Report: Capital Punishment
American Pro-Life
Encyclopedia
CHAPTER
92. CAPITAL PUNISHMENT
==============================
“If the deliberate extinguishment of human life has any effect at all, it more likely tends to lower our respect for life and brutalize our values.”-- Supreme Court Justice William Brennan, architect of Roe v. Wade , writing against capital punishment in Furman v. Georgia (1972).
The
killing of a human being can never be justified, even under the most extreme
circumstances. Capital punishment is unworkable, racist, cruel, and unusual,
and unreliable as well: At least half of all the people who are executed are
innocent.
Anti-choice
people are inconsistent and hypocritical in many areas, but the most glaring
example of this hypocrisy is that they wholeheartedly support the execution of
real human beings, while defending mere potentialities.
Pro-abortionists
link the issues of abortion and capital punishment over and over again in
debates, literature, and propaganda campaigns. Their goal is to try to make
pro-life activists look “inconsistent.”
And
we all know that inconsistency is the ultimate Neoliberal sin.
In
reality, of course, it is the pro-aborts who are being inconsistent. While
fully supporting the slaughter of more than a million and a half innocent
preborn babies annually, pro-abortionists feign concern for the handful of
guilty murderers who are put to death in this country every year. They whine
that capital punishment is an ineffective deterrent, that it is racist, that it
is “cruel and unusual,” and that it should be banned based upon the mere fact
that there might be a slim possibility that an innocent man might be condemned.
The
classic example of this amazingly hypocritical double standard was given to us
by Supreme Court Associate Justice William Brennan in his written opinion in
the Furman case, as shown above.
Another
prominent pro-abortionist, syndicated social issues columnist Coretta Scott
King, expertly summarized the pro-abortion double standard in her May 24, 1989
column, without the slightest sense of irony; “Capital punishment is racist in
its application ... it should be banned because it makes irrevocable any
possible miscarriage of justice ... the lives of innocent people are threatened
by capital punishment ... it can never produce genuine healing ... allowing the
state to kill its own citizens diminishes our humanity.”
Now,
merely substitute the word “abortion” for the words “capital punishment,” and
you will have a very good summary of the pro-life philosophy.
Strangely,
King and most other vocal capital punishment opponents are very pro-abortion.
This
chapter examines the pro-abortion arguments against capital punishment and
presents a coherent and logical pro-life response.
It
is probably true that capital punishment, as it is currently applied in this
country, is not a deterrent. All we need do is look at the statistics.
Each
year, about 25,000 murders are committed in this country, while an average of a
dozen men die in the electric chair or gas chambers annually. This means that a
murderer has about a one in 2,000 chance of being caught, tried, convicted, and
executed for his crime. Overall, a death row inmate has only a 1.4 percent
chance of being executed during the remainder of his life.
This
is about equal to the chance that an innocent citizen will be murdered during
his or her lifetime.
For
all intents and purposes, this is a negligible risk for murderers, and
naturally does not present a great deterrent effect.
However,
if everyone in society knew for a fact that they would swiftly pay with their
lives if they killed someone else, there would be very little murder in this
country today! In some Middle Eastern countries, where a murderer can expect to
be executed for his crime, the homicide rate is less than ten percent that of
the United States. This difference is partially due to societal and religious
influences, but the presence of a swiftly and certainly administered death
penalty cannot help but serve as a profound deterrent.
On
the other side of the coin, nobody can prove that capital punishment does not deter
crime, because nobody can prove a negative. We can only analyze existing data
and current trends.
In
reality, mass murderers and serial killers like Ted Bundy are not executed as
payment for their crimes, because their deaths could not begin to repay the
horror and suffering they have caused.
These
murderers are executed because of the violence they have done to the virtue of
justice. Society must eliminate its worst elements, or by tolerating them it
will itself fall into disrepair.
