Is torture (sometimes) okay?

August 11, 2008

For the last couple of years, a debate has been brewing about the military’s treatment of terror suspects. There has been evidence of prisoner abuse, complaints of innocent people being held without trial, and questions of whether water-boarding is considered torture.

The root question of this debate is how we balance the rights of individuals versus the protection of the American public from potential harm. Do we have the right to treat someone in an inhumane way in order to prevent a terrorist attack?

The question becomes – how big of an attack must be prevented in order to justify the torture of someone? Do you treat a major attack similar to 9/11 the same way you would an attack that might kill 2 people?

When, if ever, is torture justified? What do you think?


What is happening in Tibet?

March 31, 2008

It seems like every day a new report is out about Tibetans protesting the 2008 Summer Olympics, and the Chinese government that is hosting the games. Where did this whole thing come from? It seems like it started all of a sudden one day, and now it’s everywhere. What is it all about?

This will require a quick history lesson: In 1971, The Qing Dynasty that ruled China established the Dalai Lama and his regents as the spiritual and political leaders of Tibet. They continued in their rule through 1951. In 1911, Tibet proclaimed its independence from China, and although no other country recognized Tibet, it continued as a de-facto independent state until 1950.

In 1950, the Chinese army invaded Tibet, and easily overran the small Tibetan army.  Since then the Tibetan government led by the Dalai Lama has been in exile, and the Chinese government has been in control of the region. Chinese citizens were moved in to populate the area, and many Tibetans feel that their culture is being threatened.

March 2008 saw a flare-up in anti-China protests by Buddhist Monks living in Tibet, and has spread in advance of the China-hosted Olympics.

Whether or not China should relinquish some or all of its control of Tibet is one question, but the real issue is the way China has responded to the Tibetan protesters. Hundreds of peaceful protesters have been arrested, and journalists and diplomats have been barred from the region.

The US and the EU are pressuring China to change its ways, but this only highlights the question the world must be asking itself about choosing China to host the Summer Olympics. Will China clean up its human rights record? Will China stop persecuting members of the Falun Gong groups? Will China put pressure on the Sudanese government to stop the massacres in Darfur? Will China stop its ruthless crackdown of Tibetan dissent?

This is what the Tibet protests are all about. This is what we can all be thinking as we head towards the Summer Olympics that are only 129 days away.


Steven Spielberg Quits the Olympics

March 3, 2008

Since 2001, Chinese officials have been working feverishly to prepare for the upcoming 2008 Summer Olympics. It was a long and arduous process to get Beijing selected as the host of this world event.

Chinese officials were paranoid about the impression they would give off to the millions who will have their eyes trained on the country and its citizens. Training was implemented to accustom Beijing residents to western customs such as standing in line and not spitting in public. A squad of sign-checkers were sent to scour the city in search of businesses displaying poorly worded English.

Limits on driving and the shutting down of factories were timed months in advance to minimize the smog that plagues this coastal city.

One thing, however, China was unable to clean up in time for the games: its human rights record.

China has long been criticized of committing human rights violations, and it was hoping to use the Olympic games to clean up its image. Instead, it is becoming a forum for the world to focus in on the horrible acts of the Chinese government.

One of the most recent things to be focused on is the fact that China is a key ally and supporter of the Sudanese government. Despite this fact, it has done little if anything to pressure the Sudanese to end the years of bloodshed that have destroyed the region of Darfur.

Protests were conducted in cities across the world, and people were calling for divestment from the Olympics. In a sign of solidarity with this movement, Steven Spielberg resigned from his post as director of the Opening Ceremonies.

As we get closer to the Olympics, we must think what we can do to use this opportunity to put pressure on the Chinese government. Let’s make this an event of global change, not global shame.


An Urban World

December 18, 2007

For the first time in the history of the world, 2008 will see more people living in cities than not.

This trend shows no sign of stopping or slowing down, and there are many implications to this shift that remain to play themselves out. What impact will this have on economics, social interactions, food supplies, disease control, and energy resources? Will the changes be for the better or the worse?

The authors of Freakonomics posed the following question on their blog, and asked a number of experts to give their opinion:

This year marked the first time in human history that more people lived in cities than in rural areas. What problems and opportunities does this present? What effects has it had on our local and global culture? Economy? Health?

What do you think?


Pooh, Paddington and Muhammad? Confused too?

December 4, 2007

Teddy Bear

Apparently there are many popular names for teddy bears. Last week, a British national who was teaching in Sudan was arrested because a student in her class named her teddy bear Muhammad. The explanation was that such a mundane use of the prophet’s name was sacrilege.

As could have been predicted, there was a global outcry at this obvious breach of Western values. How can you arrest someone for a religious offense (an offense of someone else nonetheless!)

After spending 8 days in a Sudanese prison, Gillian Gibbons was pardoned by Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir after he was visited by two Muslim British members of parliament.

While this may seem like an extreme situation, can it be understood? In a theocracy, do governments have a right to punish non-believers? Should Gibbons have been more sensitive?

Although Israel is not a theocracy, could we envision a Jewish state with laws that could be compared to those that sent a teach to jail for the naming of a toy?


Rethinking the Death Penalty

November 20, 2007

New research has rehashed the moral debate on the Death Penalty. Does the government have the right to kill citizens, and if so, what good is it anyways?

As reported by the NY Times, a number of recent studies have show that the death penalty has a deterrent effect on future murders. It was determined that anywhere between 3-18 murders are prevented by each execution.

There has been some debate as to the validity of these studies as the number of executions is so low, and the amount of other factors that play into the murder rate is so high.

This, combined with a number of instances of overturned death sentences due to innovations in DNA analysis, has brought to light the moral question that is coupled with the deterrent factor.

Who has the right to take away life?

What is the Jewish take on the death penalty? Here’s what the OU had to say.

Does the fact that the Torah repeatedly ascribes death as the penalty for violations of Jewish law change our opinion in this matter?

Is it significant that historically, Jewish courts have been very cautious to actually impose that death penalty?

What do you think?