Torture debate

I have read much on secular blogs regarding torture. Glenn Reynolds over at Instapundit has a roundup of posts debating this issue. I have not read anything from Christian blogs, not because there are none, but simply because I have not read them. I am interested in debating torture from a Christian perspective. I cannot recall any instance of torture in the Bible. The Old Testaments contains many accounts of battle and executions handled by men such as Saul, Samuel, David, and Elijah. Paul tells us in Romans that government is ordained by God. They are a minister of God for good. They do not hold the sword in vain. This is one of the Biblical justifications for capital punishment. God has commanded that anyone who sheds man's blood should loose his life. It is the government's responsibility to enact this--they are God's minister. What is allowable for government is not necessarily allowable for the individual. I think that is important in the torture debate. We are not talking about individual citizens torturing people. We are discussing torture in the context of government fulfilling its responsibility of protecting its citizens. Does the government, and specifically the army, have the Biblical imperative to use torture as a means of effectively protecting its citizen? That leads to the question of whether or not torture is necessary for the army to be effect. I don't know if anyone can answer that. It is vital that we specifically define torture. I was watching the Gonzales confirmation hearings today, and through none of the parts I saw did I hear anyone define torture. I don't consider what has happened at Gitmo to be torture. There is a line between harsh interrogation and superfluous torture. It pains me to say that that line is determined a great part by the situation and combatant involved. I think our government ought to establish guidelines regarding this issue. The government's chief concern must be to protect its citizens, and I believe that, Biblically speaking, they have a great deal of latitude in this function. Much of what the army does will be reprehensible to many. Nobody that I am aware of wants to see any human die. But war is an awful event. I do not buy the argument that acceptance of torture is a slippery slope. I seldom if ever here any pundit use that argument in regard to abortion or obscenity laws. Allowing extreme means of interrogation under specific guidelines doesn't commit us to depravity. It is the duty of every citizen to elect leaders that are conscious of their duties and aware of the corruption of power. If we say that allowing "torture"is a slippery slope, then there are few government policies that are not.

That is far from a coherent and exhaustive argument. I hope to return to it later.