For senior, abortion a medium for art, political discourse
Martine Powers
Staff Reporter
Published Thursday, April 17, 2008
Art major Aliza Shvarts ‘08 wants to make a statement.

Beginning next Tuesday, Shvarts will be displaying her senior art project, a documentation of a nine-month process during which she artificially inseminated herself “as often as possible” while periodically taking abortifacient drugs to induce miscarriages. Her exhibition will feature video recordings of these forced miscarriages as well as preserved collections of the blood from the process.

http://www.yaledailynews.com/articles/view/24513

What a horribly deceived individual. How could a woman ever look into the face of any child she might bear later in life, and no weep for these little babies. Yet some persons think this is minimal compared to taking the life of a person who has murdered. Such deception. – Lorica

After the horrific Bali bombings of October 2002, the Howard government authorised the AFP to collect evidence and statements and to subpoena witnesses to assist in the conviction and sentencing to death of the Bali bombers.

There are many cases where execution is not only justified or even mandatory but absolutely and unequivocally REQUIRED to eliminate that particular threat PERMANENTLY. No amount of bleeding heart mentality will stop the blight of humanity from carrying on business as usual.

I would suggest maybe these judges try the lethal injection then come back and pass their opinion.

And I would suggest that the anti-death penalty people have a loved one gang raped and then beheaded and then tell me about the compassion or “guilt” they would have for the culprit if he were executed.

How many people have been wrongly convicted and given the death sentence, I bet the numbers are staggering, But people dont really care about statistics do they?

Excellent point, Hank, perhaps you could provide those statistics, because without them, your point is moot.

Justice John Paul Stevens, joining the result only, called for the Court now to consider whether the death penalty in general is unconstitutional — an issue that was not before the Court in the Baze case. Stevens wrote: “The time for a dispassionate, impartial comparison of the enormous costs that death penalty litigation imposes on society with the benefits that it produces has surely arrived.”

Typical of a liberal jurist: the only constitutional questions they can rule on are whether a verdict and sentence were reached in accord with the constitution, and whether a penalty violates the “cruel and unusual” clause. Considering the societal costs of death-penalty litigation is a policy matter for Congress and the state legislatures, not for would-be policymakers in black robes.