Tomorrow we observe the UN’s International Day in Support of Victims of Torture. As we mark this occasion, we do so at a time when people of faith are courageously stepping forward and saying enough is enough. Just today, an impressive lineup of leaders from different faiths and political philosophies called on President Bush to ban torture. Learn about their effort at http://www.campaigntobantorture.org/.

When I think about torture, the word flesh comes to mind. There are obvious reasons for this connection: torture often involves the beating and bruising of human flesh.

But, I’d like to focus on another link between these words. A link that reminds us there is a moral dimension to torture.

Brennan Manning, author and former Franciscan priest, has identified a concept that should be central to our views. He once wrote we need to be “for others, all others…to the extent that no human flesh is a stranger to us…to the extent that for us there are no ‘others.’”

Torture’s victims are as varied as its methods. Some we would hesitate to even call victim. Yet, Manning’s words suggest that if we are to uphold the idea (central to all faiths) that every human being possesses some dignity, we will apply this concept to the innocent and guilty of society.

While there are obvious differences in the circumstances of those affected by torture, saying all humans have dignity means that we act like it even when it’s unpopular or goes against our natural impulses.

It is for this very reason that we can say torture is not a liberal issue or a conservative issue, not a political or military issue, not even a sacred or secular issue. It is much more basic than that. It is a human issue. Torture is an issue that cuts to the soul of a nation and exposes its moral center. Unfortunately, it seems that the soul of our nation and many others have all too often been laid bare, brutally exposed.

When we don’t see others as “others,” torture loses its power. When we stop seeing politics, spirituality and people’s lives through a haze of battle metaphors or the ever-popular us-vs.-them mentality, torture stops. We cannot decry the use of torture as the moral failings of another, we must take ownership as well.

We must see the flesh of the stranger as our own and work together until no human flesh is tortured. There are no “others,” we are all victims of torture.

Posted by adanielsen at 04:35 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (0)

Over at Religious Dispatches, Pastor Dan writes:

Just after Easter this year, Americans were treated to the revelation that senior leaders of the Bush administration—later revealed to include the president himself—took part in meetings to approve “special interrogation” techniques to be used against terror suspects held by the CIA.

Now, they didn’t just approve those techniques: these leaders went into great detail about what would happen to the suspects. Over and over again, they talked about “whether [the suspects] would be slapped, pushed, deprived of sleep or subjected to simulated drowning, called waterboarding,” according to ABC News. "Waterboarding," it should be noted, was classified as torture by the U.S. after WWII when several Japanese soldiers were convicted of war crimes for taking part in the practice.

At least some of those present at the meetings knew they were wrong. No less a Christian than John Ashcroft wanted the White House to distance itself from its own policy, saying “History will not judge this kindly.” The news reports do not record any Cabinet members sharing his concerns.

The reaction to this rather startling news was a collective yawn. That the American government had knowingly and repeatedly approved policies that allowed interrogators to beat, humiliate, or degrade prisoners, to push them to the edge of psychosis, even to cause them to fear for their lives and the lives of their families, barely drew a ripple in the media. They were concerned with more important things, such as whether Barack Obama wore a flag lapel pin or why he ordered orange juice rather than coffee at a diner.

There was hardly a whisper from the churches and other religious institutions, either. Trapped like the rest of the nation in a seemingly endless loop of Good Fridays, they shrugged off the latest information and went about enjoying the spring like everybody else.

Ho hum, the nation (or at least its elites) seemed to be saying, The Bush people slapped the crap out of some terrorists. Oh, well. At least they didn’t crucify anybody.

Religious people do care about torture and they do care about barbarism at the highest levels of their government. We recognize that we are all created in God’s image and that torture destroys that image as it dehumanizes both the tortured and the torturer.

We recognize, moreover, that torture is incompatible with the American values of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Our nation has often aspired to use its moral authority as a beacon of freedom, justice and democracy around the world. But torture is corrosive to these values. It eats through our moral standing like acid, leaving us unable to fulfill our self-appointed mission.

It is unacceptable for the media to ignore this subject. It is unconscionable that our social discourse about “moral values” should proceed without discussion of the obligation to protect the dignity and bodies of prisoners, no matter how dangerous or loathsome the acts they are purported to have carried out. And, in most instances we must say "purported," as very few cases have been properly adjudicated.

We have been treated to a generation of conservative pastors and para-church ministry leaders blithely assure us that the only thing religious voters cared about were two particular hot-button social issues. This has never been the case, of course, and thankfully this supposed monopoly has begun to break up. But now more than ever it is urgent that media and political leaders hear that religious Americans oppose torture, before the Bush administration policies are written into conventional doctrine.

