THE RAGE TO PUNISH
based on a sermon by
Rev. Robert M. Eddy
Unitarian Universalist Church of Pensacola, Florida

READINGS
===== 1 =====
“May I be no one’s enemy and may I be the friend of that which is eternal and abides. May I wish for every person’s happiness and envy none. May I never rejoice in the ill fortune of one who has wronged me. ... May I always keep tame that which rages within me.” “EUSEBIUS”
====== 2 =======
"Like us, McVeigh was appalled by the senseless killing of innocents. [in Waco, TX] His shock quickly gave way to anger, to a desire to fight back, to make them pay. The Government had to be stopped, and violence was the only weapon that would work He was going to teach them a lesson they wouldn't forget. The dead of Waco would be avenged. .....The conviction of Tim McVeigh presented an opportunity to American society. We could have shown that violence is not the answer to violence. We could have punished the perpetrator without lowering ourselves to his level of depravity. We could have focused on healing rather than revenge. We could have stopped the cycle of violence. Sadly, in the face of the 188 dead in Oklahoma city, we have chosen to increase the death toll to 169." With this execution, we are about to become a nation of revenge-seeking Tim McVeighs. “ (emphasis added) Steve Pruitt, a survivor of the Oklahoma City bombing in a guest commentary to the Atlanta Post, May 27th, 2001
=============== 3 ==================
"I believe than an informed public can demand a justice system that will deal with offenders rationally as individuals, and that elected government officials will heed such a demand. The necessary fIrst step on the path toward this goal is public awareness. Americans must know the size of the ever - increasing tax burden they are bearing for a prison system that provides neither public safety and security nor reformation of offenders. They must realize the brutalization of the nation by the death penalty. They must understand the price they pay for THE RAGE TO PUNISH {the price} not only in scarce tax dollars but also in a growing disillusionment with the law itself. They must be educated to understand that there are viable options to the present reliance upon PUNISHMENT, and brutal and inflexible laws and rules. Judge Lois G. Forer in A Rage to Punish: The Unintended Consequences of Mandatory Sentencing, NY 1994, W.W. Norton & Company) page 15)
SERMON
I seldom read sports stories but I always read the editorial page and in Friday's Pensacola News Journal appeared a column titled: "Prison would be the end of Strawberry." In that column DeWayne Wickham wrote, "Strawberry is a sick man, not a violent criminal. He is the biggest victim of the crimes he has committed. It cost him a multimillion dollar baseball career and caused great anguish in his family. .... What Strawberry needs is a more demanding drug treatment program, not a stint in the drug bazaar that prisons have become. If that place doesn't exist, the judge should encourage someone in the public or private sector to create it - not just for Strawberry but for the many nonviolent drug abusers like him."
AMEN! I couldn't agree more. And I suspect most sports fans would agree. Unfortunately most would agree with the sentence I left out. The sentence with which I do NOT agree.
"Sure, he should not go unpunished, but the punishment should fit the crime."
Strawberry will probably get treatment but not the thousands of other mixed up young black men who aren’t sports’ superstars. Why? because most Americans assume that punishment is the appropriate response to crime. For many Americans it is also a given that punishment is the appropriate response to "sin." And for some Americans everything they consider a sin should also be a crime.
Let me put those assumptions in the form of questions.
