Reich and led his country in World War II where they commited numerous war crimes and attempted genocide on the Jewish people".
Now consider it again:
"Adolph Hitler was the leader of the Third Reich and led his country in World War II where they commited numerous war crimes and attempted genocide on the Jewish people. And he ate babies, and worshipped Satan!".
That's the kind of feeling I get when I see some people speak against torture. It's not bad enough to point out how bad it is, in and of itself, you have to bend over backwards to make it out to be pure fail, in every single way. Why?
I want to stress again that I'm not motivated here to
defend torture. I am more angry to see people being intellectually dishonest about it. I wonder what motivates people. That's always where I come from on these things. Why? Why do people do this?
ETA: You're mentioning the Inquistion is a bit of a "tell" to me. I feel that the "why" here could at least be partially motivated by the fact it was used by the church, heinously, for such a long time. I know, I know.. strawman. Calling it a strawman isn't always true. Some people are truly irrationally angry about religon. Much moreso than seems reasonable anyhow. As if a Cardinal actually molested their younger brother or something.