A group of religious bloggers has begun a program to do just that. We are calling on those who claim to represent people of faith to reject torture firmly and thoroughly, and to call on other leaders to do the same. We expect, furthermore, that torture be discussed whenever “values” are talked about in the public sphere.

It is time, it is past time, to move beyond the appalling silliness that has been the 2008 presidential campaign to talk about matters of real substance. That means challenging prominent representatives of the faith community to step up to the microphone and state the obvious truth: that torture is and never was compatible with any religious vision of the treatment of human beings, and that it is and never was compatible with American values.

It also means pushing the media to go beyond soundbite theology and simplistic questions to candidates about symbolism to ask the difficult, challenging questions about torture and its place in American life.

We can no longer afford to allow our religious and media elites to politely sidestep the question of torture. They have enabled it passively for long enough. Either they need to reject it, or they need to own it.

Posted by Alex Carpenter at 03:56 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (1)

Perhaps it's another example of the superficiality of our national debates that a Supreme Court Justice (Antonin Scalia) can claim that torture is not "cruel and unusual punishment" on national television and two days later hardly anyone's noticed (save Rolling Stone).

While Scalia claims he's no fan of torture, he fudges on the question of its Constitutionality claiming "defining it is going to be a nice trick."

What made this interview most "unusual," however, was Scalia's bizarre interpretation of what "punishment" means. Interrogation, it seems, doesn't qualify:

To the contrary...Has anybody ever referred to torture as punishment? I don't think so."

"Well, I think if you are in custody, and you have a policeman who's taken you into custody…," Stahl says.

"And you say he's punishing you?" Scalia asks.

"Sure," Stahl replies.

"What's he punishing you for? You punish somebody…," Scalia says.

"Well because he assumes you, one, either committed a crime…or that you know something that he wants to know," Stahl says.

"It's the latter. And when he's hurting you in order to get information from you…you don’t say he's punishing you. What’s he punishing you for?

While we certainly need to pay close attention to the words of the Constitution, I find it hard to believe this interpretation is consistent with the intent of the framers. If what really matters is the intent to "punish" rather than extract information, then a witness to terrorism could potentially be subjected to the most inhumane treatment (in order to get information about the terrorist) while the perpetrator would be spared such abuse.

(Even within Scalia's preposterous construction, torture is indeed a punishment for silence or obstruction.)

This is the same immoral reasoning behind the infamous "torture memos," which made the abuser's intent -- not his or her actions -- the benchmark for morality.

The thousands of Faithful Americans who signed a petition denouncing those memos may not be on the Supreme Court, but they know the United States has no business engaging in "cruel or unusual" behavior of any kind.

If only the government agreed.

Posted by Beth Dahlman at 02:03 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (0)

FoFPL Aaron posted the following this afternoon at his outstanding homestead, Faithfully Liberal:

As you have undoubtedly noticed the faith blogosphere has been putting pressure on former Governor Mike Huckabee to come out strongly against torture with two simple questions for him. We still await an answer but I want to emphasis how important it is for Mr. Huckabee to publicly state his position on the moral/value issue.

I posed a quick question in that regard to a couple of different faith leaders and received two very well thought-out responses from Faith in Public Life Executive Director Jennifer Butler and from United Church of Christ President Rev. John Thomas.

Here’s the question that I posed to them:

As a faith leader yourself, and someone who has adamantly opposed torture, what do you believe former Governor Mike Huckabee’s role in condoning or opposing torture is in regards to his newfound leadership in the religious right?

And their responses:

Rev. Butler -

Governor Huckabee is a different type of conservative religious leader. He may be a bridge between the old guard and new guard. The old guard was led by Pat Robertson, James Dobson and Tony Perkins. The new guard is lead by Joel Hunter, David Gushee and Rick Warren. The emerging evangelical center, including this younger generation of evangelicals and those coming up behind them, opposes torture. They represent the future of American evangelicalism. Look for instance at this new organization, Evangelicals for Human Rights. In the coming year we will see evangelicals as well other people of faith holding Huckabee and the presidential candidates accountable on this issue—there can be no compromise. (See here for video of Dr. Gushee asking Obama about torture)

Rev. Thomas -

While Governor Huckabee represents a conservative point of view, often at odds with my own, he has demonstrated a refreshing commitment to engaging his Biblical faith with a broad array of issues, not limiting himself to a narrow “moral values” agenda. I have particularly appreciated his sensitivity to issues of poverty and the strong Biblical mandates to address poverty in our world. Although I don’t know his personal views on the current debates regarding torture, I would anticipate that he would approach this issue as he does others, namely, through his Biblical interpretive lens. In my mind, it would be hard to take the Bible seriously and find any justification for condoning torture. Were Governor Huckabee to articulate a strong Biblical case against torture, it would be enormously helpful as a means of gathering broad support from Christians across the theological and political spectrum for a ban on the use of torture.

