In nomine Dei nostri Satanas Luciferi excelsi!
Apparently a recent opinion in my favor from the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals regarding a lawsuit I began in prison has generated a bit of chatter on the internets. The lawsuit began after the Illinois Department of Corrections refused to provide me with a vegetarian diet, a diet required to comport with my religious beliefs and practices at the time. I was not requesting anything that was not already provided by the prison - vegetarian diets were available to others whose religious practices required them. Instead of “gaming the system” by simply joining a religious group that was already provided vegetarian diets, as various prisoners that I personally know who wanted vegetarian diets have done, I chose to assert my legal rights and fight back against the illegal policies and practices of the IDOC in regards to religious diets. Therefore I began to study the law related to this issue and filed a federal civil rights lawsuit, handwritten with a three-inch flexible plastic pen from a segregation cell in Pontiac Correctional Center, when I was 23 years old.
Judge Evans, in his concurring opinion, seems to think that RLUIPA serves as a basis for game-playing. While I’m sure this can sometimes be the case, from my experience the real game-playing would come far before a prisoner, untrained in the law, would even attempt to file a lawsuit. As I mentioned, most prisoners that I know who just want a vegetarian diet for whatever reason simply join a religious group that is already provided one by the IDOC. Let’s be logical - which is an easier way to “game the system”: simply telling the prison that you are a member of a religious group that already receives a vegetarian diet at the prison, or learning the intricate ins and outs of federal law in order to not only file but prevail in a lawsuit as a legally untrained prisoner versus teams of attorneys employed by the State? Furthermore, the opinion that asserting my rights was a “waste of time” seems a rather curious conclusion coming from a federal appellate judge whose presumable position is to uphold justice and interpret the law. For those who believe in such a thing as “justice,” how is ensuring that prison officials follow the law and rendering a judgment that accords with justice a “waste of time”?
As to the commentators on the internets, specifically what appears to be the National Enquirer of legal blogs (the site attaches the following disclaimer: “This website is intended purely for entertainment. It is not intended to be a comprehensive review of appellate law.”), all I can say is: sir, please educate yourself about issues before you comment on them. I’m trying to be charitable, and not leap to the presumption that your entire post on my case is deliberately disingenuous. More likely than not its a poor attempt at infantile humor. A reading of Judge Manion’s opinion on the case would go a significant way towards clarifying the misrepresentations you make of my case in your post. I’ll refrain from a more in depth rebuttal, but a final point: as to the asinine description of Aleister Crowley as a “famed devil worshipper,” a simple perusal comprehension of the Wikipedia entry on him would serve as a decent starting point for an actual understanding of the man - though I’m sure he would be delighted to know the appellation you’ve bestowed upon him…
