Ontario Officials Rule Veganism is a Human Right Legally Protected from Discrimination

Escloflowne wrote: »

If you're going to make Halal or Kosher available, this is fair. It's the same thing in the end, it's a belief system, the fact that one of them is a religion doesn't mean it's more important, in my opinion.

Isn't a religion nothing but a belief system? Is there a difference in definition? I was a religious studies major, so that's an extremely interesting idea to me.

Edited for spelling.

auddii wrote: »

CorvusCorax77 wrote: »

Veganism isn't some weird thing nobody knows about and it is more than just a diet. The same way one should respect a request for halal food, one should respect a request for vegan food. It's not hard, people.

I'm actually amazed at the number of people who just view veganism as a diet...

And a fad diet at that. But you clearly can't argue that it has reached that place where it has become a fad diet for many and, I believe due to this, is lumped into that category.

stealthq wrote: »

Escloflowne wrote: »

If you're going to make Halal or Kosher available, this is fair. It's the same thing in the end, it's a belief system, the fact that one of them is a religion doesn't mean it's more important, in my opinion.

From a legal standpoint, it certainly does.

Besides, if you start catering to every belief system, you're opening the flood gates. Anything goes and you'd better be prepared for it.

Again... going to raise the question of what defines the difference. Pretty much anything can become a church provided they apply for the proper paperwork. Evidenced by the fact that my friend just helped found a revivalist Druidic church.

BecomingBane wrote: »

stealthq wrote: »

Escloflowne wrote: »

If you're going to make Halal or Kosher available, this is fair. It's the same thing in the end, it's a belief system, the fact that one of them is a religion doesn't mean it's more important, in my opinion.

From a legal standpoint, it certainly does.

Besides, if you start catering to every belief system, you're opening the flood gates. Anything goes and you'd better be prepared for it.

Again... going to raise the question of what defines the difference. Pretty much anything can become a church provided they apply for the proper paperwork. Evidenced by the fact that my friend just helped found a revivalist Druidic church.

In Canada, I don't know.

In the US, there is a maze of court rulings that set general guidelines for what is considered a church or a religion for various legal purposes. The definition for federal taxation purposes is not used for other federal legal purposes, just as an example that it is not a straight-forward issue.

In the US, you can not just stand up, declare your beliefs a religion and have that hold any water with the federal government. That much is abundantly clear and the feds have won plenty of lawsuits to prove it.

lemurcat12 wrote: »

It's pretty analogous to the question of whether and when an opposition to war is in essence a religious belief vs. a political or philosophical one (for the purposes of being a conscientious objector). I'm inclined to think veganism is, at least for some, on that level.

That actually seems to be a very good comparison.

Well... it is nice to offer options! I don't see anything wrong with it. It's not necessarily going to be expensive. And it is a very well defined way of eating that is closely linked to people's morals (vs just health) so if you are going to protect one, it makes sense to be that one.

It will be more useful for people than they think.

Consider how many religious people have meatless days, or need to eat kosher or halal. Vegan options are also great options for them.

Derp_Diggler wrote: »

janejellyroll wrote: »

Derp_Diggler wrote: »

BecomingBane wrote: »

summerkissed wrote: »

I'm not against vegans or vegetarians or this or that but it's a choice that they make and with choices come sacrifices and if that means you need to supply your own food then well that's apart of your choice to eat a certain way!! I choose not to eat certain foods but that doesn't mean I go into hospital or schools expecting them to adhere to my choices......it just means I go prepared!! My choice, my responsibility!!

Let me see if I understand you. So... say I get hit by a car and put in hospital, or my luck, ICU, I'm single, and have no immediate family... am I supposed to supply my own food then? Just get up and run out to the local grocer?

If it doesn't affect your health a hospital should not be "forced" to provide it.

Is this also your position on kosher and halal meals in hospitals? You think people who need medical care should choose between that and keeping kosher/halal?

In Canada, where the health system is paid for by taxation, yes, I do. The sole purpose of a hospital is to make sick people better, not cater to their belief system. A lifestyle, like religion, is a choice. Every time you begin to cater to a different belief system, costs go up and so do taxes. If someone wants to pay extra for the "Health" system to accommodate their beliefs, that is fine. But don't expect the public to foot the bill for it.

Do you anticipate extra costs from serving beans instead of chicken?

forwardmoving wrote: »

janejellyroll wrote: »

Derp_Diggler wrote: »

janejellyroll wrote: »

Derp_Diggler wrote: »

BecomingBane wrote: »

summerkissed wrote: »

I'm not against vegans or vegetarians or this or that but it's a choice that they make and with choices come sacrifices and if that means you need to supply your own food then well that's apart of your choice to eat a certain way!! I choose not to eat certain foods but that doesn't mean I go into hospital or schools expecting them to adhere to my choices......it just means I go prepared!! My choice, my responsibility!!

Let me see if I understand you. So... say I get hit by a car and put in hospital, or my luck, ICU, I'm single, and have no immediate family... am I supposed to supply my own food then? Just get up and run out to the local grocer?

If it doesn't affect your health a hospital should not be "forced" to provide it.

Is this also your position on kosher and halal meals in hospitals? You think people who need medical care should choose between that and keeping kosher/halal?

