A Fate Worse Than Death

Sordel recently argued that - far from taking society to some new moral nadir - restoring capital punishment is like a leafy suburb somewhere on the line between The City of God and our current societal Sodom. Naturally this is far from an argument on behalf of the restoration of capital punishment (just because bad things happen, no need to add to them!) but let us turn out attention for a moment to how bad capital punishment really is as a legal resort.

How would it be if you could experience the fear and discomfort of death and not die?

Good punishment? Bad?

Waterboarding was routinely used by the U.S. as an interrogation technique. For the person being interrogated in this way, the experience is said to be similar to being drowned. Some claim it's torture, but it was contended by the Bush administration that it is not. Either way, we're not killing the person, so why worry, right?

Waterboarding does not infringe the natural right to life, and it can be used both as retribution against the convict and as a deterrent. Since it is not a capital punishment, it is proportionate for all sorts of crime. It's cheap, causes no permanent (physical) damage ... what's not to like?

No wonder that U.S. interrogators apparently felt that it was okay to waterboard Khalid Sheikh Mohammed 183 times in March 2003.

(No wonder there is such understandable anxiety in America that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed might cheat justice and elude the death penalty.)

Of course, that's just the United States, and it can be argued that the use of waterboarding was primarily preventative rather than punitive. Interrogation may have saved many more lives than it ruined and - unless you actually believe in natural rights - the end (on a purely Utilitarian calculation) often does justify the means.

My philosophical concern is not whether waterboarding itself is justifiable, but rather this: is there no number of waterboardings that equal, from the standpoint of retributive punishment, one actual execution?

Because, if other punishments (including those inflicted without due legal process) can exceed in cruelty capital punishment, then why are we drawing this artificial moral line?

Why do we strain out a gnat and swallow a camel?