Ethical veganism is philosophical belief, tribunal rules

[CAPP0]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-50981359

Beeb said:

The tribunal's ruling means ethical vegans are entitled to protection from discrimination.

"Religion or belief" is one of nine "protected characteristics" covered by the Equality Act 2010.

Bit random, surely? Or can anyone pick their own belief and get it enshrined in law?

[PositronicRay]

This bloke practises it though. ie avoiding taking the bus incase of accidental bird or insect collision.

Fair play.

[bitchstewie]

CAPP0 said:

Bit random, surely? Or can anyone pick their own belief and get it enshrined in law?

Look at pretty much any thread on here whenever veganism is raised.

Many of the reactions are irrational bordering on hysterical compared to the impact what someone chooses (not) to eat has on anyone else's life.

[Diderot]

PositronicRay said:

This bloke practises it though. ie avoiding taking the bus incase of accidental bird or insect collision.

Fair play.

How does he avoid walking on ants?

[Stay in Bed Instead]

What's the difference between a ethical vegan and a non ethical vegan?

[amusingduck]

Stay in Bed Instead said:

What's the difference between a ethical vegan and a non ethical vegan?

Ethical vegans are proper vegans by the look of it, and oppose the exploitation of animals full stop. The non ethical option is a vegan diet only - the trendy ones

I think it's pretty ridiculous, but at least they're not hypocrites. I respect the hell out of that.

[Agammemnon]

bhstewie said:

Look at pretty much any thread on here whenever veganism is raised.

Many of the reactions are irrational bordering on hysterical compared to the impact what someone chooses (not) to eat has on anyone else's life.

As with religion, they can believe & practise whatever they like. Once they choose interfere in others' lives then their privileges should be removed.

I couldn't care less about vegans until they start evangelising.

[21TonyK]

Just waiting for this one to hit work (food) where I am obliged to meet all "ethical and clinical" dietary needs.

[Oakey]

21TonyK said:

Just waiting for this one to hit work (food) where I am obliged to meet all "ethical and clinical" dietary needs.

I did wonder what this means in real terms. If you opened a restaurant that only served steak would you be discriminating against vegans for not offering a vegan option?

[Camelot1971]

Plants are living beings too, why is it ok to murder them? If you were a true vegan you would only eat fruit and berries that the plants wants to be eaten. Anything else is just sadistic barbarism.....

[CAPP0]

bhstewie said:

CAPP0 said:

Bit random, surely? Or can anyone pick their own belief and get it enshrined in law?

Look at pretty much any thread on here whenever veganism is raised.

Many of the reactions are irrational bordering on hysterical compared to the impact what someone chooses (not) to eat has on anyone else's life.

I wasn't coming at it from an irrational pov, I just don't quote get how something like this, which whilst a belief is essentially a lifestyle choice, can be protected in law. I'm not trying to have a pop at vegans.

Not trying to be obtuse but if, say, I decided I wanted to live as a caveman, could I have that enshrined and protected?

[21TonyK]

Oakey said:

21TonyK said:

Just waiting for this one to hit work (food) where I am obliged to meet all "ethical and clinical" dietary needs.

I did wonder what this means in real terms. If you opened a restaurant that only served steak would you be discriminating against vegans for not offering a vegan option?

No, in a restaurant you can do and serve what and who you want. Schools, hospitals, prisons etc.

Just means a pile of frozen vegan ready meals, along with the Kosha, Halal options etc that most places trot out.

[bitchstewie]

CAPP0 said:

bhstewie said:

CAPP0 said:

Bit random, surely? Or can anyone pick their own belief and get it enshrined in law?

Look at pretty much any thread on here whenever veganism is raised.

Many of the reactions are irrational bordering on hysterical compared to the impact what someone chooses (not) to eat has on anyone else's life.

I wasn't coming at it from an irrational pov, I just don't quote get how something like this, which whilst a belief is essentially a lifestyle choice, can be protected in law. I'm not trying to have a pop at vegans.

Not trying to be obtuse but if, say, I decided I wanted to live as a caveman, could I have that enshrined and protected?

Didn't mean you

I agree it's a fine line in what you pick as "protected".

My point was more that when you look at some of the things that cause a completely irrational reaction people maybe those are things to look at and ask whether they do deserve some sort of protection?

Simple example, read the comments on here whenever threads about (certain) religions, gay or trans issues, or veganism come up.

Ask yourself how comfortable you'd be if you fell into one of those groups and some of the people making those comments were your boss?

[Nimby]

Camelot1971 said:

Plants are living beings too, why is it ok to murder them? If you were a true vegan you would only eat fruit and berries that the plants wants to be eaten. Anything else is just sadistic barbarism.....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fruitarianism

Far from a healthy diet.

[Sheepshanks]

Oakey said:

21TonyK said:

Just waiting for this one to hit work (food) where I am obliged to meet all "ethical and clinical" dietary needs.

I did wonder what this means in real terms. If you opened a restaurant that only served steak would you be discriminating against vegans for not offering a vegan option?

The fun part would be employing a staff member who then refused to serve steak. Or even refusing to employ them in the first place.

[amusingduck]

bhstewie said:

Didn't mean you

I agree it's a fine line in what you pick as "protected".

My point was more that when you look at some of the things that cause a completely irrational reaction people maybe those are things to look at and ask whether they do deserve some sort of protection?

Simple example, read the comments on here whenever threads about (certain) religions, gay or trans issues, or veganism come up.

Ask yourself how comfortable you'd be if you fell into one of those groups and some of the people making those comments were your boss?

I think innate characteristics should be protected, because nobody should be discriminated against for something they did not choose to be.

Aside from that, why should your choices be protected from discrimination, in principle? I accept it's probably far too late to change now, but if we could go back in time? I think it'd have been better to stick to innate characteristics.

[eldar]

Camelot1971 said:

Plants are living beings too, why is it ok to murder them? If you were a true vegan you would only eat fruit and berries that the plants wants to be eaten. Anything else is just sadistic barbarism.....

What about plants that eat meat?

[CAPP0]

amusingduck said:

I think innate characteristics should be protected, because nobody should be discriminated against for something they did not choose to be.

Aside from that, why should your choices be protected from discrimination, in principle? I accept it's probably far too late to change now, but if we could go back in time? I think it'd have been better to stick to innate characteristics.

That's a good summary/conclusion, IMO.

[nikaiyo2]

Camelot1971 said:

Plants are living beings too, why is it ok to murder them? If you were a true vegan you would only eat fruit and berries that the plants wants to be eaten. Anything else is just sadistic barbarism.....

Jainsim... they have wonderful food!

However that is a genuine religion, predating christ.

[robsa]

PositronicRay said:

This bloke practises it though. ie avoiding taking the bus incase of accidental bird or insect collision.

Fair play.

That sounds like Jainism, which is a protected religion already. He should have just become one of them. I don’t see the purpose in protecting a food choice? Can someone enlighten me?