This
kind of ‘indirect deterrent’ is aimed not at individuals, but at the public
‘mind’ as an entity. The message is simple: Value human life and treat it as
the highest good. Those who do not observe this paramount rule will have
society show its disapproval by meting out the strictest punishment possible
under the laws applicable at the time.
The
death penalty is certainly not “unusual,” since virtually every nation since
Christ has used it to one extent or another. A more proper term would be
“rare,” since less than 15 people are put to death in our country every year.
To
put this into perspective, a person’s chances of being struck and killed by
lightning are more than four times greater than being put to death by the
State.[1]
Even
if we were to accept that the death penalty is “unusual,” so what? The mere
labeling of something as “unusual” is meaningless, because such a description
is purely neutral. In fact, some Neoliberals use the quality of being different
as a positive good -- one example being the homosexual’s “celebrate diversity”
slogan.
There
is no doubt that the death penalty has been extremely “cruel” in the past. Many
countries drowned or burned or tortured those people who were sentenced to
death.
As
far as twentieth century methods are concerned, anyone who has seen a videotape
of an electric-chair execution will be convinced on the spot that this
particular form of death is cruel in the extreme.
However,
death does not have to be cruel, as the pro-euthanasia people like to say. For
example, the most painless death imaginable would be execution by lethal
injection. In fact, the Hemlock Society and anti- euthanasia groups have estimated
that doctors have surreptitiously put hundreds or even thousands of people to
‘sleep’ in this manner. And these are innocent people. Why not use this
identical painless method of execution for the guilty?
Of
course, anticipation can be agony, especially when your own life hangs in the
balance. We may logically argue that a greater cruelty than death itself is the
agony involved in waiting for months or years on death row in anticipation of
execution. Most people would probably agree that months of anticipation of
death is far worse than the process of death itself, particularly if this
process is rendered completely painless.
We
have not mentioned the hideous tortures that many murderers have inflicted upon
their helpless victims. If these murderers are so free to torture and kill
their victims, why should they be spared death by far more humane means?
The
opponents of capital punishment also seem to forget the extreme danger to their
fellow inmates that convicted murderers pose. What does a man with nothing to
lose care about another person’s life? All the authorities can do to them is
give them yet another life (or death) sentence. The rate of murder in prisons
in one hundred times that of the population as a whole. It would therefore be
logical to remove violent criminals on death row permanently, otherwise they
might inflict their own version of cruel and painful capital punishment on
those inmates around them, often for the most trivial of reasons.
But
increased risk to the surrounding population has never been a great concern of
the average Neoliberal.
After
Norman Mailer (founder of People for the American Way) and other New York City
intellectuals lobbied to get psychopathic convicted murderer Jack Abbott released
from prison, he promptly killed a waiter, leaving a young widow and four little
children. Mailer, upon being questioned on his position after this brutal
murder, callously replied that “Art is worth a little risk.”[2]
One
must speculate what his response would have been if Abbott had slaughtered some
of Mailer’s own family members or a few of his fellow ‘intellectuals.’
As
always, Neoliberals (and, in particular, abortionists and their toadies) are
mired in a self-created sticky swamp of inconsistency.
The
same people who push so hard for abortion and euthanasia under the rationale
that “people ought to be able to control their own bodies” vigorously oppose
even the execution of those few inmates who want to be put to death.
There
have been dozens of instances of such interference by anti-death penalty
groups, who curiously are uniformly pro-abortion.
Oregon
killer James Isom steadfastly said that he preferred death to life in prison
until September 1992, but anti-death penalty groups did not want him to have
control over his own body. Terry Wright, spokesman for the Oregon Coalition to
Abolish the Death Penalty, alleged that “We certainly are concerned about Mr.
Isom’s wishes. We just don’t feel as a coalition that we can sit by and let
this execution occur.”[3]
The
same situation occurred almost simultaneously in Oregon’s neighboring state
Washington, where convicted child molester and killer Westley Alan Dodd urged
his attorneys to use whatever means were available to hasten his own execution.
