Starving vegan in jail, he is dying so please help

[willpeavy]

he has some vegan food available through the commisary, and he was buying food from there for a while. But then he stopped doing that because he believes that he shouldn't have to

 

If that's what is going on that changes everything. If he chose not to eat the vegan food that was available to him, then I don't feel so bad for him

[willpeavy]

Isn't there some law that prevents people from being tried for the same crime more than once?

 

Yeah the 5th Amendment has the double jeopardy clause

[FormicaLinoleum]

he has some vegan food available through the commisary, and he was buying food from there for a while. But then he stopped doing that because he believes that he shouldn't have to

 

If that's what is going on that changes everything. If he chose not to eat the vegan food that was available to him, then I don't feel so bad for him

I think it's very limited. It was peanuts and maybe one other thing. So it could be helpful to keep him from dying, but still not enough to create a well-rounded vegan diet for him. He might be able to stay alive combining what the jail gives him and what he can buy at the commisary, but I doubt he could actually be healthy on it.

 

fwiw, I think he's right--the jail should provide him with healthful vegan food. I know I hate to think that if I were arrested (not even convicted, mind you) I'd have to give up veganism, and maybe even eat meat, just to stay alive.

[compassionategirl]

blue

... any person who is confronted with a choice of starving themselves to death, or breaking some ethical conviction they have, and choosing to starve instead doesn't deserve 'compassion'.

 

maybe if this was the "stuck on an island with nothing else to eat" scenario, then it would be stupid to choose to starve (putting all the speciest arguments aside). But here, there are significant implications at stake. Society, and in this case the prison system, needs to understand that ethical veganism isnt a "whim", and that denying an ethical vegan food that is edible to him is as much a violation of his basic human rights as is providing a Jewish prisoner only with food containing pork. Of course, I dont expect you to get it since your earlier description of veganism (i.e. "whim", "vacation resort", etc.) precisely reflects the kind of attitude among law enforcement and prison authorities that Eric is takin a stand against.

 

 

......he has access to a place he can purchase vegan, or at least vegetarian food, but he won't use it because he feels the government should be bending over backwards to conform to his demands, which is ridiculous since he is a prisoner. ......

 

 

Why should he have to purchase food that doesnt violate his beliefs when the prison should, pursuant to his basic human rights, provide him with it? Let's take the Jewish example again here. If a Jew was imprisoned, would you also object to his insistence on being provided with food that doesnt contain pork and/ or is kosher? That any such "demand" on the Jews part would be "ridiculous"? The prison shouldnt have to bend over backwards accomodating that Jew, right? And the Jew should just shut up and eat his pork and be thankful that he is in the US prison system? The Jew and the vegan lose their basic human rights because they are in jail (nevermind the fact that they havent even been convicted yet), right?

 

How many of you here would feel just as "wronged" if you landed in prison and were forced to eat meat or buy your vegan food, because the prison denied you your human rights and scoffed at and dismissed your long time commitment to vegan ethics? Well, maybe because of people like Eric that came before you, you may not have to deal with such an INDIGNITY, if that day ever comes. Ever think about that? So ya, Eric deserves respect, and more - even gratitude.

 

"The prison bending over backwords" - Providing a balanced vegan meal is not difficult nor expensive, so how do you figure they'd be "bending over backwards"? Or are you under the mistaken impression that Eric is asking for a 9 course vegan gourmet meal prepared for him daily?

 

What is he trying to do, become some type of martyr for veganism? That's freakin ridiculous. There is nothing admirable or respectable about that.

 

No, he is asserting his basic human rights (and according to his lawyer, his constitutional rights). That is hardly ridiculous. And like I said above, maybe because of him and people like him, future vegan and environmental activists that end up in jail may not have to endure the indignity that is being forced upon Eric.

 

Thank goodness for people like Eric, who are willing to stand up against injustice. It is a shame that there arent more people like him in the world. Yet your reaction to a human being that is sacrificing himself for justice, human rights, and the greater good is one of callous indifference and smug criticism?

 

And, by the way, the prison's and the sherrif's intentional and malicious withholding of adequate food from Eric (to which you very tellingly dont object) reflects the kind of conduct that would be expected from a bunch of sociopathic sadists.

Edited April 27, 2006 by compassionategirl

[compassionategirl]

he has some vegan food available through the commisary, and he was buying food from there for a while. But then he stopped doing that because he believes that he shouldn't have to

 

If that's what is going on that changes everything. If he chose not to eat the vegan food that was available to him, then I don't feel so bad for him

 

 

Will, I am shocked that you could say that, because of reasons that I explained in my response to Sinister above. There is a bigger picture here, one of basic human rights, and that is what this man is fighting for.

