In accordance with the Christian understanding of human dignity, torture can be considered as a legitimate ethical alternative only if it does not serve as punishment or intend to elicit a juridical confession but rather intends to rescue actually threatened human life. However, the indirect relation between torture and potential rescue creates an unavoidable uncertainty of knowing and deciding. This is the most important difference between torture on the one hand and both self-defence (Notwehr) and self-defence by proxy (NothiIfe) on the other. And precisely this difference excludes any ethical justification of torture. Who nevertheless - for ethical reasons - in a situation of serious conflict decides to command or to perform torture must at least accept the juridical consequences of his or her decision.
Enthalten in:
Zeitschrift für Evangelische Ethik; 2005/3 Kommentare, Studien, Berichte, Dokumentationen, Diskussionen, Rezensionen, Bibliographie
(2005)
Serie / Reihe: Zeitschrift für Evangelische Ethik
Personen: Härle, Wilfried
Härle, Wilfried:
Kann die Anwendung von Folter in Extremsituationen aus der Sicht christlicher Ethik gerechtfertigt werden? / von Wilfried Härle, 2005. - S.198-212 - (Zeitschrift für Evangelische Ethik)
Zeitschriftenartikel