Teresa
Mathis of the Washington Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty, whose
organization fought long and hard against Dodd’s execution, said flatly that
“It doesn’t matter whether this person wants to die or not. We don’t think it’s
the right thing to do.”[4] Invoking the tired idea that any ‘crime’ committed
by society makes everyone in that society guilty of the ‘crime,’ she simpered
that “I’m not willing to be a killer.”[4] It makes one curious as to whether or
not Mathis thinks that she is a killer of unborn babies (an abortionist), since
Washington State pays for thousands of free abortions each year.
One
of the most popular arguments used against the death penalty is that it is a ‘racist
institution’ -- meaning that a disproportionately high number of Black people
eventually are executed for their crimes.
The
worst disparities in executions among the races occurred during the decade of
the 1940s. During the ten-year period 1940 to 1949, there were 1,284
executions, and nearly two-thirds of those executed (61%, or 781) were Black
men, as shown in Figure 92-1.
|
|
Prisoners Executed for Murder |
Prisoners Executed for Rape |
Total Executions [1] |
||||||
|
Year(s) |
White |
Black |
Total |
White |
Black |
Total |
White |
Black |
Total |
|
1930-1939 |
803 |
687 |
1,514 |
10 |
115 |
125 |
827 |
816 |
1,667 |
|
1940-1949 |
458 |
595 |
1,064 |
19 |
179 |
200 |
490 |
781 |
1,284 |
|
1950-1959 |
316 |
280 |
601 |
13 |
89 |
102 |
336 |
376 |
717 |
|
1960-1964 |
79 |
66 |
145 |
6 |
22 |
28 |
90 |
91 |
181 |
|
1965-1967 |
8 |
2 |
10 |
-- |
-- |
-- |
8 |
2 |
10 |
|
1968-1976 |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
|
1977-1980 |
3 |
-- |
3 |
-- |
-- |
-- |
3 |
-- |
3 |
|
1981 |
1 |
-- |
1 |
-- |
-- |
-- |
1 |
-- |
1 |
|
1982 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
-- |
-- |
-- |
1 |
1 |
2 |
|
1983 |
4 |
1 |
5 |
-- |
-- |
-- |
4 |
1 |
5 |
|
1984 |
13 |
8 |
21 |
-- |
-- |
-- |
13 |
8 |
21 |
|
1985 |
11 |
7 |
18 |
-- |
-- |
-- |
11 |
7 |
18 |
|
1986 |
11 |
7 |
18 |
-- |
-- |
-- |
11 |
7 |
18 |
|
1987 |
13 |
12 |
25 |
-- |
-- |
-- |
13 |
12 |
25 |
|
1988 |
7 |
4 |
11 |
-- |
-- |
-- |
7 |
4 |
11 |
|
1989 |
11 |
5 |
16 |
-- |
-- |
-- |
11 |
5 |
16 |
|
TOTALS |
1,715 |
1,656 |
3,411 |
48 |
405 |
455 |
1,802 |
2,092 |
3,936 |
Note. [1] Total executions includes those performed for offenses other than murder and rape. These are 25 for armed robbery, 20 for kidnapping, 11 for burglary, 8 for espionage, and 6 for aggravated assault. The above figures do not include 160 executions carried out by the Army and Air Force: 106 for murder, 53 for rape, and 1 for desertion. The total executions by category include races other than black or white.
Reference. United States Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Reference Data Book and Guide to Sources, Statistical Abstract of the United States . Washington, DC: United States Government Printing Office. 1990 (110th Edition), 991 pages. Table 332, “Prisoners Executed Under Civil Authority: 1930 to 1988.”
In
1972, the United States Supreme Court’s Furman v. Georgia decision held that
the death penalty had been applied “arbitrarily and capriciously,” and banned
it completely. In response, many states rewrote their death penalty statutes
and in 1976, the Supreme Court cleared the way for executions to take place under
much stricter guidelines.
