Pros And Cons Of Acting Torture

Torture, when most people think of this word, they think of terrible acts being done to people. What most often disregard is the fact that the people that are being tortured have deserved it. I do not say that lightly. People that are being tortured are people that have done unforgivable things such as; murder, rape, terrorism actions and a list of other items. These people do not deserve to be in prison, because although not a comfortable living environment, prisoners are still provided with shelter, food, healthcare and psychiatric care. Torture, just like the death penalty is something that is very controversial and widely discussed. People often have differing opinions and even more often they bring morality into it. No one considered the …show more content…
Levin says “acting torture as an acceptable measure for preventing future evils.” This tells us that he is attempting to convince his audience about the fact that torture isn’t there to survey as a punishment but as a means of not allowing the same crime to happen again in the future. To compare, Ghiasi says “In the informal poll of the four anonymous mothers, it is apparent that Levin appealed to the fears and emotions of the parents in question” not realizing the fact that the goal of Levin was to emotionally appeal to his audience, really making them think about the points that he was making. Ghiasi did not do this, she focused her piece on breaking down why Levin was wrong to give us hypothetical situations supporting the claims that he made. Levin, by repeating the same idea and again really illustrates his point of torture being necessary very clearly. Ghiasi however, does not do that, her writing is more scattered and not as down to the point as Levin’s. The alignment of Levin’s paper was one that was very easy to follow and understand. He had paragraphs separating his examples and then following were explanations of those examples previously given. Ghiasi, in her papers, uses alignment that is more scattered and organized, this did not really help her paper or how it needed up flowing. In Ghiasi’s paper, she links morality and constitutional right together, several times. For example, Ghiasi saying “rationalizing cases where the rights of the individual should not hold for the supposed greater good of the society” is supporting her point of disagreeing with torture. Her flaw however is the fact that she leaves that sentences on it’s own and doesn’t support what she is