1. Is punishment the appropriate response to crime?
2. Is punishment is the appropriate response to "sin." And
3. Should things most American consider a sin also be a crime?
I’ll spend most of my time this morning on the first question:
1. Is punishment the appropriate response to crime? Well it depends what you mean by crime. A crime is a violation of a law. All human societies have laws. What do I mean by law? I mean by law certain rules set forth by a society that proscribe certain behaviors and prescribe consequences for the proscribed behaviors. In basic English, If you do “this” then “that” will happen. The purpose of the fundamental law, is to quote from the U. S. constitution of 1778 , “to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our posterity.” By that standard the criminal law in the United States fails on nearly every count. It is dividing us into adversarial classes and races, it violates every cannon of fairness, it insures conflict between haves and have-nots, it exacerbates the gap between the rich and the poor; it has made a large proportion of this countries citizens prisoners and it makes us vulnerable to foreign agitators and those who would do our nation harm. And the reason? Because the criminal law relies almost entirely on incarceration as the ultimate consequence for most crimes - at least people who are neither rich nor famous. Lois G. Forer at the beginning of her book "A Rage to Punish" from which I quoted earlier, points out that incarceration as a consequence for breaking a law is a relatively recent invention. It started as a good idea. When nearly everyone was poor the function of the courts was to arrange for restitution. Folks two hundred years ago and before saw no sense in feeding and sheltering someone for a period of time to “punish” them. What was needed was restoration: of property to the victim or substitution of the criminals labor for the labor the injured or deceased person might have rendered to the tribe or state. Enslavement was, for example, one way of “paying one’s debt to society.” Even into the 20th century “the work house” was a common feature of rural America as it had been in Europe for centuries and is in China even today: reformation through labor. The notion of incarceration was first promoted by Quakers who saw it as a means of reformation of character. One alternative, common at the time, was execution: over 200 capital offenses, lesser punishments were branding, whipping, expropriation of all property, banishment to places like Georgia and Australia. All were seen as deterrents to crime. Incarceration was originally a more humane way to deal with criminal behavior. But it has become something else: something very different; a big business for one thing. I’ve been interested in this subject ever since I organized a conference on “Alternatives to Incarceration.” for the Unitarian Universalist Governor of Colorado back in 1973. At that time the Unitarian Universalist Service Committee was promoting alternatives to incarceration as were a number of members of the Colorado legislature. We didn’t get very far. The rage to punish overwhelmed the movement. I bought Forer’s book back in 1994 for a proposed sermon titled, "The Crime of Punishment" I never got to write that sermon, but on Thursday I decided to see if someone else had ; so I put these words "The Crime of Punishment" into the "search engine" on my computer, set it loose on the World Wide Web, and up came a 1999 essay by someone named Rose Fu that says about all that needs to be said about the irrationality and injustice of our so called "Justice System." Ms Fu quotes extensively from a PBS special titled, "Snitches" which many of you saw. I didn't need to see it because a friend of my son had been brutalized in just such a case as was described there. I hope our Social Action committee will purchase a copy of "Snitches" and schedule it for your viewing. It is a powerful indictment of the snake pit that the so called “war on drugs” has created in our jails and prisons where the only way to get out is to “snitch” or accuse another person; a snake pit - a cess pool where plea bargaining has turned legal defense into coerced false witness. There is a group of UU’s working to get repeal of those draconian “no tolerance and “three strikes and out” drug laws. The group is called Unitarian Universalists for Drug Policy Reform. Chuck Thomas is the executive director and the web site is http://www.uudpr.org and the phone number is 301-270-1209 if you want to get involved Some of you in this congregation know first hand of the injustice of our criminally unjust so called justice system. But that's not what I want to discuss this morning. I want to look at those three questions. First: Is punishment the appropriate response to crime? Well, what does appropriate mean in this context? Does it mean what the fictional emperor of Japan in MIKADO meant "To make the punishment fit the crime?" That idea has been around for three thousand years - at least. It's what the ancient code of Hammarabi prescribed as an alternative to tribal feuds. “make the punishment fit the crime” it was also at the basis of Anglo- Saxon Common law first written down in “The Laws of Aerthelbert” who ruled Kent (in South East England) in the 600’s. Instead of going to war with the relatives of the person who had injured a member of your tribe, Hamarrabi and Aethelbert said that if an eye had been destroyed, no more than an eye -or the financial equivalent - could be demanded. That code has been