Rather
than examine and analyze the statistics, opponents of the death penalty
continue to insist that it is blatantly racist. In fact, some of those who
oppose the death penalty see no problem with lying about or manipulating the
facts. For example, Congressman John Conyers stated in the July 1, 1985 New
York Times that “The chances of being executed are three to ten times greater
for killing a white person than a black person.”
Many
people who are opposed to the death penalty paint a lurid picture of an
epidemic of Whites killing Blacks. This ploy is part of the ‘victim’ strategy,
which is a blatant play for sympathy. In other words, if the facts don’t
support their position (and they don’t), anti-death penalty activists will try
to gain sympathy for their position by lying about the facts.
To
begin with, there is no impending ‘race war’ taking place in the United States.
The vast majority of murder victims are killed by someone of their own race.
For example, in 1983, 94 percent of Black murder victims were killed by Blacks
and 88 percent of White murder victims were killed by Whites.[5]
Although
Neoliberal death penalty opponents would like to ignore the facts and figures
that do not suit their preconceptions, in 1983, 245 Blacks were killed by
Whites, and 592 Whites were killed by Blacks.[5] Since Black people make up
only 13 percent of the population and Whites 75 percent, this means that Blacks
are (592/0.13)/(245/0.75) = 14 times more likely to kill Whites than
vice-versa.[6]
So
the media’s artificially-manufactured specter of hordes of Whites beating up
Black people with ax handles is a myth.
As
shown in Figure 92-1, of the 120 people who were executed during the time
period 1976 to 1989, 75 were White and 45 were Black. This means that 38
percent of all prisoners who were executed during this time period were Black
while Blacks make up only 12 percent of the population, suggesting that
inequality still exists.
However,
this type of analysis is simplistic in the extreme. We must examine the
statistics more closely in order to make a reasoned judgement.
During
the period 1976 to 1989, 35 percent of those arrested for murder and
intentional homicide were White, and 50 percent were Black (15 percent were
from other races).
While
Whites account for 35 percent of all those arrested for murder, they accounted
for 62 percent of all executions over the time period 1976 to 1989. Blacks
accounted for 50 percent of all murders during this period, but only 38 percent
of all executions. This means that a White man arrested for murder or
intentional homicide was (62/35)/(38/50) = 2.33 times more likely to be
executed than a Black man.
This
means that the system of capital punishment in the United States is racist, all
right -- since 1976, it discriminates against Whites!
Many
pro-abortion activists claim that their heinous activities are justified
because “abortion is not explicitly mentioned in the Bible.” Bogus religious
groups like ‘Catholics’ for a Free Choice and the ‘Religious’ Coalition for
Abortion Rights lean heavily on this false assertion.
Curiously,
as they denounce Biblical standards, these pro-abortionists often even admit
that what they are doing is murder.
Magda
Denes, an expert on abortion, confesses that “I do think abortion is murder --
of a very special and necessary sort. What else would one call the deliberate
stilling of a life? And no physician involved with the procedure ever kids
himself about that ... legalistic distinctions among “homicide,” “justified
homicide,” “self-defense,” and “murder” appear to me a semantic game. What
difference does it make what we call it? Those who do it and those who witness
its doing know that abortion is the stilling of a life.”[7]
And
Norman Mailer, founder of People for the ‘American’ Way, is certainly honest in
his attitude towards the preborn; “Let me say something that’s shocking. I am
perfectly willing to grant that life starts at conception. If a woman doesn’t
want to have a child, then I think it’s her right to say no. But let’s not
pretend that it isn’t a form of killing.”[8]
Strangely,
these same people are also mostly opposed to capital punishment of guilty
murderers, but seem to ignore the fact that the Bible has many passages
supporting the practice.
This
inconsistency is entirely typical of pro-abortionists: They lean on the Bible
only when it allegedly supports their position, but unhesitatingly reject it
when it condemns their activities or does not agree with them.
In
the very first book of the Bible, God established the death penalty for murder
in Noah’s days and also established the civil authority to enforce it (Genesis
9:4-6).