[wannalift]

just because you CAN buy somethiing doesn't mean that you can afford to. it becomes a question of economic hierarchy. what if someone in jail was allergic to a large array of food (i know someone who can't eat anyting poultry). should they just have to suck it up or rather buy their way out of their situation? perhaps it would be different if he was demanding boca burgers and tofurkey. the only people who get screwed by him having free access to rice & bean is the corporation the prison hired to prepare the grade F food for the prisoners.

[Kathryn]

maybe if this was the "stuck on an island with nothing else to eat" scenario, then it would be stupid to choose to starve (putting all the speciest arguments aside). But here, there are significant implications at stake. Society, and in this case the prison system, needs to understand that ethical veganism isnt a "whim", and that denying an ethical vegan food that is edible to him is as much a violation of his basic human rights as is providing a Jewish prisoner only with food containing pork.

 

I agree completely.

 

Ones beliefs in not taking a life can be as strong as those of an organized religion. I thought that one can opt out of military service as a conscientious objector for religious reasons or if it is shown that one's beliefs proclude killing. Why wouldn't it be the same for prisons? If they are obligated to provide Jewish prisoners with foods that comply with their religious beliefs, then why not to those who have a deep belief in not killing?

[willpeavy]

Will, I am shocked that you could say that, because of reasons that I explained in my response to Sinister above. There is a bigger picture here, one of basic human rights, and that is what this man is fighting for.

 

He probably sees it as fighting for human rights, and you and a few others see it that way. But I think 99% of the people in the world are just going to see it as some guy being difficult to deal with. If I were in his situation I would have just bought the vegan food they had available, been grateful for that, and saved my energy for bigger battles

[veggymeggy]

Will, I am shocked that you could say that, because of reasons that I explained in my response to Sinister above. There is a bigger picture here, one of basic human rights, and that is what this man is fighting for.

 

He probably sees it as fighting for human rights, and you and a few others see it that way. But I think 99% of the people in the world are just going to see it as some guy being difficult to deal with. If I were in his situation I would have just bought the vegan food they had available, been grateful for that, and saved my energy for bigger battles

 

Agreed. And a dead vegan isn't very useful for fighting anything.

[FormicaLinoleum]

He probably sees it as fighting for human rights, and you and a few others see it that way. But I think 99% of the people in the world are just going to see it as some guy being difficult to deal with. If I were in his situation I would have just bought the vegan food they had available, been grateful for that, and saved my energy for bigger battles

But we're talking about a bag of peanuts here. It might keep him alive, but he can hardly go on living on bread and peanuts for an extended period of time. If he is going to have legumes, grains, and veggies, it's going to have to come from the jail. He can't get any of those things from the commisary.

[jonathan]

 

Agreed. And a dead vegan isn't very useful for fighting anything.

 

So lets use a different example, but use the same moral framework:

 

You think it is OK to eat non-vegan food if your life is being threatened even though is it not hard for someone to give you food?

 

Basically what you have is oppression. The guy has not been convicted (not that that would make any difference to his right to food) and he is being denied sustinance occording to his beliefs. I don't know about you but I don't see non-vegan food as food, only bits of other animals, and stuff that comes from them. Are you suggesting that we should support the people who oppress this guy because "a dead vegan isn't very useful"?

 

Let's use a different example. Say you are in captivity, and the captor refuses you food, even though they have it. Your only choice is to kill another prisoner, and eat them. Is that OK? Because morally it is identical. You eat animal products, you murder. You eat a human, you murder. I fail to see the difference.....unless you feel that the life of a human is somewhat more important than that of a cow/sheep/pig.....

 

Jonathan

Edited April 28, 2006 by jonathan

[Tarz]

You think it is OK to eat vegan food if your life is being threatened even though is it not hard for someone to give you food?

 

I think you meant to say 'OK not to eat vegan food'?

[jonathan]

You think it is OK to eat vegan food if your life is being threatened even though is it not hard for someone to give you food?

 

I think you meant to say 'OK not to eat vegan food'?

 

That'll be the one! 24 hours at work with 5hours sleep - I cannot be held responsible for typos!!

[_raVen_]

A decent attorney would counsel him to eat what vegan food is available and continue his protest -- he doesn't need to starve (to death) to make his point or to continue a suit. A doctor to monitor his (inevitable) declining health on the minimal foods (vegan) will also further his message. His grandstanding on this will only antagonize onlookers; he has to gain sympathy not antipathy.

