More Mormons implicated in U.S. use of Torture.

[Coach McGuirk]

If you don't think the fact that three of the top underwriters for the government's use of torture were Mormon isn't going to associate the Church with this controversy, you have another thing coming. Don't shoot the messenger. Gird up your loins and get ready for the storm.

What storm? There is no storm


Ask yourself this question. Say we could have stopped 9/11 by water boarding a high profile prisoner. Would you have done it? What if you could have done it and prepared pearl harbor for the attack. Are you too moral for that?

[RobinFinderson]

The role of Jessen and Mitchell has been public info since the 1997 VF article. Bybee's role has been known even longer. As the economy gets going again, the D's will stop using the torture debate as a distraction and these names along with their relationship with Mormonism will be forgotten.

Along with most people here, I'll keep my fingers crossed in hope that you are right.

But I have to disagree with you about the D's using this issue as a distraction. Obama doesn't want to prosecute anyone for torture precisely because it is the sort of distraction that will not let him accomplish his greater ambitions. The D's gain no political ground that hasn't already been won by continuing to bang the torture drum, and deeper investigations could easily further implicate D's. It certainly doesn't distract us from economic woes -- it just adds to the burden of our times.

In the meantime we have defenders of these torture techniques right here on CUF. We have government agencies who say that waterboarding IS torture, and that the combination of other non-torture techniques used against American prisoners collectively constituted torture. And then we have THIS article suggesting that religious people are more likely than secular people to support torture:

The more often Americans go to church, the more likely they are to support the torture of suspected terrorists, according to a new survey.

At the heart of all of this are three Mormons who are some of the most prominent underwriters of America's use of torture. What about religion in general and Mormonism in particular makes people more likely to stand with their toes curled over the edge of this precipice?

[byu71]

Along with most people here, I'll keep my fingers crossed in hope that you are right.

But I have to disagree with you about the D's using this issue as a distraction. Obama doesn't want to prosecute anyone for torture precisely because it is the sort of distraction that will not let him accomplish his greater ambitions. The D's gain no political ground that hasn't already been won by continuing to bang the torture drum, and deeper investigations could easily further implicate D's. It certainly doesn't distract us from economic woes -- it just adds to the burden of our times.

In the meantime we have defenders of these torture techniques right here on CUF. We have government agencies who say that waterboarding IS torture, and that the combination of other non-torture techniques used against American prisoners collectively constituted torture. And then we have THIS article suggesting that religious people are more likely than secular people to support torture:



At the heart of all of this are three Mormons who are some of the most prominent underwriters of America's use of torture. What about religion in general and Mormonism in particular makes people more likely to stand with their toes curled over the edge of this precipice?

The less people go to church the more likely they are to support petaphiles, pornography and terrorism. There is just a different mindset amongst liberals and conservatives. They are wired differently.

[YOhio]

Along with most people here, I'll keep my fingers crossed in hope that you are right.

Why that is just mighty gracious of you Robin! It means quite a bit to us here that you hope that Mormonism isn't forever tarnished by three members who helped facilitate the waterboarding of KSM. Keep them fingers crossed buddy! We're all in this together.

Dems aren't using this as a distraction? Now who's being naive Kay?

[RobinFinderson]

Dems aren't using this as a distraction? Now who's being naive Kay?

I think Obama, who wants to focus on other things, and Pellosi, who might get implicated, would be really happy if the torture issue would go away. Who is banging this drum and what is the evidence that they are doing so as a 'distraction' as opposed to a legitimate and substantial legal issue?

[Fiyero]

I guess it's possible that some haters will associate torture with the LDS church because of Jay Bybee. I guess they could also be so brainless as to associate torture with BYU law graduates, UNLV law professors, Ninth Circuit Appellate judges, Republicans, people with spouses named Diana, 55-year-old men, and guys who wear robes all day. That bastard Hugh Hefner, I bet he's for torture too.

[UtahDan]

I guess it's possible that some haters will associate torture with the LDS church because of Jay Bybee. I guess they could also be so brainless as to associate torture with BYU law graduates, UNLV law professors, Ninth Circuit Appellate judges, Republicans, people with spouses named Diana, 55-year-old men, and guys who wear robes all day. That bastard Hugh Hefner, I bet he's for torture too.

Ooh. Now there is something bound to make a few people around here sore.

[byu71]

I would agree Obama does't necessarily want this thing to come down. However, he has a very liberal base he bows to, so I doubt he is going to stop the witch hunt and name calling.

To bad the republicans are so inept at getting an act together. Obama is playing the role of a flim flam man and no one has the credibility to call him on it. The main stream press won't and the repubs. can't.

I think Obama could govern responsibly, but no one is going to hold his feet to the fire.

[RobinFinderson]

I guess it's possible that some haters will associate torture with the LDS church because of Jay Bybee. I guess they could also be so brainless as to associate torture with BYU law graduates, UNLV law professors, Ninth Circuit Appellate judges, Republicans, people with spouses named Diana, 55-year-old men, and guys who wear robes all day. That bastard Hugh Hefner, I bet he's for torture too.

I think there is some validity to your point here. But at the end of the day, it was three Mormons who underwrote much of what became the U.S. torture policy. I don't think we would ever see three Unitarians underwriting these government actions, and if they did, you can bet that Unitarians en masse would disassociate themselves from those individuals. Torture, and things anything like unto it, are not in the DNA of the Unitarian church. The UU church stands as a bulwark against this kind of treatment of prisoners. Why can Mormons be found with crumbs on their face where Unitarians will never be found? What is it about the Mormon church that allowed three active members to curl their toes over the edge of this precipice?