In
the same chapter of Genesis, God extended the use of the death penalty to all
generations (Genesis 9:12).
Capital
punishment is reaffirmed many times in the Bible (Exodus 21:12-15; Leviticus
24:17-21, Numbers 35:9-34; and Deuteronomy 21:1-9). Paul recognizes the need
for the death penalty in serious cases in Acts 25:10-12.
Scripture
also tells us that the only way to cleanse the land is capital punishment of
those who do murder (Numbers 35:33-34). Those nations that fail to enforce
capital punishment will be judged harshly (Jeremiah 2:34-27, and Hosiah
1:4;4:1-5).
The
nation that refuses to avenge the taking of innocent human life shall share the
guilt of the murderer (Deuteronomy 21:7-8).
Our
country should pay special attention to these last several passages; instead of
cleansing the land of abortionists and euthanasiasts, our government is paying
them and protecting them with its court systems and police forces.
In
1974 and 1978, the United States Catholic Conference outlined its firm
opposition to capital punishment “... in the belief that a return to the death
penalty can only lead to a further erosion of respect for life in our society.”
The
assertion that capital punishment adds to a “further erosion of respect for
life in our society” echoes the statement made by Roe v. Wade author William
Brennan as he wrote against capital punishment in Furman v. Georgia , when he
said that “If the deliberate extinguishment of human life has any effect at
all, it more likely tends to lower our respect for life and brutalize our
values.”
It
is hard to imagine how the execution of a dozen mass murderers each year can
lead to any further “erosion of respect for life in our society” when
abortionists and judges freely admit that they are involved in
‘state-sanctioned killing’ of certain classes of human beings (the preborn);
when polls show that a significant percentage of Americans approve of legalized
assisted suicide by lethal injection; and when a flood of films, books, and
even video games glorify the most explicit violence imaginable.
In
a society saturated with sex and murder, it is almost ludicrous to suggest that
the killing of a handful of obviously guilty murderers can further erode the
general ‘respect for human life.’
In
any case, whether anti- or pro-abortion, the average member of the public is
aware of the difference between an innocent child and a convicted serial
killer. The act of killing mass murderers is perceived as justice, not murder.
The
United States Catholic Conference has made statements in direct contradiction
to the directives of the Vatican in many areas of ethics and morality.
Regarding the death penalty, the USCC has gone so far as to suggest that
Catholics cannot in good conscience vote for a ballot measure approving capital
punishment.
This
is not the case. Consider the formal address of Pope Pius XII to the First
International Congress of Histopathologists of the Nervous System at Rome on
September 14, 1952; “Even when it is the question of the execution of a man
condemned to death, the State does not dispose of the individual’s right to
live. It is then reserved for the public power to deprive the condemned of the
benefit of life, in expiation of his fault, when already, by his crime, he has
dispossessed himself of the right to life.”
Pope
Pius had merely paraphrased Romans 13:4, which holds that; “For he is the
minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid;
for he beareth not the sword in vain; for he is the minister of God, a revenger
to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.”
Once
again, the Neoliberals are trying to confuse Catholics on the issue of capital
punishment, just as they have attempted to confuse them on the abortion issue.
Some ‘progressives’ even try to misquote St. Thomas Aquinas, alleging that he
opposed the death penalty. Once again, they are telling only half the truth.
St.
Thomas, in his Summa Theologica (2a2ae.64,2) states that suicide and vengeance
killing ( De Homicidio ) by individuals is never permissible; such vengeance is
reserved to the government.
One
of the favorite slogans of the pro-abortion movement is that pro-lifers are
inconsistent (the most deadly Neoliberal sin), because they favor the death
penalty.
Dr.