It’s a simple concept – we should never torture and a strong coalition of faith leaders on both sides of the theological and political aisle can help end its practice.

But I would like to throw it out to you as well. Why is ending the use of torture or pressuring leaders on the issue important to you?

Posted by Alex Carpenter at 05:06 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (0)

A leading ethicist and a major evangelical voice at both a scholarly and popular level, Dr. David P. Gushee presented a series of lectures on the campus of Bluefield College, April 15-16. He is an authority on contemporary moral issues, especially torture.

His latest work is The Future of Faith in American Politics: The Public Witness of the Evangelical Center.

He helping to organize A National Summit on Torture: Religious Faith, Torture, and our National Soul, to be held at Mercer University on September 11-12, 2008.

Posted by Alex Carpenter at 12:59 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (0)

A new exposé in Vanity Fair by British attorney Philippe Sands reveals new details about how attorney John Yoo and other high-ranking administration lawyers helped design and implement the interrogation policies seen at Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib and secret CIA prisons.

According to this article, "The Green Light," then-White House counsel Alberto Gonzales and other top officials personally visited Guantanamo in 2002, discussed interrogation techniques and witnessed interrogations.

On the 7th of February, 2002, President Bush adopted the decision that none of the detainees at Guantanamo would be able to rely on any protections under the Geneva Conventions, including the prohibition against cruel, inhuman, degrading treatment or torture. And Doug Feith described to me how he and General Myers worked together, and that he, in particular, took the steps to ensure that none of these detainees could rely on Geneva. And I put it to him, “Isn’t the consequence of getting rid of Geneva that there’s essentially a blank page? All the constraints on abusive interrogation are gone.” And his response was, “That was precisely the point.” And I thought that was rather telling, because the administration has never owned up to the fact that the reason they dis-applied Geneva was precisely to open the door to aggressive interrogation.

According to the National Religious Campaign Against Torture: "Religious institutions are called to embody these values and to engage in these tasks because of the authority they bring to issues of morality. Religious traditions emphasize ethical behavior as a demonstration of faith in action. They also provide leadership in secular society, playing an important role in influencing issues of morality at the national, state, and local levels. Furthermore, the infrastructure they provide supports the millions of people who covet justice and peace for all of God's creation.

Alexis de Tocqueville, the French historian, politicist, and observer of 19th century America, observed that "America is great because America is good. If America ceases to be good, America will cease to be great." It is important for people of faith to impress upon Americans and our leaders in Washington that America's goodness, and hence its greatness, is seriously compromised by the practice of torture, or cruel, inhuman and degrading treatments of detainees."

Posted by Alex Carpenter at 04:44 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (0)

On the heels of yesterday's torture memo release, Vanity Fair published a wrenching, in-depth story about the genesis and evolution of America's post-9/11 torture regime. It is a deeper and darker hole than I cared to imagine, and the story does a great job of laying the facts out, and of bringing it home on a gut level:

We went through the marked-up document slowly, pausing at each blue mark. Detainee 063’s reactions were recorded with regularity. I’ll string some of them together to convey the impression:

Detainee began to cry. Visibly shaken. Very emotional. Detainee cried. Disturbed. Detainee began to cry. Detainee bit the IV tube completely in two. Started moaning. Uncomfortable. Moaning. Began crying hard spontaneously. Crying and praying. Very agitated. Yelled. Agitated and violent. Detainee spat. Detainee proclaimed his innocence. Whining. Dizzy. Forgetting things. Angry. Upset. Yelled for Allah.

The blue highlights went on and on.

Urinated on himself. Began to cry. Asked God for forgiveness. Cried. Cried. Became violent. Began to cry. Broke down and cried. Began to pray and openly cried. Cried out to Allah several times. Trembled uncontrollably.

(h/t David Kurtz at TPM)

Posted by Dan at 02:43 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (0)

The torture memos have long been known to exist, but the texts themselves came out today, and they're breathtaking.

The Washington Post has them in two parts, here and here.

From the Post's report on the memos:

Interrogators who harmed a prisoner would be protected by a "national and international version of the right to self-defense," Yoo wrote. He also articulated a definition of illegal conduct in interrogations -- that it must "shock the conscience" -- that the Bush administration advocated for years.

"Whether conduct is conscience-shocking turns in part on whether it is without any justification," Yoo wrote, explaining, for example, that it would have to be inspired by malice or sadism before it could be prosecuted.

