Some case of torture are minimally, morally acceptable.

The person undergoing the torture is helpless in a way but they wouldn't be in that situation if they didn't make the choice to inflict harm on innocent people. They could easily give up the information that they are holding to free their self from being tortured. Overall the whole situation would be avoided if they just confess. It is the whole concept of what goes around comes around. Whatever hurt people want to pose on others there is likely to be a consequence for them in the near future. I do not agree with the fact that if the act is not physical then the act is not torture. Torture does have its physical side but torture also has its mental side. Just because in society in the media and what not you see torture as some horrid infliction of pain does not mean that that is how all people torture others. We can blame what we see on television which shapes our views of certain things such as torture. If you were to look up the different types of torture you would see that they are all not physical, they do vary because torture is a very broad concept which entails many different forms. If a person was not guilty in some case then why would they be in the situation of torture anyway? Obviously there is a reason for this action being put upon them. Some cases where torture would be minimally, morally justified would be in any case where a life was in jeopardy. Sometimes for some reason people feel the need to harm others for a reason that does not have to do with the innocent victims which is a case where torture is ideal. So if this is a case would you just allow for many innocent people to die without even trying to save them? Another point I'd like to bring up again is that if human beings are entitled to their own beliefs then the point of this argument would be irrelevant. There would be no ending conclusion because the argument would have no answer. Both the pro side and the con side would be able to consent to this statement. Torturers would be entitled to do what they wanted to do to people making the pro side acceptable because of their beliefs. In your Premise two you said that " Torturing a person for the sake of disagreeing with their belief does not make their belief depart" but this statement does not seem to make sense. The whole point of torture does not have to do with disagreeing with each other's beliefs but it's sole purpose is to stop them from hurting other people. In order to stop them the torturer must torture the person if they do not give up the information to eventually get information. Their beliefs do not have to be the same but the torturer will see to it that the lives of others remain intact. It is evident that for some people, especially terrorist, there is no way of changing how they believe but there is a way to keep people safe from danger because of them. This way would be torture. In most instances torture can be seen as abused and unnecessary but in other instances it is necessary to protect people. Torture provides a way to retrieve information from a person for necessary reasons such as saving a life or saving multiple lives. Although the information gained may or may not be accurate it is better to have tried to do something about the situation instead of not and wondering what the alternative would be. Overall there is a ultimate difference between torture and murder. Torture is the practice of forcing someone to say or do something or the intentional infliction of extreme physical suffering on some non-consenting, defenseless, other person for the purpose of breaking their will. Murder is killing someone unlawfully and with premeditation. Torturing does not pass the limit of killing someone, it is just an attempt to get a person to confess the truth using force. The person does not die and murdering the person would defeat the whole purpose of torture because then the torturer will end up with no access to the information about the situation. With no access to the information people could die and that is the exact opposite goal of the torturer. Innocent people are not murdered because of torture they are murdered because there are bad people in this world that cause harm for no reason . I do agree with the fact that torturing someone will never stop the attacks that happen in this world or just the bad acts that happen but I do believe that something must be done. We many not save all the lives of people but at least we are making an attempt to save some. Some is always better than none and as world we should fight to save our people especially if that means torturing the people in charge of the chaos.