misinterpreted to mean that if an eye were destroyed NO LESS THAN an eye should be required for "Justice" to prevail. That's the way a lot of people think today. Some religious people think that way even today. Which brings me to my second question: 2. Is punishment is the appropriate response to "sin." Many religious people so believe . If a life has been destroyed they feel sure that God requires another life be taken. Even those who claim to be followers of Jesus make the claim despite Matthew’s reports that Jesus said, " You have heard that it was said, ‘an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth’ but I say to you. Do not resist one who is evil. But if one strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. ..... “ and “ You have heard it was said ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ but I say unto you love your enemies and pray for those that persecute you ......" Matt: 5:38-44 RSV translation. But of course most people who call themselves Christians do not try to emulate Jesus. They are not disciples of the Gallelian Prophet, but believers in a theology of retribution that has mistakenly been attached to his title. For them Christianity is a religion that Feed s “the rage to punish” All members of this congregation are automatically subscribed to UU World. I hope all of you read the article in the most recent issue titled “Violence and Doctrine: How Christianity Twists the Meaning of Jesus’ Death.” They claim that by showing God as inflicting punishment on humankind for disobedience and then sacrificing his own son to fulfill his demand for “justice” traditional Christianity has promoted wife and child abuse. It’s a powerful article whether you agree or not is another matter. Rebecca Ann Parker, President of our UU seminary in Berkley and Rita Nakashima Brock restate the foundational story of the Christian Myth - that the creator of the universe required restitution for the crime of disobedience committed by the first humans. In Theological circles this is called the “substitionary theory of the atonement.” We of course don't buy that myth - even those of us who consider themselves Christian UU's don’t buy that myth. No UU’s that I know believe that God sacrificed his son to satisfy his "rage to punish" - a rage demonstrated often in the supposed historical stories of the expulsion from Eden, the flood, the destruction of Sodom and Gomora, the bloody conquest of Cannan and hundreds of other stories that show that a God who was a brutal sadist demanding NO LESS THAN - in fact MUCH MORE THAN an "eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth." None of us believe in that kind of God. Like our Universalist forbears and like Jesus himself, if we believe God then we see her as a loving parent: a Creator/Sustainer God. But many of us no longer consider ourselves Christians in any sense. People like myself find the term "God" so sullied by history we would rather not use it. What do people like me. non-theistic Humanists, (often called Secular Humanists) do with the notion of justice as punishment? Well I can’t speak for all who carry that label, but I see “making the punishment fit the crime” as a human temptation; a childish attempt to "get even"; a counterproductive strategy to escape grief and the fear of future pain. I BELIEVE THAT PUNISHMENT HAS NO PLACE IN A CIVILIZED CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM OR IN A COMPASSIONATE RELIGION. THE NOXIOUS NOTION THAT THE GUILTY MUST BE PUNISHED BELONGS TO THE REALM OF PRIMITIVE RELIGIOUS SUPERSTITION, NOT TO THE REALM OF ENLIGHTENED LEGISLATION OR ENLIGHTENED RELIGION IN A CIVILIZED NATION. The function of the justice system in a civilized country is not to “make the punishment fit the crime.” The function of the justice system in a civilized country is to protect the vulnerable from human predators; to educate the selfish to their social responsibilities, to heal the wounds inflicted by impulsive action- wounds to both the perpetrator and the victim. - I refer to most beatings and murders which occur in the heat of passion and harm both the victim and the perpetrator. A civilized justice system is the very opposite of what we have today. If you don't believe me spend a day sitting in any of criminal courtrooms of the city or county or state where you live. Observe closely the courtrooms that deal with drug possession or dealing. I’ve done that. It’s a painful education. Much less painful is reading a book or watching a video like Snitches. At least do that. You think our "justice system" isn’t so bad? Just look at what it proposes to do with the twelve and thirteen year old Milton brothers who apparently, killed their father with a baseball bat. Their treatment before trial is terrible; their fate if found guilty as youthful offenders is horrible and if found guilty as adults, as they are charged - is horrendous. But these boys are white and look angelic. What if they were black? Would they find justice in our county? The pastor of another youthful murderer in Florida has run out of attempts to find justice in this state. He has taken his young parishioners case to the United Nations Human rights commission in Geneva, Switzerland. There’s no question that Nathaniel Brazill, who was 13 did in fact shoot and kill his teacher. Because of the seriousness of the crime he was tried as an adult and will spend the next 28 years in prison where all he will learn is how to be a criminal. Whatever potential he had for being a contributing citizen will be destroyed. Will