Paul Cameron’s interesting 1984 study shows that few pro-lifers really do
believe in the death penalty, but that pro-aborts are being consistent in that
they favor death for the born as well as the unborn , and the innocent as well
as the guilty , as shown in Figure 92-2.[9]
|
|
Pro-Life Response |
Pro-Abortion Response |
||
|
Statement |
Agree |
Disagree |
Agree |
Disagree |
|
Capital punishment should never be used |
26% |
74% |
6% |
94% |
|
Capital punishment should be used as an option for a heinous crime |
54% |
46% |
83% |
17% |
|
Would you serve as an executioner? |
8% |
92% |
22% |
78% |
Reference. Paul Cameron, Ph.D. Study described in J.C. Willke. “Capital Punishment.” National Right to Life News , August 8, 1985, page 3.
The
vivid differences between capital punishment for the preborn and capital
punishment for adult murderers are shown in Figure 92-3.
Statistics
on death-row inmates and actual executions in this country over the last sixty
years are shown in Figures 92-1 and 92-4.
|
ABORTION |
CAPITAL PUNISHMENT |
|
Victim |
‘Victim’ |
|
Innocent of any crime |
Convicted of heinous crime(s) |
|
No judge |
Judge in charge of all proceedings |
|
No jury |
12-person jury of peers |
|
No trial |
Exhaustive, expensive trial |
|
No stay of execution |
Many stays of execution; automatic appeals |
|
Never produces genuine healing (see Chapter 45 of Volume II, “Post-Abortion Syndrome”) |
Sometimes produces healing in victim’s families and communities |
|
Racist in its application; directed towards minorities (see Chapter 78 of Volume II, “Racism of Abortion”) |
At one time racist, now more closely approximates society’s racial composition (see Figure 92-4) |
|
Cruel punishment of the innocent (see Chapter 75 of Volume II, “Fetal Pain”) |
Steps taken to insure that the condemned do not suffer pain |
|
Diminishes society’s humanity |
|
|
Precursor to euthanasia |
|
|
Definitely diminishes respect for the sanctity of human life |
|
|
|
1970 |
1975 |
1980 |
1985 |
1990 |
|
Total death row population |
631 |
488 |
714 |
1,591 |
2,327 |
|
Prisoners by Race |
|
|
|
|
|
|
White |
293 (46%) |
218 (45%) |
427 (60%) |
903 (57%) |
1,174 (50%) |
|
Black |
252 (40%) |
198 (41%) |
179 (25%) |
531 (33%) |
922 (40%) |
|
Hispanic |
44 (7%) |
38 (8%) |
61 (9%) |
102 (6%) |
150 (6%) |
|
Am.Indian |
14 (2%) |
11 (2%) |
21 (3%) |
28 (2%) |
38 (2%) |
|
Asian |
6 (1%) |
5 (1%) |
10 (1%) |
11 (1%) |
16 (1%) |
|
Unknown |
22 (4%) |
18 (3%) |
16 (2%) |
16 (1%) |
27 (1%) |
|
Prisoners by Sex |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Men |
611 (97%) |
467 (96%) |
699 (98%) |
1,574 (99%) |
2,297 (99%) |
|
Women |
20 (3%) |
21 (4%) |
15 (2%) |
17 (1%) |
30 (1%) |
|
Prisoners by Age |
|
|
|
|
|
|
20 Years Old |
7 |
9 |
8 |
11 |
13 |
|
20-54 Years Old |
603 |
461 |
694 |
693 |
1,547 |
|
55+ Years Old |
21 |
18 |
12 |
10 |
31 |
|
Prisoners by Education |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less than 8 Years |
44 |
56 |
60 |
68 |
147 |
|
8-12 Years |
503 |
333 |
528 |
440 |
1,082 |
|
12+ Years |
18 |
21 |
35 |
43 |
127 |
|
Unknown |
66 |
78 |
91 |
163 |
235 |
|
Time On Death Row |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less than 1 Year |
135 |
102 |
135 |
185 |
273 |
|
1 to 4 Years |
168 |
118 |
273 |
389 |
739 |
|
4 to 6 Years |
181 |
97 |
202 |
102 |
303 |
|
6+ Years |
147 |
171 |
104 |
38 |
276 |
References. (1) United States Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Reference Data Book and Guide to Sources, Statistical Abstract of the United States . Washington, DC: United States Government Printing Office. 1990 (110th Edition), 991 pages. Table 330, “Prisoners Under Sentence of Death: 1980 to 1988.” (2) Kathryn Kahler, Newhouse News Service. “A Matter of Life and Death: Legal Counsel Questioned.” The Oregonian , May 15, 1990, page A2.