So it's okay to torture, provided that you're not doing it just to be a jerk. Also, no legal authority can prevent the President from authorizing it.

Here's another torture memo -- the National Religious Campaign Against Torture's quotes from religious leaders:

Judicial and penal institutions play a fundamental role in protecting citizens and safeguarding the common good (cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2266). At the same time, they are to aid in rebuilding “social relationships disrupted by the criminal act committed” (cf. Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church, 403). By their very nature, therefore, these institutions must contribute to the rehabilitation of offenders, facilitating their transition from despair to hope and from unreliability to dependability. When conditions within jails and prisons are not conducive to the process of regaining a sense of a worth and accepting its related duties, these institutions fail to achieve one of their essential ends. Public authorities must be ever vigilant in this task, eschewing any means of punishment or correction that either undermine or debase the human dignity of prisoners. In this regard, I reiterate that the prohibition against torture “cannot be contravened under any circumstances” (Ibid., 404).
-Pope Benedict XVI

"I'm concerned that we, as a nation, are unwilling to draw the line on torture. We should be able to point to that line with pride. To cross it would be to vacate our integrity and violate the human dignity of those whom we thus choose to victimize." - Rev. William J. Byron, S.J., Research Professor, Sellinger School of Business and Management, Loyola College in Maryland

"The deliberate torture of one human being by another is a sin against our Creator, in whose image we all have been created. This practice should not be condoned or allowed by any government. It must be condemned by all people of faith, wherever it exists, without exception." - Archbishop Demetrios, Primate, Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America

"My Christian faith does not allow me to compromise on this issue. Torturing another human being, a child of God, is evil, plain and simple." - Rev. Dr. Bob Edgar, president and CEO, Common Cause

"I signed 'Torture is a Moral Issue' because I understand the Christian faith to require vigorous efforts on behalf of human dignity, wherever it is threatened--friend or enemy, wartime or peacetime, my government or somebody else's government. I also understand that evangelical Christians, of which I am one, have enormous power in this culture, and I wanted to put myself clearly on record against torture precisely as an evangelical. I signed the statement because I believe that the United States has a fundamental legal and moral obligation to refrain from any form of torture even as we also have a legitimate right to self-defense. Finally, I signed the statement because I am very much concerned that torture, or acts approaching torture, are still occurring." - Dr. David P. Gushee, Distinguished University Professor of Christian Ethics, McAfee School of Theology, Mercer University

"What we must face squarely is this: whenever we torture or mistreat prisoners, we are capitulating morally to the enemy-in fact, adopting the terrorist ethic that the end justifies the means."
- Rev. Kermit D. Johnson, Chaplain (Major General), U.S. Army (ret.) ( From "Inhuman behavior: A chaplain's view of torture," The Christian Century, 4/18/06.)

"There is a special dignity in every human being that comes from the fact that we are brothers and sisters in God's one human family. It is because of this that we all feel that torture is a dehumanizing and terrible attack against human nature and the respect we owe for each other." - Theodore Cardinal McCarrick, Archbishop Emeritus of Washington

"In the years leading up to World War II, Karl Barth lamented that the German church wasn't awake to what was going on.'...the Church permanently finds itself in an emergency,' he said, but often is asleep at the wheel. I worry that we similarly are slipping into patterns of national behavior about which the American church is unaware, silent, or worse, complicit. I hope this statement on torture will help us wake up." - Dr. Brian McLaren, author/speaker

"The international community expresses shared moral belief through international law. International law absolutely prohibits torture, as well as cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment. The United States was once fully in support of these international laws and the moral principles upon which they are based. We can be again." - Mary Ellen O'Connell, Robert and Marion Short Professor of Law, Notre Dame Law School

"All of humanity is created in the image of God. Torture is a profound violation of this principle." - Rabbi David Saperstein, Director, Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism

"The Bible teaches that all of us sin, and power corrupts especially when dealing with the weak and vulnerable--which surely includes prisoners. Biblical Christians know we need the restraint of law, and want to be law-abiding. It's not enough just to be against torture; we want the U. S. to be a law-abiding citizen of the world, respecting international law." - Dr. Glen Stassen, Lewis B. Smedes Professor of Christian Ethics, Fuller Theologicay Seminary

"I have heightened sensitivity to the torture issue because the central symbol of my faith is an instrument of torture. While on that torture machine Jesus cried out to God on humanity's behalf, 'Father, forgive them for they know not what they do.' 2000 years later, we still don't know what we are doing." - Dr. Leonard Sweet, E. Stanley Jones Professor of Evangelism, Drew University

"The Koran clearly emphasizes the dignity of all human beings that must be maintained at all costs."
- Dr. Sayyid Syeed, National Director, Office of Interfaith & Community Alliances, Islamic Society of North America

"If we condone torture, we yield the moral high ground to our enemies and encourage anyone who hates us to stoop to using that subhuman level against us. We reap whatever we sow." - Dr. Rick Warren, Founder and Pastor,
Saddleback Church

Posted by Dan at 11:36 AM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (0)

Right before the Academy Awards, I settled down to listen to my almost daily dose of Bloggingheads.tv, a virtual salon of substantive punditry. Instead of a debate about libertarian principles or the presidential election, I was treated to a 47 min. discussion between New York's film critic David Edelstein and Alex Gibney (Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room), the maker of Taxi to the Dark Side.

So impressed was I with Mr. Gibney's grasp of American torture policy under Bush and Cheney that I selected his film over SiCKO to win Best Documentary on my party ballot. The doc won, and so did I. "What? Victory and human rights, say it ain't so, Mr. Yoo."

The room of smart guys at the Jewish Council for Public Affairs also nail the sickness that torture brings. Jared writes:

While watching Taxi to the Dark Side, I found one scene particularly disturbing. Afghan detainees are being processed by U.S. troops as they enter U.S. custody. The detainees stand in a line; their sleeves, rolled up. A U.S. solider, with Sharpie indelible marker in hand, begins to write the prisoner's ID number on his right inner forearm. Even writing this post I am having a horrible visceral reaction to this image. Marking prisoners in this way harkens back directly to the number tattoos that mark Holocaust victims. The symbolism is disgusting.

If that's not enough for you, the Washington Monthly gives America 37 leaders articulating why we must stop torturing now. National Association of Evangelicals honcho Richard Cizik lists four reasons why Christians should fight torture. He adds, "A consensus is emerging within our churches about our obligation to speak out against torture. As evangelical Christians, we have a non-negotiable responsibility to oppose a policy that is a violation of both our religious values and our national ideals."

In the same issue, Jimmy Carter writes:

"Our nation, which overcame slavery and segregation to proudly raise the banner of human rights for all to see, now finds itself condemned amid the indelible images of human degradation, perpetrated by U.S. forces in charge of the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. Our government's persistent unwillingness to ban the use of torture by its own agents or to grant access to legal counsel or prospect of a proper trial to hundreds of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay emboldens those who oppose human rights elsewhere."

More and more folks of faith are speaking up on the torture issue, which is particularly significant because traditionally religion has been the most closely connected to issues of conscience and physical suffering. As the state steals the rack from the Grand Inquisitor, those who follow a higher ethic, from liberal Hollywood documentarians to evangelical moderates, are working to pull America back from the dark side.

FYI: June is Torture Awareness month. Find out how you can get involved with the National Religious Campaign Against Torture here. And join the 18,000 who have signed the statement.

Posted by Alex Carpenter at 06:12 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (0)

This is not a rhetorical question -- when in the history of representative democracy has a legislative body passed a measure prohibiting torture, only to have it vetoed by a chief executive? Has there ever been such an open and official approval of torture in a democratic society?

If the answer is yes, let's not join the ranks of whoever's crossed that rubicon of shame. If the answer is no, let's keep it that way. From NRCAT:

We ask you to call the White House at 202-456-1111, or to email the President at comments@whitehouse.gov to express your support for H.R. 2082 (the Intelligence Authorization bill). Tell the President that we cannot win the war on terror by abandoning the values that made us great, and that he can help return us to those values by signing H.R. 2082.

The Washington Post's Dan Froomkin asks some other pertinent questions that demand answers:

Who are we as a nation? Are we who we used to be? Did one terrorist attack really change all that? Can it be changed back?

If you believe in atonement and redemption, the answer to Dan's last question has to be a firm yes, but the answers to his other three are far more troubling.

On an upnote, if your Congressional representatives voted the right way, it'd be nice to drop them a note of a appreciation.

Posted by Dan at 02:20 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (0)

Hot on the heels of CIA director Michael V. Hayden's admission that CIA interrogators waterboarded three detainees between 2002 and 2003, the Bush administration says they can do it again.

But in remarks that were greeted with disbelief by some members of Congress and human rights groups, White House spokesman Tony Fratto said that waterboarding was a legal technique that could be employed again "under certain circumstances."

Fratto said the nation's top intelligence officials "didn't rule anything out" during congressional testimony Tuesday on CIA interrogation methods, and he indicated that Bush might consider reauthorizing waterboarding or other harsh techniques in extreme cases, such as when there is "belief that an attack might be imminent."