he “pay” for his crime no he can’t. He didn’t steal someone’s money. He killed someone so to make the punishment fit the crime his life must be taken from him. If the court “mercifully” declines to execute him it must be consider generous. If the court declines to give him incarceration for his natural life then it must be considered merciful. They only punish him by taking away his youth. That's what the present system of injustice requires. It seems to me, and to FORMER Judge Lois Forer that the proper function of our judicial system should be "to do Justice to all parties: the state, the victim, and the offender." (RAGE p127) You why Lois Forer is a former judge? She is a former judge because she resigned from the Pennsylvania bench when the passage of mandatory sentencing laws made it impossible for her to - “do justice to all parties." Judge Forer viewed incarceration as a last resort and used it only when the criminal posed a danger to the community. Her first concern was restitution for the victim so she set up a probation program which required the convicted criminal to work to pay the victim restitution for his or her loss if at all possible. Where addiction was present she required enrollment in addiction treatment programs. And she most definitely included addiction to Alcohol, the drug most commonly involved in criminal violence. In cases where she believed the criminal was beyond rehabilitation she sentenced the criminal to as long a term as the law allowed. Many nevertheless, accused Judge Forer of "coddling criminals" but independent study showed that her program of probation with restitution and rehabilitation resulted in far less recidivism than the "standard" treatment. Read the book. Or get on your web site of Unitarian Universalists for Drug Policy Reform < http://www.uudpr.org > and join other UU's working to change the injustice system where it most impacts young people today. Finally question number three: 3. Should everything most American consider a sin also be a crime: sins like homosexuality, pornography, adultery, bigamy and other “abominations.” Well, it depends on what you see as the role of the State. If the role of the state is what the U. S. and most state constitutions say it is then no, what a majority consider a sin should not be turned into a crime. If on the other hand the role of the state is to enforce morality as many believe, then of course you must find a common morality: in aspiration if not in behavior, and find a way to enforce that morality. We’re a pluralistic society. We can seldom get anything like a consensus as to what is “a sin.” Most Americans would agree but many support the notion that government should punish “sin” in principle. Suppose we could find something that say 80% of the people find abhorrent then it might be possible to make it a crime. In point of fact it’s not what the bulk of the people think that decides what is or is not a sin. It’s what judges like Judge More in Alabama think or what the second most powerful man in America, the attorney General thinks is a sin. Mr. Ascroft has already taken it upon himself to decide that the medical use of Marijuana and assisted suicide for the terminally ill is wrong - whatever the people of Oregon think. He is therefore interposing all the power of his so called “Department of Justice” between the will of the people and their free exercise of their liberty. The chief law enforcement officer of our Government is on the same path that led to the Taliban Regime in Afghanistan. That’s what comes of turning “sins” into crimes.Is there nothing we can do? Well you must decide where you will put “the stubborn ounces of your weight. Where you will try to be a catalyst, a trigger, a bit of leaven that lifts the whole loaf. Never think it’s hopeless. You can make a difference. But this is not just a national problem. It’s right here in West Florida. At the local level we need to educate our selves and our neighbors on the dangers of confusing “sin” and “crime.” we need to educate our selves and our neighbors on the role of the State and the role of the Church. We need to educate our selves and our neighbors on the rights of religion and the privileges of religious institutions. IN CONCLUSION
Last week was National Crime Victims Rights Week. Victims are often, and understandably, driven by a “rage to punish.” It is rare to find who channel their anguish to some positive purpose. It is rare to find someone like the Oklahoma city victim I quoted earlier. It is rare to find a victim like the father of one of the young people killed in Littleton school massacre who reached out to the parents of the killers. It is rare to find victims like the group of people who lost loved ones in the 911 terrorist attacks who opposed the massive retaliation of our government. It is rare to find victims like the parents of children killed by Palestine and Jewish terrorists who seek peace with justice in the Holy Land. Yes it is rare to find grieving persons who can work for reconciliation and peace and healing rather than seeking revenge; revenge which always has and always will simply perpetuate the cycle of misery. Those victims who become peacemakers should be honored above all. Those consumed with “the rage to punished” should be comforted and understood but not be allowed to decide what to be done with the guilty and/or the sinner. Those of us who have not been victimized; those of us who have been spared those horrors have the responsibility to “always keep tame that which rages within ....”