But just for the sake of discussion, let’s bring the whole issue closer to home. Suppose your son or your daughter is, for some reason, the target of kidnappers and that they’ve put your child in a hidden location with a bomb scheduled to go off if you don’t pay them a million dollars. Now, suppose you have one of the kidnappers in custody. What would you be willing to do, assuming you couldn’t get the money, to find out where your child was being held and get him or her away from the bomb? Whoops, you can’t slap the kidnapper! That would be torture! You can’t even threaten to shoot him if he doesn’t tell you what you need to know! Again, that would be torture! Do you think you might be inclined to take whatever action necessary to save your child? Or would you let your child die to avoid torture? The world is, and always has been, a vicious place and its fine and grand and noble to talk about never using torture or the threat of torture – in the abstract. I would contend, however, that if the life of your child or your spouse or your best friend was on the line, you might not look on a slap as the unlawful infliction of severe physical pain in quite the same light. In the abstract, we can call it torture. When the lives of loved ones are at stake, I submit that being slapped around seems relatively mild – but I could be wrong.
Why is animal testing so important. Advancement in our medical field. Great for our points.
