Torturing the Constitution

In December 2004 a Human Rights Watch Freedom of Information Act request uncovered an executive order signed by President Bush authorizing torture (of enemy combatants captured in the “war on terrorism"). In December 2006 Bush signed a bill outlawing torture, but he also issued a “signing statement” saying, “The executive branch shall construe the law in a manner consistent with the constitutional authority of the president.”

Numerous Republicans at a Patriot Act renewal meeting have quoted Bush as referring to the Constitution as “just a goddamned piece of paper,” which explains why his manner has consistently meant complete disregard. He may be willing to read authority for himself into the Constitution, but he clearly has no respect for it.

Our government was established by people fearful of governmental tyranny. The Constitution was designed to prevent the accumulation of too much power by any one person. Intense debates resulted in a division of power between the executive, legislative and judicial branches. The Constitution has worked to hold this country together because it places the burden of restraint on all three branches through a system of checks and balances that was intended to thwart tyranny.

We must ponder what happens to the constitutional balance of power when the executive branch decides that the Constitution doesn’t apply to it.

Bush has routinely invoked his theory of inherent powers to search without warrant, imprison without charges and otherwise usurp the safeguards provided in our Constitution’s Bill of Rights. Now he wants to pass retroactive legislation creating torture as standard U.S. policy to avoid problems that may arise from investigations into torture that has already been approved by executive orders.

A torture policy becomes the excuse when the boundaries of acceptable torture are breached—boundaries for what can be done as well as to whom it can be done. I can already hear, “My job was to torture, and I was just doing my job.” And, “I didn’t realize I was only supposed to threaten to attach the electrodes to the man’s genitalia.” If we draw the line at acceptable torture, the line will be routinely crossed in a manner consistent with human nature.

I offer an interesting hypothetical. The government has hired me to torture, and I am instructed to make my captive “tell me about the weapons of mass destruction.” When my subject’s threshold is reached, I will hear what I want to hear, whether those WMD exist or not.

“Be not afraid” were the words Jesus spoke most frequently to his disciples. Why does Bush do everything he can to keep us afraid? It’s rather un-Christian. Since he does what he wants anyway, why does he campaign for our collusion?