Torture (“waterboarding”) and terrorism, evoke two mutually exclusive provisions of the Constitution.  You cannot comply with one without violating the other. Violation of the Constitution is unavoidable.  I'll explain.

What if 53 terrorists covertly invade our country and plant atomic bombs in 13 of our largest cities, set to detonate in 24 hours? Let’s further suppose that one of the terrorists has been captured and that he knows where the bombs are and how to disarm them.  But he is not talking.  Although he is susceptible to waterboarding, he is aware that our 8^th Amendment prohibiting “cruel and unusual punishment”, will rescue him from our using any substantive measures to make him talk. 

And so we cannot waterboard the captured terrorist.  But we still have a responsibility to “protect each of the states against [both overt and covert] invasion” as required by Article IV of the Constitution.  We’re in a lose/lose situation.  Whether we waterboard, do not waterboard, or do nothing, we will have violated the law.  Violation of the Constitution is unavoidable.   The question is not whether or not to violate the Constitution, but rather, “In what manner shall it be violated?”

This is only one of the many contradictions inherent in our law.  The inconsistencies stem from our addressing issues without regard to a set of unifying principles.  Visit the website GoldenCharacter.org.   It takes an interesting approach to this question and proposes an innovative solution.  Our government should also be working to resolve the general question of principles, along with the specific problem of waterboarding.