To recap: a slowly administered drowning, invented by inquisitors, used by the Khmer Rouge, previously prosecuted by the US government as torture, is "a legal technique that could be employed again 'under certain circumstances.'" In other words, when push comes to shove, America tortures. Not like you didn't already know, but it's still noteworthy to hear them confess this moral calamity.

The National Religions Campaign Against Torture provides an extensive list of ways to get involved in the movement to ban torture by the US government (for real this time).

NRCAT's web site offers a cogent explanation for their motivation:

Why Are People of Faith Working to End U.S.-Sponsored Torture?

Tens of thousands of people of diverse faith traditions, including evangelical Christians, mainline Protestants, Roman Catholics, Orthodox Christians, Quakers, Unitarians, Muslims, Jews, and Sikhs, as well as representatives of over 130 religious organizations, are working together to end U.S.-sponsored torture. Notwithstanding points of theological difference, these groups share a basic understanding and affirmation of the inherent dignity of each individual which includes:

* A conviction that all individuals are created in the image of God and therefore are endowed with a basic dignity;
* Some variant of what is commonly referred to as "The Golden Rule": That which you would not want done to yourself, do not do to another.

Each of these traditions also share ethical principles that people of faith are called to practice:

* People of faith are called to compassion - to not only care when people are degraded or hurt but to take action: to stand for, and with, those who are abused, oppressed, and among the most vulnerable.
* People of faith are called to pursue justice to assure that all people are treated fairly - as Martin Luther King once noted, "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."
* People of faith are called to be faithful - to be constant in their defense of each individual's dignity, humanity, and honor.
* People of faith are called to hospitality - to welcome those who are marginalized, ostracized, and perceived as Other.
* People of faith are called to make peace - to facilitate reconciliation and to create a culture of peace.

Religious institutions are called to embody these values and to engage in these tasks because of the authority they bring to issues of morality. Religious traditions emphasize ethical behavior as a demonstration of faith in action. They also provide leadership in secular society, playing an important role in influencing issues of morality at the national, state, and local levels. Furthermore, the infrastructure they provide supports the millions of people who covet justice and peace for all of God's creation.

Alexis de Tocqueville, the French historian, politicist, and observer of 19th century America, observed that "America is great because America is good. If America ceases to be good, America will cease to be great." It is important for people of faith to impress upon Americans and our leaders in Washington that America's goodness, and hence its greatness, is seriously compromised by the practice of torture, or cruel, inhuman and degrading treatments of detainees.

Posted by Dan at 02:09 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (2)

Six years ago Friday, we established Camp X-Ray, the torture chamber and legal black hole that has turned "Guantanamo" into shorthand for America's eroded moral status in the world.

Check out this powerful witness against the absurd depravity of America's treatment of detainees.

Posted by Dan at 04:20 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (1)

The National Religious Campaign Against Torture is calling on the Senate Judiciary Committee to reject any attorney general nominee who is not forcefully "against the use of torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment."

But the call by the 130-member coalition seems likely to be too little, too late as the committee appears ready to send to the full Senate the nomination of Judge Michael Mukasey to replace Alberto Gonzalez.

Of course, for the sensitive types like former Ambassador to the UN John Bolton, just talking about torture is torturous.

On Democracy Now, Amy Goodman interviews someone who actually has been subjected to waterboarding.

According to Religion and Ethics Daily,

In a Nov. 1 letter to the Judiciary Committee, the interfaith group said it was "deeply concerned" about Mukasey's answers on the volatile issue of torture and what interrogation techniques may be permissible. "Our country already knows what happens when we have an attorney general who countenances torture and cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment," the letter said. "We lose our moral compass; decent Americans are called upon on our behalf to commit acts that damage their souls; our soldiers who may be captured are placed in greater jeopardy; we are shamed in the eyes of the world. It would be tragic to allow an individual who has not clearly rejected the illegal and immoral practices of torture ... to become the leading law enforcement officer of our nation."

Posted by Alex Carpenter at 02:37 AM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (4)

Karl Rove, on the treatment of prisoners in Guantanamo, speaking at the annual Aspen Ideas Festival this week:

"Our principal health problem down there is gain of weight, we feed them so well," he said as many in the audience shook their heads and groaned in unison. [Denver Post, 7/9/07]

As The Washington Post and so many other news outlets reported in December 2004:

Detainees at the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, were shackled to the floor in fetal positions for more than 24 hours at a time, left without food and water, and allowed to defecate on themselves, an FBI agent who said he witnessed such abuse reported in a memo to supervisors, according to documents released yesterday.

