I am writing to refute the notion claimed by The Daily Collegian's editorial that the Genocide Awareness Project was a "distasteful display that did not promote meaningful debate."

The editorial, "Graphic genocide photos ineffective in educating students about abortion," Oct. 27, reported that passersby described the display as "tasteless" and "unnecessary." My question is, how many students were polled regarding this matter? Do you purport you can extrapolate two comments made by a very small, unscientific sample to the entire community's feelings on the Genocide Awareness Project?

I think this is a hasty generalization that should not be masked as good journalism. And to reply to the notion that the Genocide Awareness Project is unnecessary, let me draw an analogy to a horrific event that occurred in 1955. A young black boy named Emmett Till was brutally maimed and murdered solely on the basis of his race. His mother decided to have his funeral with an open casket, revealing the grizzly disfigurement of his body.

While many people were disgusted by the horrific mutilation, the purpose of their discomfort was clear: Sometimes we must be shocked and sickened to become aware of the atrocities occurring in our country.