In a recent book group discussion of "Little Bee" (by Chris Cleave) we got stranded at the terms "torture" and "rape" when somebody asked for a definition. Do we really need a definintion of torture which then is subject to tweaking by a phalanx of opinionated lawyers, leading to another discussion altogether and away from the basic question: What is torture? Applying Common Sense I would say, if you hurt me in any way to get something from me that I am unwilling to give, then you tortured me. Basta! as the Italians say. That's it. How much it hurts, what body part you apply it to, how long it lasts, if organs fail or not - is really irrelevant. IT IS TORTURE.
The same goes for rape. If you take what somebody is unwilling to give then it is RAPE. She was asking for it, she dressed provocatively, and other common arguments are -again- irrelevant. It is the ACT we are naming and, hopefully, punishing.
Imagine -- a world functioning based on common sense originating in our pure conscience! How much time, how many words, how many lies, how much suffering we would save ourselves and others. Why is our innate conscience, which knows the difference between whole and unwhole, hidden so deeply? Is it buried by centuries of deception, demagoguery, ignorance and failure to listen and act upon what we are told by the inner voice? Is it ignored by cowardice or inbred callousness? Maybe some genetic re-engineering is in order. We KNOW, and we could act far better than we are. Namaste!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment