Is purposeless torture moral?

This answer has already been shown to be insufficient. I'm pretty sure you would not like to be imprisoned for a crime, or fined for violating a traffic ordinance. Are those things immoral?

So, do unto others as you would have them do unto you must be modified to include the possibility of deserved punishment. And has been pointed out, therein lies the route to relativism.

That's fine. I was trying to get a similar admission out of someone else.

Torture need not be applied for the purpose of extracting information. For example, burning at the stake to be a torturous death even if the death itself can be justified as punishment.But in any event, your own version of do unto others seems to include accepting unpleasant things if you deserve them. That's what turns the golden rule into a relativism. As has been pointed out repeatedly, all one needs to add is a justification, and any act can be considered moral. You cannot avoid the fact that your "view" has been addressed and refuted simply because you don't acknowledge such. You know full well, "where"Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Morality by popular vote? Surely you jest.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

So if many people needed to steal food from me, so they could live while my small family dies, that would be moral in your opinion.Nonsense.