 

He should be allowed vegan foods. John Lee Malvo complained the prison he was held did not make the meat according to his Muslim faith; so he was given a vegetable loaf (which, consequently, he complained made him ill). The same change should be afforded to a vegan for whom consuming flesh is unethical.

[finbarrio]

I agree with Raven, I think. I agree that he should continue his protest, eat what he can, and find a decent attorney. My only reservation is due to the fact that I don't specifically know what the law says. I would think that in a case where the prisoner's health is in danger because of his personal (dietary) beliefs, a decent attorney could get a hearing quickly and get a judge to interpret the law in this case. If being vegan is not held in the same legal regard as religious or allergy-related dietary restrictions, then the law needs to change. And it may take some great sacrifice to do so - say, like someone having to endure a hunger strike while in prison.

[veggymeggy]

 

Let's use a different example. Say you are in captivity, and the captor refuses you food, even though they have it. Your only choice is to kill another prisoner, and eat them. Is that OK? Because morally it is identical. You eat animal products, you murder. You eat a human, you murder. I fail to see the difference.....unless you feel that the life of a human is somewhat more important than that of a cow/sheep/pig.....

 

Jonathan

I absolutely think the life of a human is more important than that of a cow/sheep/pig.

That doesn't mean I think it's ok to eat them or abuse them, but, hierarchically speaking, yeah, humans are "more important". And before you jump all over me, you should know that less than a year and a half ago I damn near lost my own life by returning to a burning house to save that of a dog. I just did it after I pulled its owners out.

Anyway, that's of little relevance. If I were starving, I really don't know what I'd be capable of. Actually, to reference my previous statement, I never knew I was capable of running into a burning house until one was presented in front of me. So who knows, maybe I'd be capable of murder; I doubt I'll ever have to find out.

I find it hard to imagine that ALL the prison food is tainted with animals. Are prison meals solely a slab of meat? I imagine they much more likely consist of several ounces of meat, a vegetable portion, bread, etc. I really just don't see how he can't find enough food to survive.

[crashnburn]

We sit her talking and debating. Do we know what is really happening there? Is a local vegan group / member out there doing anything?

 

All debates here become pointless.. atleast from the perspective of his immediate health.

[compassionategirl]

I agree with Raven, I think. I agree that he should continue his protest, eat what he can, and find a decent attorney. My only reservation is due to the fact that I don't specifically know what the law says. I would think that in a case where the prisoner's health is in danger because of his personal (dietary) beliefs, a decent attorney could get a hearing quickly and get a judge to interpret the law in this case. If being vegan is not held in the same legal regard as religious or allergy-related dietary restrictions, then the law needs to change. And it may take some great sacrifice to do so - say, like someone having to endure a hunger strike while in prison.

 

1. If he buys the vegan food he wouldnt be protesting. It is his hunger strike (which is basically what this is now) that is his protest, and is a much more powerful one that just sitting in your jail cell complaining with a full stomach that they arent giving you vegan food.

 

2. He did get a hearing, and as for as I know, the judge refused to accept the notion that his veganism should be respected by the prison authorities; refused to accept the argument that the prion's failure to provide him with adequate food was a vioaltion of bis constitutional or human right. It isnt a matter of simply getting a good attorney that will get a judge to interpret the law.... Here, both Eric and the attorney are up against people that have a vested interest in the status quo. I dont think the judge looks too kindly on activists for earth or aniimal lib. Judges are supposed to interpret and apply the law fairly, yes, but they are human in the end and are not above prejudice, racism, etc as we have seen countless times.

 

 

3. re the law should change. Yes I agree, and so does Eric, and that is what Eric's protest/hunger strike is all about. he is sacrificing himself to change the system. An endeavour that is certainly not insignificant and not undeserving of our "energy", as was mentioned by somebody else. YOu said that it may take a great sacrifice like somebody enduring a hunger strike, and that is exactly what Eric is doing. Trying to change the law and the system by refusing to "buy" his vegan food - in this case, this is tantamount to going on a hunger strike.

 

So it sounds Finn, like the person you agree with is Eric.

Editted to add: Uh, okay, guess not then.

Edited April 28, 2006 by compassionategirl

[compassionategirl]

I absolutely think the life of a human is more important than that of a cow/sheep/pig.

 

 

So let me get this straight, you think that just by virtue of being a Homo Sapien, you are more important/superior to a non-human animal? That your species is the sole factor that makes you automatically more important than a non human animal?

 

**hmm maybe I should break this post off as this is a whole other debate***

Edited April 28, 2006 by compassionategirl

[compassionategirl]

 

Agreed. And a dead vegan isn't very useful for fighting anything.

 

I don't know about you but I don't see non-vegan food as food' date=' only bits of other animals, and stuff that comes from them.[/color'] Are you suggesting that we should support the people who oppress this guy because "a dead vegan isn't very useful"?

 

 

Jonathan

 

Exactly. if you wouldnt kill and eat your cats, and I assume you wouldnt, then why are other animals food in instances like Eric's situation? because you grew up in a society that said so? What if you got busted in China, imprisoned, and the Chinese prison authorities killed and cooked your cats and forced you to eat them or starve? We all know that in some Asian countries, eating cats and dogs is about as "normal" as is eating pigs and chickens. Would you feel in that case that your fundamental human right was being violated?

 

And what makes it even more ridiculous is that the prison HAS vegan food, as you note yourself VM!!!!!! It isnt like every piece of food in the prison is slab of meat, as you note. They could very easily give him vegan food, because they have it. Their withholding of it is malicious and sadistic. telling us that a dead vegan isnt useful is only stating the obvious and misses the point. This isnt a small, insignificant battle that Eric has chosen to wage. It involves a vegan's constitutional and human right to be fed in a manner that doesnt violate who they are. "A dead vegan may not be useful after he is dead," but the self-sacrifice/death of one may get the ball rolling in effecting change to a fundamentally unjust system. I for one couldnt be that selfless. I would buy the vegan food (assuming I had the luxury of being able to afford doing so on a daily basis!) and suck it up, rather than going on what is tantamount to a hunger strike in protest of the indignity and injustice that Eric is being forced to endure. Hence the respect and the compassion for Eric.

[finbarrio]

** Warning...Change Of Heart **

After reading about this guy and his little gang, I don't care whether he gets his vegan meal or not.

[compassionategirl]

His grandstanding on this will only antagonize onlookers; he has to gain sympathy not antipathy.

 

huh? Grandstanding? Grandstanding: "To behave ostentatiously in an attempt to impress onlookers."

 

ya, that is what Eric is looking to do - impress onlookers. Next thing I know I am going to be reading that he is being "pretentious".

 

Actually, no. I dont think the goal is to gain sympathy from the prison (the sympathy part, and more than that, support, was expected from his fellow ethical vegans). The goal is to compel the prison system to recognize and acknowledge that ethical veganism isnt flippant, whimsical, and the like, and that denying an ethical vegan vegan food is as much of a constitutional and human rights violation as is giving a devout Hindu prisoner only food containing beef, or giving you ony food that contains the cooked remains of your pets and other "companion" animals. He has chosen to state that message as powerfully and as seriously as possible under the circumstances, which is appropriate since we are talking about a serious human rights violation. It is no joke, and no small matter, and that is what his "extreme" actions are trying to convey. It is truly disheartening that this is being viewed as "grandstanding" among some vegans.

[_raVen_]

LOL!

[veggymeggy]

Too lazy to do quotes, but...

CG, about the prison meals, I'm sure he's served a tray containing a meat, a veg, etc..unless I'm completely misunderstanding, they're not withholding everything EXCEPT for meat from him...so if he's choosing not to eat what IS acceptable among the food that's offered, that's his deal. Perhaps I'm missing something but it certainly seems he should be able to pick through what he's offered to get enough edible food to at least live. I recall being hospitalized once and having requested a vegetarian meal, they mistakenly brought me pot roast or something like that. But on that tray there was still a vegetable side dish, a roll, and some fruit cocktail or something like that....more than enough to eat while sidestepping the meat. (They actually brought me a new dinner, but my point is, if they'd refused, I wouldn't have gone hungry).

Oh, and again with the whole "if I were starving"....I don't see cow as any more appetizing than cat, but if I were facing death, sustenance is sustenance. As I said before, who knows what I'd do, but death would not be my first choice.

[compassionategirl]

VM: I couldnt break that post to start a new thread - have no clue how to do it. SO if you could just please respond in this thread, that will be fine. I dont care if its off topic or if constitutes a 'hijacking.'

 

This is the post I am talking about:

____________________________________________________________

 

I absolutely think the life of a human is more important than that of a cow/sheep/pig.

 

 

So let me get this straight, you think that just by virtue of being a Homo Sapien, you are more important/superior to a non-human animal? That your species makes you automatically more important than a non human animal?

 

**hmm maybe I should break this post off as this is a whole other debate***

Edited April 28, 2006 by compassionategirl