article_snippet: (CNN)The case of a Georgia woman, whose execution was postponed for a second time Monday, is once again shining the national spotlight on one of the most fundamental questions we as a nation face:
article_snippet: When do we put we own citizens to death?
article_snippet: As it relates to crimes against individuals ... the death penalty should not be expanded to instances where the victim's life was not taken."  
article_snippet: But what happened to all that "shouldn't expand death penalty to crimes where the victim's life was not taken" language from the Supreme Court?  
article_snippet: As it relates to crimes against individuals, though, the death penalty should not be expanded to instances where the victim's life was not taken.
article_snippet: Apparently, when we are talking about crimes against people, the death penalty should not be expanded to nonhomicide-type crimes.  
article_snippet: After all, treason is one of three crimes mentioned in the U.S. Constitution, so there's a good argument that the federal statute authorizing death for treason is "constitutional" -- because it's actually in the U.S. Constitution.  
article_snippet: Ultimately, it's nearly impossible to articulate a simple rule for determining which crimes our society deems worthy of the death penalty.
article_snippet: Society's view of the death penalty is constantly evolving, and so is the view of appropriate death penalty crimes.
article_snippet: Eddie Slovik -- for refusing to intentionally participate in the killing.  
article_snippet: While the husband-wife execution of convicted spies (and nonkillers) Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were certainly high profile at the time, the modern reality is that every person executed since the reinstatement of the death penalty in 1976 participated in a crime in which a victim died.
highlights_snippet: Society's view of death penalty is constantly evolving .