In memos over a two-year period that ended in August, FBI agents and officials also said that they witnessed the use of growling dogs at Guantanamo Bay to intimidate detainees -- contrary to previous statements by senior Defense Department officials -- and that one detainee was wrapped in an Israeli flag and bombarded with loud music in an apparent attempt to soften his resistance to interrogation.

The International Committee of the Red Cross has charged in confidential reports to the United States government that the American military has intentionally used psychological and sometimes physical coercion "tantamount to torture" on prisoners at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba.

The finding that the handling of prisoners detained and interrogated at Guantánamo amounted to torture came after a visit by a Red Cross inspection team that spent most of last June in Guantánamo.

The team of humanitarian workers, which included experienced medical personnel, also asserted that some doctors and other medical workers at Guantánamo were participating in planning for interrogations, in what the report called "a flagrant violation of medical ethics."

Interrogators at the U.S. detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, forced a stubborn detainee to wear women's underwear on his head, confronted him with snarling military working dogs and attached a leash to his chains, according to a newly released military investigation that shows the tactics were employed there months before military police used them on detainees at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq.
...
The investigation also supports the idea that soldiers believed that placing hoods on detainees, forcing them to appear nude in front of women and sexually humiliating them were approved interrogation techniques for use on detainees.

“"Reports indicate that the treatment of detainees since their arrests, and the conditions of their confinement, have had profound effects on the mental health of many of them. The treatment and conditions include the capture and transfer of detainees to an undisclosed overseas location, sensory deprivation and other abusive treatment during transfer; detention in cages without proper sanitation and exposure to extreme temperatures; minimal exercise and hygiene; systematic use of coercive interrogation techniques; long periods of solitary confinement; cultural and religious harassment; denial of or severely delayed communication with family; and the uncertainty generated by the indeterminate nature of confinement and denial of access to independent tribunals. These conditions have led in some instances to serious mental illness, over 350 acts of self-harm in 2003 alone, individual and mass suicide attempts and widespread, prolonged hunger strikes. The severe mental health consequences are likely to be long term in many cases, creating health burdens on detainees and their families for years to come.”"

Join the National Religious Campaign Against Torture, Rabbis for Human Rights and Evangelicals for Human Rights to challenge our political leaders to stop U.S.-sponsored torture.

Posted by Katie at 08:26 AM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (0)

June is "Torture Awareness Month." Thanks to Real Time with Bill Maher, this clip from the most recent presidential debate reveals a reason why we might need a whole month to reflect on this in America.

There's a lot of torture in the air. Early on America was crafted on the principle of religious freedom in an historical moment when Catholics and varieties of Protestantism were employing terrorism and torture to defend their communities. (See Guy Fawkes, the Separatists, the Puritans, Bloody Mary, Fox's book of Martyrs and the Spanish Inquisition.) Just as these religious groups learned to find alternative methods of will-to-power through dialogue and religious tolerance, so too will the fearful in our day; but only if we refrain from inflaming fears and "enhancing" our interrogation techniques.

The National Campaign Against Torture stands as a witness for true security and sustainable nonviolence.

"In a nation-wide project called "Spotlight on Torture," the National Religious Campaign Against Torture (NRCAT) has arranged for DVD copies of "Ghosts of Abu Ghraib" to be available to 1,000 congregations, on a first come, first served basis – 50 during the week of June 10-17 and 950 during the week of October 21-28. Within those two weeks, congregations can choose the date and time they wish to schedule a screening and discussion."

"Ghosts of Abu Ghraib," an 80-minute HBO film, features the familiar and very disturbing pictures of torture at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison and raises many questions: How did torture become an accepted practice at Abu Ghraib? Did U.S. government policies make it possible? How much damage has the aftermath of Abu Ghraib had on America's credibility as a defender of freedom and human rights around the world? Acclaimed filmmaker Rory Kennedy looks beyond the headlines to investigate the psychological and political context in which torture occurred."

The Christian Century "Theolog" notes:

News services carried stories in early May about a Pentagon study that found many of the U.S. Marines and soldiers in Iraq would support torture in attempts to get strategic information and would not report on a comrade for killing or wounding civilians. General David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, reminded service members that keeping high moral values “distinguishes us from our enemy” and is vital to winning support among Iraqis.

The study showed increasing mental health problems for troops on extended or multiple deployments. More than one-third of soldiers and marines believed that torture should be allowed to get information about insurgents or if it might save U.S. lives. Only 40 percent of U.S. Marines and 55 percent of soldiers said they would report a comrade for killing or injuring an innocent Iraqi.

