I have mentioned before on this program that the Animal Rights Law Center has represented people incarcerated in state and federal prisons who do not wish to eat or use animal products for spiritual reasons. Apparently, an article on our success was printed in a prison law journal. As a result, this week, my mailbox has been filled with requests from inmates spread across the country who are having trouble getting a vegan diet in their prison.

This is an issue that should be of considerable importance to vegetarians, especially those who see their diet and product choices as part of their attempt to act responsibly, ethically and in pursuit of a broad sense of justice. Yet my dealings with prison authorities on this issue have raised some serious ironies: some poignant, some infuriating.

I have heard many discussions on this show about whether veganism is required if one is concerned about the rights of animals and about environmental issues. Should we criticize our friends when they "lapse?" Does a bit of ice cream really hurt? Or in a world where animal exploitation is the largest industry and where 8 billion animals are killed in this country alone for food every year, does that little "cheat" on the ice cream issue really make a difference to anything?

It is one of these ironies, then, to talk to people in prison, -- many of whom were sentenced for violent crimes, most of whom are very poorly educated, and nearly all of whom have never really subscribed to any spiritual belief except paid lip service to the church they may have attended as children -- who really take ideas seriously. The men I am representing are vegans, and they will not flinch from observing the requirements of a vegan lifestyle even in the face or remarkable pressures. If there is no acceptable food presented on the food line, they will not eat. Some have decided to forego adequate bedding because they will not use wool blankets or down pillows. I should stress at the beginning that these men are not claiming a right to anything that we would consider a luxurious diet. The vegan food in prison is bland, repetitive and unappetizing. Yet, there's very little discussion with them about the problems of "lapsing" because they could not control their food preferences.

Now isn't that remarkable! One of my clients, serving a life sentence in South Carolina for first degree murder (who has been incarcerated for thirty years on various charges, beginning in his very early teens), has written at great length to me, trying to understand how he got in a mind-frame that permitted him to take a life when it is possible that he could have fled from the violent situation, and to kill without the sort of reactions that make most of us flinch from violence in almost any context. John Pope has had plenty of time to think in prison. And, most remarkably, considering the conditions of his prison, and the fact that rehabilitation and "correction" are not concerns of his prison administrators, it seems, he has for almost 15 years now, totally rejected violence. That means that he does not eat animal products, wear animal products, kill insects in his cell, or join in with the almost constant fighting that erupts when we cram violent, uneducated frustrated individuals into cells.

Now you would think that that would make him a model prisoner: a real success story for the process of incarcerated life. Time out to reevaluate one's life, a change for the better, and a change that translates into a recognition of the value, spiritual aspects, and moral imperatives of non-violence that few of us who are "out in the world" come to.

So, it's doubly ironic that the Animal Rights Law Center had to threaten the South Carolina Department of Corrections, under the new leadership of Michael Moore (fondly known as "The Slasher" for his "reforms" of prisons), in order to get a vegan diet for prisoners. First, prisoners who have spiritual beliefs that require a specific diet have a very clear right under the federal Constitution and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act to a diet that respects their religion. The state cannot prevent the free exercise of religion. When the Religious Freedom Restoration Act was passed in 1993, there was discussion whether prisons would be essentially held to a lower standard concerning respect for the free exercise of religion than that for other federal agencies. Before 1993, as long as a prison could advance an argument -- with anything like a straight face -- that they were not going to respect someone's religion for "security" reasons," courts did not seriously question their determinations. When the 1993 Act was passed, prisons were deliberately held to the higher standard to which other state institutions must adhere. They can certainly argue that free exercise of a religion would compromise their security or penal goals, but they have to come up with a sound and compelling reason for their argument.

I haven't heard a single argument made by a prison to justify denying a vegetarian diet that makes any sense to me. Now, of course, I am a vegan, and someone who chooses not to eat meat because to me a vegan diet is a step in advancing a broad concept of justice and non-violence. But you don't have to hold such beliefs to see that respecting these requests for vegetarian food is not only required by the constitution, but makes complete sense in terms of penal and fiscal policy.

Vegetarian food costs less. Prison dietitians with whom I have consulted have told me that it can cost up to $2 less per day to provide a vegan diet. It is harder to quantify the savings in terms of the medical care required by prisoners, but after many have lived much of their lives in poverty, with poor diet and exposure to disease, drugs and alcohol, diet can assist in alleviating many common medical problems.

Even more difficult to quantify is the benefit that each of the men who I am representing, points to as the most important benefit to themselves and to the society to which they hope to return. They describe their belief that meat makes them less able to control their own violent tendencies. That may not be a reason why I, or your viewers eat vegetarian food, but why on earth would we want to dispute their claims?

If a prisoner says, I have a spiritual belief in non-violence and I want to live my life according to that principle, what possible reason is there for a prison to hinder spiritual growth?

If a prisoner says, as an added benefit my blood pressure, allergies, cholesterol problem, intestinal problems or whatever are alleviated by plant foods, why not give plant foods?

If a man says, I have more control over my tendencies to violence, why not assist him in accommodating his desire to abstain from meat. If he says that he thereby feels less violent (and this is not in the context of his parole hearing where he might have other motivations to make such a statement), can we mean, by denying him a vegan diet, that we want him to be violent so that we take punitive measures against him?

It is my opinion, that prison authorities feel that they have lost control over inmates who subscribe to spiritual beliefs such as non-violence. John Pope in South Carolina organized reading groups, education programs (at a time when education in the prisons was seriously cut back) and support with making the change to a vegan diet. He taught meditation and yoga. At one point earlier this year, he had 40 men in the lock-down unit, and 25 in the general population on a regular schedule of yoga and meditation. Is there something scary to prison officials when men can find away to remove themselves from the violence, gang structure, drug dealing and alcohol abuse, and sexual predation that go on right under the noses of the guards? Why is it apparently easier to get drugs into a prison than to get soy milk into a prison? Is a man struggling to perfect his headstand more scary that one pulling a homemade weapon? One, you know how to control. The other is making a statement that he is beyond what you want to do with him.

One day, most of theses prisoners will be released. Most of them will not be significantly better educated, or more skilled, or more equipped to deal with the stresses and problems of normal life than they were before. Many will have actually honed their drug- dealing and violence skills in prison. Most will be very angry. Wouldn't you think that someone who has studied non-violence, taken a stand for a non-selfish principle, and lived according to his beliefs, would have a better chance of not committing another crime and ending up in prison again? It makes sense to me.

So why I am sifting through requests for legal representation on these claims this week? Nearly everyone who has written to me has presented coherent reasons why they have a legal right under the constitution to a vegan diet. I am confident that we can win more of these cases, it's just a matter of whether the Animal Rights Law Center can raise the money to provide free legal help in so many states at the same time. I am asking why the prisons, whether federal or state, are spending our tax dollars to fight us in these cases. Perhaps your listeners have similar questions. Perhaps we should demand some answers from our legislators?

This is Anna Charlton for Animal Rights Commentaries.