In Canada, where the health system is paid for by taxation, yes, I do. The sole purpose of a hospital is to make sick people better, not cater to their belief system. A lifestyle, like religion, is a choice. Every time you begin to cater to a different belief system, costs go up and so do taxes. If someone wants to pay extra for the "Health" system to accommodate their beliefs, that is fine. But don't expect the public to foot the bill for it.

Do you anticipate extra costs from serving beans instead of chicken?

I would think that possibly the increased cost may not be due to the cost of the ingredients but in the process of preparing meals. For the most part, hospital meals are produced in an assembly line manner which keeps labour costs down. If you need to prepare 100 regular" meals and 1 vegan, the labour cost for that vegan meal will be higher.

As well, the hospital buys food in bulk which keeps costs down. Vegan protein sources are often not cheap and they may not be getting the full discount price that they might for chicken.

Just speculating.

My understanding (from a friend who works as a dietician in a hospital setting) is that hospitals already prepare different types of meals for patients with different dietary needs. This may not be accurate everywhere, but is accurate at her place of employment. And vegan sources of protein can be quite economical -- things like beans and peas are often less expensive than meat.

If my understanding of Canadian law is correct, hospitals are already doing this for patients who require kosher or halal meals. We aren't talking about introducing a totally new concept for the benefit of vegans. We're talking about adding veganism to a system that is already in place.

janejellyroll wrote: »

AllOutof_Bubblegum wrote: »

janejellyroll wrote: »

myfelinepal wrote: »

Is it completely necessary?

Are people holding down vegans and forcefeeding them honey?

Are vegans forced to sit at the back of the bus?

In the US, some people in prison do not have access to vegan meals. I'm not sure what the situation is in Canada.

People in prison should not have the right to vegan options. That's what prison is for: taking rights away as a consequence to committing a crime. They're felons, they eat what they're given.

Is that your position on kosher and halal meals in jail as well? As long as it's consistent, I can understand that position. I disagree, but I understand it.

Is anyone else thinking about that plot line in Orange is the New Black when
Looks like getting food in US prisons that adheres to one's religious beliefs is covered, while basic quality is not:

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

... Complaints against prison food have been made on the grounds of breach of Constitutional Amendments. In particular, claims of inadequate food may breach the Eighth Amendment banning cruel and unusual punishment, and denial of specific food requirements on religious grounds breach the First Amendment.

...There is concern about the change of food preparation practices. There have been numerous documented examples of mass illness within prisons from the food served.[9] There have been hunger strikes from prisoners protesting being served food that makes them ill after eating. Whistle blowers and reporters have documented mouse droppings and various violations of standards in prison kitchens.[9] It is no longer allowed for family to bring food nor share with loved ones behind bars; rather families can transfer money for a fee to allow inmates to purchase packaged foods such as prepared noodle packages and candy from the prison store. There is thus usually no way for inmates to ever have access to fresh food. Aramark, who has provided the meals to many prisons in the USA since 2004, has been sharply criticized for lowering standards and not providing sufficient quantities of edible food.[9]

forwardmoving wrote: »

janejellyroll wrote: »

Derp_Diggler wrote: »

janejellyroll wrote: »

Derp_Diggler wrote: »

BecomingBane wrote: »

summerkissed wrote: »

I'm not against vegans or vegetarians or this or that but it's a choice that they make and with choices come sacrifices and if that means you need to supply your own food then well that's apart of your choice to eat a certain way!! I choose not to eat certain foods but that doesn't mean I go into hospital or schools expecting them to adhere to my choices......it just means I go prepared!! My choice, my responsibility!!

Let me see if I understand you. So... say I get hit by a car and put in hospital, or my luck, ICU, I'm single, and have no immediate family... am I supposed to supply my own food then? Just get up and run out to the local grocer?

If it doesn't affect your health a hospital should not be "forced" to provide it.

Is this also your position on kosher and halal meals in hospitals? You think people who need medical care should choose between that and keeping kosher/halal?

In Canada, where the health system is paid for by taxation, yes, I do. The sole purpose of a hospital is to make sick people better, not cater to their belief system. A lifestyle, like religion, is a choice. Every time you begin to cater to a different belief system, costs go up and so do taxes. If someone wants to pay extra for the "Health" system to accommodate their beliefs, that is fine. But don't expect the public to foot the bill for it.

Do you anticipate extra costs from serving beans instead of chicken?

I would think that possibly the increased cost may not be due to the cost of the ingredients but in the process of preparing meals. For the most part, hospital meals are produced in an assembly line manner which keeps labour costs down. If you need to prepare 100 regular" meals and 1 vegan, the labour cost for that vegan meal will be higher.

As well, the hospital buys food in bulk which keeps costs down. Vegan protein sources are often not cheap and they may not be getting the full discount price that they might for chicken.

Just speculating.

This, but more so the slippery slope it creates. First vegan, next paleo, after that who knows? Where do you draw the line? Why is one belief system worthy of catering to and others aren't? Before you know it the hospital has to stock and prepare 20 different kinds of meals. And that that sort of variety is not cost effective, as it costs more for purchase, storage, and preparation. I believe that a publicly funded resource should not stray from it's main objective. In this case it's to nurse people back to health. Anything beyond that is not essential, and as such, an unnecessary burden on an already over taxed populous. All while tax payers are on five year waiting lists for MRIs.