I've been in Rome (woohoo!), camping out with my 2.5 million besties to attend the first-in-history Mass concelebrated by two popes: Reigning & Emeritus. It happens they were canonizing two other popes: John XXIII & JP the Great. More on that when the jet lag passes (returning West is always much harder on me than going, plus we pulled a few all-nighters while away).
Meanwhile, two items. First: Ugh! Am I going to read this stupid Pikkety book? Not that book is stupid, just that it's everywhere and I don't feel like tackling it. But it's everywhere.
Second: You know how for a while I was incensed about how popular Catholic writers objecting to "enhanced interrogation techniques" always begged the question? They'd start with the true premise, "The Church forbids torture," and then conclude, "Waterboarding is wrong, QED, and you're less than human if you disagree."
Drove me crazy not because I wish to defend torture, but because I'd like to see an ARGUMENT laid out instead of the usual jump-straight-to-name-calling. (Though I did find a decent exchange at last in 2009.) Not sure why this comes up again --apparently Sarah Palin said something while I was away that got everyone exorcised about this topic? Anyway, here's the pro-argument, although as you will see it is not exactly "pro," it's just careful not to make too sweeping a judgment.
And here's a good response (minus the last paragraph which is a bit much).
My point in bringing this up is not to discuss the merits of waterboarding, though. It's simply to congratulate Todd Aglialoro & Michelle Arnold for showing the blogosphere what a dispassionate and well-reasoned discussion looks like. I feel better!