Water Boarding is an act of torture and is immoral.

I wish us both luck. Before I examine my opponent's arguments, I would like to offer some definitions for the sake of clarity. I apologise for not doing this in the opening round of debate, and am happy for my opponent to attempt to dispute these definitions if he wishes. As I quote basic definitions from established sources this should not be an issue however. Water boarding: "Waterboarding is a form of torture in which a bound, gagged prisoner is forced to breathe in water. There are several techniques: a prisoner is strapped to a board, or submerged, or held down and forced to breathe through a water-soaked cloth held over his mouth. All waterboarding produces the physical sensation of drowning and a psychological sensation of panic, fear and loss of control. " . http://terrorism.about.com... "Water Boarding: the prisoner is bound to a board with feet raised, and cellophane wrapped round his head. Water is poured onto his face and is said to produce a fear of drowning which leads to a rapid demand for the suffering to end. " . http://news.bbc.co.uk... "Waterboarding is a form of torture that consists of immobilizing a person on their back with the head inclined downward and pouring water over the . .. " en. wikipedia. org/wiki/Water_Boarding "Water boarding as it is currently described involves strapping a person to an inclined board, with his feet raised and his head lowered. The interrogators bind the person's arms and legs so he can't move at all, and they cover his face. In some descriptions, the person is gagged, and some sort of cloth covers his nose and mouth; in others, his face is wrapped in cellophane. The interrogator then repeatedly pours water onto the person's face. Depending on the exact setup, the water may or may not actually get into the person's mouth and nose; but the physical experience of being underneath a wave of water seems to be secondary to the psychological experience. The person's mind believes he is drowning, and his gag reflex kicks in as if he were choking on all that water falling on his face. " . http://people.howstuffworks.com... Torture: "Infliction of severe physical pain as a means of punishment or coercion. " "In a broad sense, torture might be regarded as any instance in which pain is inflicted by one human being on another, either for personal gratification or to demonstrate power. But historically torture has most often been defined more narrowly, as an aspect of legal systems or of state repression. " . http://www.answers.com... # 2torture (transitive verb) 1 : to cause intense suffering to : torment 2 : to punish or coerce by inflicting excruciating pain . http://www.merriam-webster.com... "the 1984 UN "Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or Punishment. This defines torture in the following way: "Torture means any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind. .. " . http://news.bbc.co.uk... Immoral: "a.1. Not moral; inconsistent with rectitude, purity, or good morals; contrary to conscience or the divine law; wicked; unjust; dishonest; vicious; licentious; as, an immoral man; an immoral deed. " . http://www.webster-dictionary.net... "violating moral principles; not conforming to the patterns of conduct usually accepted or established as consistent with principles of personal and social ethics. " . http://dictionary.reference.com... ": not moral ; broadly : conflicting with generally or traditionally held moral principles. " . http://www.merriam-webster.com... My opponent opens his first round with the following: "Like any violent act, the morality (status as promoting rather than serving as an obstacle to one's existence) of waterboarding is dependent on the context. " I think there are two huge problems with this statement. Firstly my opponent seems to be interpreting morality as: "promoting rather than serving as an obstacle to one's existence. " My opponent offers no source for this definition but I would suggest it is profoundly at odds with the established and general interpretation of morality. If what is moral is merely what is in an individuals own self-interest there is no longer any good or bad in the world just selfish self-preservation. This seems to me to be the opposite of morality and I don't understand what my opponent hopes to achieve by debating immorality from an amoral standpoint. Secondly, my opponent seems to be saying in this first sentence that the morality of any violent act is determined solely by the context. Is he suggesting that crimes such as murder or rape are morally acceptable if they promote (rather than serving as an obstacle to) one's existence? My opponent then goes on to concede that water boarding IS indeed immoral unless it is used "for the gathering of intelligence from known members of a guilty party. " The problem here is establishing guilt and the issue of what evidence is required for someone to be a "known" member of a "guilty" party. By his own logic my opponent seems to be suggesting that extremists would be justified in torturing members of the US armed forces for information as they would be "known" to be members of an organisation "guilty" of invading their territory and killing their people. It is my opinion that torture is always immoral and this opinion is shared (on paper at least) by the UN, the Geneva convention and most civilised governments including those of the US and UK. Unless my opponent wishes to persevere with his bizarre interpretation of morality, (in which case he better provide some pretty good evidence to back it up) then he needs to prove one of two things: Either that water boarding is not torture, or that torture is not immoral. If he fails to establish either of these then I have proved my case. Thankyou.