At least two actors who openly oppose torture have accepted parts on the [the television show 24].
From Rebecca Dana of the Wall Street Journal‘s story entitled “Reinventing 24” in yesterday’s paper.
The sentence jumped out at me as I read the piece. The sentence suggested a kind of furtiveness to opposition to torture – suggesting those who “openly promote the homosexual agenda“, who “openly embrace socialist medicine”, who “openly promote apostate Catholicism“, “openly promote keyword spamming“, “openly promote intolerance“, “openly promote cigarettes to minors” “openly embrace prejudice“, who “openly oppose a living wage“, “openly oppose any talks with Iran that might resolve the nuclear issue“, who “openly oppose what built this Nation“, and those who “openly embrace the hysterical homophobia mouthed by Christian fundamentalist groups from all over the country“. ((I acknowledge these are not exact quotes – I have changed the tenses and in some sentences deleted phrases in order to conform all of them to the structure I set up; but I have attempted to maintain the original meaning of each.))
In almost every usage I was able to find, adding the adverb “openly” to describe a political act indicates a kind of shame associated with that act. The openness is supposed to shock – “Not only does this candidate seem to accept x view, they openly promote it!”
I don’t blame Ms. Dana for using the phrase – but it was shocking to find it associated with opposing torture. Have we really come that far as a nation that opposing torture is now somewhat embarrassing? I don’t think so. But enough mainstream conservatives have defended torture as to make it an acceptable point of view in the press.
There is shame in that.
Related articles