In addition, "NRCAT is joining the American Civil Liberties Union, Amnesty International, and the Leadership Council on Civil Rights to sponsor a rally and lobby-day called, "Day of Action to Restore Law and Justice," in Washington, DC, on June 26, 2007. The goal of the event is to end torture and secret prisons, to restore due process and fairness to our treatment of detainees, and to reform the abuses of the Military Commissions Act by enacting the Restoring the Constitution Act."

Learn more here.

Posted by Alex Carpenter at 05:43 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (0)

According to the Hartford, CT, Courant newspaper, Sen. Lieberman "is not particularly popular with the clergy crowd these days." The clergy crowd in question was an inspiring local interfaith voice for justice: Reclaiming the Prophetic Voice.

Reclaiming the Prophetic Voice is a Connecticut-wide interfaith "gathering of religious leaders and people of faith, joined by our belief in the God of justice and love, who calls us "to do justice, to love kindness and to walk humbly with God." In this time of crisis and war, we believe that walking humbly with God requires us to advocate and practice nonviolent love, in the tradition of Gandhi and Martin Luther King, Jr."

Active supporters of the National Religious Campaign Against Torture, they have also been busy holding events to increase Connecticut pressure for Senate Bill S 576 and House Bill HR 1415.

During Holy Week and Passover, Reclaiming the Prophetic Voice faith leaders from Muslim, Jewish and Christian traditions held a press conference to rally support for the "Restoring the Constitution Act of 2007", legislation Senator Chris Dodd (D-CT) introduced in February which would restore Habeas Corpus rights, bar evidence gained through torture or coercion and reinstate U.S. adherence to the Geneva Conventions." Catch news footage from that very successful event here.

In the past they have sponsored a very provocative billboard calling attention to American leaders who have supported torture, including President Bush. They have also circulated a petition against the Iraq war, called attention to the silencing of Iraqi women's voices, and during the 2006 campaign they spoke out strongly again Sen. Lieberman, a man of faith, for being weak on torture. During that campaign Rev. McTigue appeared on Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor.

Posted by Alex Carpenter at 02:21 AM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (0)

It's an exciting time to be a blogger interested in faith and progressive politics. There are more of us every day (we'll be featuring some of the best here at FPL), and national leaders in our community are becoming more and more aware of how important blogs can be in spreading the good news about their work. With all that energy in the cyber-air, it's almost providential that we get to announce that the first ever Progressive Faith Blog Con is on its way.

The Blog Con will take place from July 14-16 in Montclair, NJ (just outside of New York). It's the brain-child of some of the best minds in our corner of the blogosphere, and will feature Velveteen Rabbi, Mainstream Baptist, Chuck Currie, Pastor Dan of Street Prophets, XPatriated Texan, Talk to Action, Philocrites, CrossLeft, JSpot, Rabbi Arthur Waskow, and many, many more. Check out the site for more details on attending. You won't want to miss it! The buzz about the event is already building here, here, here, here, and, well, you get the point.

We at FPL are thrilled to be working on this, and will be sure to keep you all up to date as the calendar ticks down to July 14. Register now (space is limited!), spread the good word on your blogs, and make sure you're there for this landmark event.

Posted by David Buckley at 05:08 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (3)

Welcome to Faith in Public Life’s corner of the blogosphere! We’re glad to join the hundreds of bloggers out there in this growing and exciting community. Like any responsible new neighbor, we’ll try to make a good first impression, keep the yard looking tidy, and not make TOO much noise.

As you’ve hopefully noticed from the rest of this website, Faith in Public Life isn’t a normal organization. We exist as a resource center for faith communities working for justice and the common good. When we do our jobs right, we provide faith leaders and community members with the tools they need to more effectively carry out their work. When our partners win, we win, so to speak.

In keeping with this mission, this blog won’t be entirely normal either. We’ll feature our share of staff-written content on current events at the intersection of religion and politics, but we’ll spend most of our time featuring the best work of others, in an attempt to build up the strongest voices for justice and the common good in our community.

What does it mean to use a blog to provide resources to the community? We’ll frequently feature cross posts from bloggers whose voices add to the national debate on faith in politics. We’ll have guest blogs from our board members and partners who don’t maintain regular blogs but who are excited by the chance to engage in conversations with this community. We’ll put together a weekly highlight reel of the most interesting posts from far and wide in the faith blogosphere. And we’ll use the blog to post audio and video clips of our partners making an impact in mainstream media outlets.

We hope that this blog can play a role in building up this exciting community. Leave comments, tell us all what you think, and spread the word about Faith in Public Life as a resource center for bloggers who care about faith, justice, and the common good.

Posted by David Buckley at 08:57 AM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (4)