The original comment of yours that I replied to says that "torture = bad" and that all that separates good and bad people is principle. I have two reasons for challenging this. First, it's just not true. Torture, in some cases, is completely justified. These cases are both hypothetical (you need to find the dirty bomb going to kill millions) and real (beat a car thief to save a child). Second is to question the underlying principle that makes torture usually immoral.
I can ask it no clearer: Given that your counterfactual is an exceedingly rare edge case, why do you feel it is important to counter the valuable moral heuristic of "torture=bad"? What are you gaining by doing that?