The DNA of the Mormon church is Authority and Exceptionalism. Torture is about authority and exceptionalism. This doesn't implicate the church as whole, but it should give its members pause. The church isn't going to stand as a bulwark against terrible deeds, and when those deeds are done it will not punish its offending members.

[RobinFinderson]

The role of Jessen and Mitchell has been public info since the 1997 VF article. Bybee's role has been known even longer. As the economy gets going again, the D's will stop using the torture debate as a distraction and these names along with their relationship with Mormonism will be forgotten.

BTW, HERE is the link to the 2007 VF article that YOhio references. This is a more exhaustive article than the one I linked.

[Indy Coug]

I think there is some validity to your point here. But at the end of the day, it was three Mormons who underwrote much of what became the U.S. torture policy. I don't think we would ever see three Unitarians underwriting these government actions, and if they did, you can bet that Unitarians en masse would disassociate themselves from those individuals. Torture, and things anything like unto it, are not in the DNA of the Unitarian church. The UU church stands as a bulwark against this kind of treatment of prisoners. Why can Mormons be found with crumbs on their face where Unitarians will never be found? What is it about the Mormon church that allowed three active members to curl their toes over the edge of this precipice?

The DNA of the Mormon church is Authority and Exceptionalism. Torture is about authority and exceptionalism. This doesn't implicate the church as whole, but it should give its members pause. The church isn't going to stand as a bulwark against terrible deeds, and when those deeds are done it will not punish its offending members.

The only significance to the 'Mormon-torture connection" is if the government was systematically searching for people of like mind religion by religion until they could find a few members of the same religion who would produce a limited torture memo and after searching members of dozens of religions ended up having to settle for the bloodthirsty Mormons.

The LDS-torture connection is pure happenstance and not a reflection of something endemic to the LDS faith that renders it uniquely prone to this viewpoint. Last I checked, the approach of trying to extrapolate the opinions of 3 people as a representative sample of the attitudes of 13 million would not get you a passing grade in any accredited institution of learning.

[il Padrino Ute]

The only significance to the 'Mormon-torture connection" is if the government was systematically searching for people of like mind religion by religion until they could find a few members of the same religion who would produce a limited torture memo and after searching members of dozens of religions ended up having to settle for the bloodthirsty Mormons.

The LDS-torture connection is pure happenstance and not a reflection of something endemic to the LDS faith that renders it uniquely prone to this viewpoint. Last I checked, the approach of trying to extrapolate the opinions of 3 people as a representative sample of the attitudes of 13 million would not get you a passing grade in any accredited institution of learning.

Don't bring logic into this debate. We Mormons are the cause of everything bad about this country.

[The_Tick]

I am LDS but this is not why I support the following things:

- I support torture/interrogations if it has the ability to keep something like 9/11/01 from happening again then by all means, go right ahead.

- The closing of the borders.

- No amnesty

- Repealling of the 14th amendment (maybe not the whole thing, but at least one of your parents should have to be a legal citizen of the country for a baby to be a citizen also)

- Flat Tax

I am not these things because I am LDS, I am against them because that is how I feel. The guy who shares the cubicle next to mine at work is Catholic and he feels the same way on all of it, so we should probably be lumping them in too Robin.

[RobinFinderson]

The only significance to the 'Mormon-torture connection" is if the government was systematically searching for people of like mind religion by religion until they could find a few members of the same religion who would produce a limited torture memo and after searching members of dozens of religions ended up having to settle for the bloodthirsty Mormons.

The LDS-torture connection is pure happenstance and not a reflection of something endemic to the LDS faith that renders it uniquely prone to this viewpoint. Last I checked, the approach of trying to extrapolate the opinions of 3 people as a representative sample of the attitudes of 13 million would not get you a passing grade in any accredited institution of learning.

There are three courts where this issue is going to play out:

The court of public opinion -- In this court logic and fairness don't matter. A narrative will develop, and with three prominent underwriters of the policy all sharing a common faith, I think there is a good chance that the church will get smeared. The church stands to lose a lot of ground in this court, depending on how the narrative develops. Time will tell.

The courts of law -- The church didn't force these people to hold their opinions. As far as I can see, the church is 100% safe in the courts of law.

The court of introspection -- This is where I would like to see a real change. Why didn't Mormon faith stand as a bulwark against torture and things like unto it? As Mormons we should seriously think about that and let our contemplation mend our hearts to steel us against such exceptionalist abuses of authority.

[byu71]

There are three courts where this issue is going to play out:

The court of public opinion -- In this court logic and fairness don't matter. A narrative will develop, and with three prominent underwriters of the policy all sharing a common faith, I think there is a good chance that the church will get smeared. The church stands to lose a lot of ground in this court, depending on how the narrative develops. Time will tell.

The courts of law -- The church didn't force these people to hold their opinions. As far as I can see, the church is 100% safe in the courts of law.

The court of introspection -- This is where I would like to see a real change. Why didn't Mormon faith stand as a bulwark against torture and things like unto it? As Mormons we should seriously think about that and let our contemplation mend our hearts to steel us against such exceptionalist abuses of authority.

Why should the church stand against your definition of torture and not mine. What makes you any more of an expert on what torture is or isn't.

I think having Nancy Pelosi as Speaker of the House is torture. However, I am not going to ball and moan if you disagree.