kittyjo Posted March 10, 2008 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 53 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 523 Content Per Day: 0.07 Reputation: 1 Days Won: 0 Joined: 05/11/2004 Status: Offline Share Posted March 10, 2008 the best part about that definition is that it comes from wikipedia, where anyone can edit the definition. THAT is why it will go heavily ignored. Your who I was thinking of. http://www.reference.com/search?r=13&q=Water%20Boarding At the bottom of your link from above: All 3 results for: Water Boarding 3 from Wikipedia Cowinkydinkypedia Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest LadyC Posted March 10, 2008 Share Posted March 10, 2008 cowinkydinkypedia? ROFL kittyjo, i love your terminology! you should create an entry for that word in wikipedia! FPG, i love your name... faith pleases God. somehow though, i frequently see people putting their faith in wikipedia, which is once again, is one of the least credible resources on the net. the information in that "pedia" is as biased as the person who writes or edits the entry. you might as well be doing a man-on-the-street survey. but whatever. i'm just trying to help ya out by letting you know that if you want people to take you seriously, you might want to consider using legitimate sources. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jadams_4040 Posted March 10, 2008 Group: Nonbeliever Followers: 0 Topic Count: 0 Topics Per Day: 0 Content Count: 52 Content Per Day: 0.01 Reputation: 1 Days Won: 0 Joined: 03/05/2008 Status: Offline Birthday: 06/17/1953 Share Posted March 10, 2008 Well, if it is used on terrorists and will save us from future attacks, I'm all for it. BTW, waterboarding isn't torture. And what happens when the enemy does it to our soldiers? is it still ok then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
O'Dannyboy Posted March 10, 2008 Group: Royal Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 156 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 3,454 Content Per Day: 0.48 Reputation: 4 Days Won: 0 Joined: 09/22/2004 Status: Offline Birthday: 07/02/1969 Share Posted March 10, 2008 Oddly enough Meriam-Websters doesn't even have a definition for it. Apparently it's a new terminology and so the definition is still being hashed out. I am in agreement that Wikipedia references are not sufficient as they allow the meaning to be twisted to accomodate anyones personal definition or agenda. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest LadyC Posted March 10, 2008 Share Posted March 10, 2008 Well, if it is used on terrorists and will save us from future attacks, I'm all for it. BTW, waterboarding isn't torture. And what happens when the enemy does it to our soldiers? is it still ok then? if ONLY they would use waterboarding on our soldiers, instead of chopping their heads off on video. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
O'Dannyboy Posted March 10, 2008 Group: Royal Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 156 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 3,454 Content Per Day: 0.48 Reputation: 4 Days Won: 0 Joined: 09/22/2004 Status: Offline Birthday: 07/02/1969 Share Posted March 10, 2008 Well, if it is used on terrorists and will save us from future attacks, I'm all for it. BTW, waterboarding isn't torture. And what happens when the enemy does it to our soldiers? is it still ok then? We are supposed to be above using such practices. The problem is that our enemies do not abide by the Geneva Convention. Moreover, enforcing the Geneva Convention is a bit like charging China with crimes against Humanity. Who has the power to punish them save God himself? These days sanctions are the most widely used tool and we can all agree that such punishments meet with limited results and affect the citizens the most rather than the perpetrators of any war crimes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest LadyC Posted March 10, 2008 Share Posted March 10, 2008 maybe i'm dense, but i don't understand how waterboarding affects citizens more than it does the war criminals... unless you think the detainees are actually innocent. can you name any private citizen that waterboarding has affected? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
faith pleases God Posted March 10, 2008 Group: Senior Member Followers: 6 Topic Count: 10 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 653 Content Per Day: 0.11 Reputation: 189 Days Won: 0 Joined: 11/18/2007 Status: Offline Birthday: 03/26/1977 Share Posted March 10, 2008 cowinkydinkypedia? ROFL kittyjo, i love your terminology! you should create an entry for that word in wikipedia! FPG, i love your name... faith pleases God. somehow though, i frequently see people putting their faith in wikipedia, which is once again, is one of the least credible resources on the net. the information in that "pedia" is as biased as the person who writes or edits the entry. you might as well be doing a man-on-the-street survey. but whatever. i'm just trying to help ya out by letting you know that if you want people to take you seriously, you might want to consider using legitimate sources. Is that your reference? Ladylike? your name is great! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest LadyC Posted March 10, 2008 Share Posted March 10, 2008 is what my reference? and my name is LadyC.... i'm a woman. my name starts with a C. did you think i was being sarcastic when i said i like your name? i DO like your name. but i still encourage you to start using a more legitimate resource when trying to persuade people that your view is the correct one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chimoku Posted March 10, 2008 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 24 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 270 Content Per Day: 0.04 Reputation: 1 Days Won: 0 Joined: 03/31/2005 Status: Offline Author Share Posted March 10, 2008 - O'Dannyboy: Oddly enough Meriam-Websters doesn't even have a definition for it. Apparently it's a new terminology and so the definition is still being hashed out. I am in agreement that Wikipedia references are not sufficient as they allow the meaning to be twisted to accomodate anyones personal definition or agenda." Evidently , Dannyboy, agreement on this issue is possibly a lost cause . . . Nevertheless, regardless of what expert source one wants to cite or what euphemism one wants to attribute to the act, waterboarding ( along with other enhanced interrogation techniques such a forced nudity, mock executions) is defined as torture by the Geneva Conventions and the United Nations Convention Against Torture. A rose by any other name, is still a rose. - Getrude Stein I recollect the days when I was active in the Pro-Life movement and in debates was challenged by Pro-Abortionists who refused to acknowledge the child in the womb as a "Baby" and preferred to use the word "medical procedure" instead of saying "abortion" or "killing the child". We as Christians need to stand for righteousness in this land. Certainly prisoners of war should be incarcerated; and war criminals should be brought to justice. However they should not be degraded, treated in a cruel fashion and dehumanized. God never instructed His people to use torture in the OT. He did instruct them at times to annilihate communities, kings and armies because they threatened and /or obstructed His purposes for His Chosen people - the apple of His eye. Jesus our Lord in the NT calls us to practice mercy . .to pray for and love our enemies . . . i.e. treat them as human beings. Those men incarcerated in Qunatanamo are in many respects misguided and misdirected in their passions - However, where will they find the LIGHT, if we do not let it shine in our call for their just treatment. That being said, I rest my case - You all put up a fair argument, though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts