At the vigil against the death penalty many people fast for the four days we are there. Many people don't. It is optional as is the severity of the fast. If you don't fast, don't eat around those who are fasting. If you are castigate it is up to you what that looks like. Some do a water only fast. Others are a liquid only. Some do the daylight fast, etc.
I had never fasted before last year's vigil. And I really wasn't sure I could do it. But, with my sister by my side, I decided to try it and see how long I would make it. I started on the all water but got too shaky and drank some juice for the sugar and that worked. This year I did the same thing. A glass of juice ob the morning and water the rest of the day.
On the Abolition Action Committee website (www.abolition.org) there is a page that talks about the fasting aspect. And I read it before I went. I found it very helpful. Here are two of the points I got from it:
Why? There are many reasons people have for fasting: spiritual, religious, health, and political. A common reason while taking part in a political action is that by forgoing food and not stopping to eat every few hours, we adjust our schedules to focus all our energy and time on our issue of concern. And it is a tough adjustment. I lost track of time since the day wasn't broken into before and after lunch and dinner. I didn't know how to greet people (and was often wrong) in saying good morning or have a good afternoon/evening.
Difficulty: dwelling on the fact that you aren't eating or are hungry. To deny yourself food or the thoughts about it is somehow to make it stronger so that is all you think about. So it is suggested to think about for a bit and then to consciously refocus your thoughts on why you are there and doing what you're doing. In my day to day when I get hungry I start to get cranky if I know that food is not on the way. And I would find that to be true at first during the fast, until I turned my thoughts to why I was there. It kept my spirits up knowing that I was in solidarity with ao many others against the death penalty. It also continued for weeks after...when I got hungry I remembered those on death row and sent up a prayer.
It is amazing how wired we are to food. I woke up ready for breakfast and would be a little hummed when I remembered I wasn't eating. I would be holding up a banner and think that as soon as I got relieved by someone I could go grab a snack. Or during our evening teachings I would think that as soon as it was over we could go get dinner. Oh, wait. Not happening yet...
Friday, July 24, 2015
Saturday, July 18, 2015
Starvin' for Justice
I spent the beginning of the month at our nation's capital at the 22nd Annual Fast and Vigil Against the Death Penalty. It was my second time to join this group on front of the Supreme Court with banners, petitions, and speakers with the intention of educating the public.
Some history on the dates:
On June 29, 1972, the Supreme Court decided in Furman v Georgia that the death penalty was applied in an "arbitrary and capricious manner" and put a moratorium on it. All States had to rewrite their death penalty laws.
On July 2, 1976, in Gregg v Georgia, the Supreme Court allowed executions to resume in the US. (Not much had changed though)
So every year (for the past 22) people have been gathering from all over the world and the US. Last year we had a couple from Australia and this year a young man from New Zealand. People come for all sorts of reasons. Each evening we have speakers as well: swath row survivors, murder victim family members, family members of the executed, a jury member from a capital case, lawyers, priests. They tell the stories of why they are here and how they got here. Many of them started on the other side of the issue.
On the sidewalks we pass out a pamphlet entitled "Why End the Death Penalty?" Some take it easily, others decline to take it Brut say they agree, some chant "Texas Texas doing it right" as they walk by. Here are some of the facts inside:
Since 1972, 154 wrongly convicted persons have been released. They were all deemed to have had FAIR trials. In Herrera v Collins the Supreme Court ruled that it is constitutional to execute the innocent if they had a fair trial!
It cost 2 to 6 times as much to execute than to incarcerate for life. The cost is weighted in the initial trial and sentencing, not in the appeals process.
The outcome is racist. When the victim is white, the perpetrator is 4 to 11 times more likely to receive the death penalty.
States without the death penalty consistantly have lower murder rates (as do countries that have abolished the death penalty) . In fact, studies show the murder rate increases slightly after a highly publicized execution.
Some history on the dates:
On June 29, 1972, the Supreme Court decided in Furman v Georgia that the death penalty was applied in an "arbitrary and capricious manner" and put a moratorium on it. All States had to rewrite their death penalty laws.
On July 2, 1976, in Gregg v Georgia, the Supreme Court allowed executions to resume in the US. (Not much had changed though)
So every year (for the past 22) people have been gathering from all over the world and the US. Last year we had a couple from Australia and this year a young man from New Zealand. People come for all sorts of reasons. Each evening we have speakers as well: swath row survivors, murder victim family members, family members of the executed, a jury member from a capital case, lawyers, priests. They tell the stories of why they are here and how they got here. Many of them started on the other side of the issue.
On the sidewalks we pass out a pamphlet entitled "Why End the Death Penalty?" Some take it easily, others decline to take it Brut say they agree, some chant "Texas Texas doing it right" as they walk by. Here are some of the facts inside:
Since 1972, 154 wrongly convicted persons have been released. They were all deemed to have had FAIR trials. In Herrera v Collins the Supreme Court ruled that it is constitutional to execute the innocent if they had a fair trial!
It cost 2 to 6 times as much to execute than to incarcerate for life. The cost is weighted in the initial trial and sentencing, not in the appeals process.
The outcome is racist. When the victim is white, the perpetrator is 4 to 11 times more likely to receive the death penalty.
States without the death penalty consistantly have lower murder rates (as do countries that have abolished the death penalty) . In fact, studies show the murder rate increases slightly after a highly publicized execution.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