==========================================
[1] National Geographic Society. Nature On the Rampage . 1986, 200 pages. Special Publications Division, National Geographic Society, Washington, D.C. Page 130 of this publication notes that 1,154 persons were killed by lightning during the 15-year period 1970 to 1984. The chances of being killed when struck are about one in three, resulting in an average number of 230 persons being struck by lightning every year, and 77 being killed annually.
[2] George Sim. “Norman Mailer and God.” National Catholic Register , December 7, 1989, page 5.
[3] G.B. Veerman. “Public Interest.” Willamette Week [Portland, Oregon], September 3-September 9, 1992, page 9.
[4] Teresa Mathis of the Washington Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty, speaking of Wesley Alan Dodd, quoted in Marcia Wolf. “Dodd’s Death Watch Begins.” The Columbian [Vancouver, Washington], December 1, 1992, page A3. Mathis was also quoted on Channel 2 News (10:00 PM Edition), Thursday, October 7, 1992.
[5] Lawrence W. Johnson. “The Executioner’s Bias.” National Review , November 15, 1985, page 44.
[6] United States Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Reference Data Book and Guide to Sources, Statistical Abstract of the United States . 1990 (110th Edition). United States Government Printing Office. Table 12, “Total Population, By Sex, Race, and Age: 1988;” Table 15, “Projections of the Hispanic Population By Age and Sex: 1989 to 2010;” and Table 16, “Projections of Total Population, By Race: 1989 to 2025.”
[7] Magda Denes. “Performing Abortions.” Commentary Magazine, October 1976, pages 33 to 37. A truly frightening and profoundly sickening article by a doctor who observes and describes in graphic detail a number of saline abortions and their results. She acknowledges that abortion is killing, but a type of “necessary” killing. Also see the “Letters” sections in the December 1976 and February 1977 issues of Commentary Magazine.
[8] Norman Mailer on the David Frost Show. Quoted in “Norman Mailer Speaks Out on Sex and AIDS.” American Family Association Journal , March 1992, page 3.
[9] Paul Cameron, Ph.D. Study described in J.C. Willke. “Capital Punishment.” National Right to Life News , August 8, 1985, page 3.
==========================================
Joseph Cardinal Bernardin. Consistent Ethic of Life . Sheed & Ward, 115 East Armour Boulevard, Post Office Box 419492, Kansas City, Missouri 64141, telephone: 1-800-333-7373. 1988, 287 pages, $12.95. This book consists of three parts: (1) The texts of 10 addresses by Cardinal Bernardin, the originator of the “seamless garment” theory. This series of addresses considers the topics of genetic engineering, abortion, modern welfare, the terminally ill, and capital punishment; (2) symposium papers by several authors on the “seamless garment,” including renegade Jesuit Richard A. McCormick and Sidney Callahan; and (3) and the Cardinal’s response to the symposium.
Greenhaven Press. The Death Penalty: Opposing Viewpoints . Greenhaven Press Opposing Viewpoints Series, Post Office Box 289009, San Diego, California 92128-9009. 1986, 175 pages. Each section includes several essays by leading authorities on both sides of each issue. The questions asked are: “Three Centuries of Debate on the Death Penalty.;” “Is the Death Penalty Immoral?;” “Does the Death Penalty Deter Murder?;” and “Should the Death Penalty Be Used for Political Crimes?” Authors include Clarence Darrow, Horace Greeley, and Ernest van den Haag. A catalog is available from the above address and can be obtained by calling 1-(800) 231-5163.
=================================================================