If you had any doubt that, for some, veganism is more than a dietary lifestyle choice but something more akin to religion, look no further.
VEGANS and teetotallers are to be given the same protection against discrimination as religious groups, under legislation championed by Harriet Harman, the equalities minister.
…
A code of practice explaining the legal implications of the equality bill states that religions need not be mainstream or well known for their adherents to gain protection. “A belief need not include faith or worship of a god or gods, but must affect how a person lives their life or perceives the world.”
It is not my intent to mock vegans, rather to mock those who would substitute a diet for Deus. This is one case in which soy is not a suitable substitute.
Ironically, having taken on the nature of religion for some, veganism has its own form of protestantism. Whether vegan or vegetarian, it would seem that the foundational principle is no meat. But by what authority (it always comes down to authority, no?) do vegans and vegetarians get to define what meat is? Isn’t every vegetarian free to decide his own definition of meat? Well, for one delightfully named group that just sounds protestant, this is the case. They are Pescatarians (see, I told you!)
Pescatarians are the protestants of the vegetarian world. They want all the credit of being a vegetarian without doing all the hard work. Pecatarians, like many Catholics during lent, have no problem with ordering the Filet O’Fish on the drive-thru at Mickey D’s.
In a weird way, I have respect for vegans. At least they are committed. Pecatarians? They are lukewarm vegetarians. And you know what they say about the lukewarm. On judgment day they will be spit out like a day old filet o’fish. Or something like that.
March 8, 2010 at 11:57 am
Filet O'Fish from McDonald's? Us true Catholics spend our Lenten Fridays at Long John Silver's!
March 8, 2010 at 12:13 pm
“A belief need not include faith or worship of a god or gods, but must affect how a person lives their life or perceives the world.”
And on that note, I declare secular pluralism a dead letter.
March 8, 2010 at 1:41 pm
What "discrimination" do vegans face exactly??? I was hoping the article would detail the woes of being force-fed a steak wrapped in bacon…mmm with creamy mashed potatoes and buttery veggies on the side.
No such thing, just a line about how the things now protected are "heartfelt" beliefs. It's kind of disturbing that the government thinks it can determine what beliefs are heartfelt. I'm sure there are Jedi who have very heartfelt beliefs in their religion and who get mocked daily for it.
March 8, 2010 at 3:19 pm
The funny thing is, I describe my diet as "pescatarian" during Lent to my non-Catholic friends (I usually give up "meat" for the full 40 days). I hope they don't think of me as some vegan heretic! Oh, my!
For those who embrace it as just a diet (ugh, not a religion) there are actually good reasons for putting the stopper at fish. On an environmental level, fish are more "efficient" because you don't have to feed them the same food that we would be eating. Some people also have qualms with factory farming, but not with eating animals per se. The diet also most closely resembles a mediterranean diet rich in omega-3s and lean proteins. Of course, how all of this is "religious" is still beyond me, and why people want "credit" or "protection" for their self-defined dietary needs is, well, beyond me as well.
March 8, 2010 at 3:32 pm
"What "discrimination" do vegans face exactly?"
There is one Title VII case where a vegan, as part of his job requirements, had to take a vaccine made from chicken embryos. The court ruled that his veganism counted as a "religion," but that the employer had demonstrated reasonable accommodation.
This case, I thought, had interesting ramifications. I was disappointed that this case didn't go the other way around for the sake of future Catholics who would, say, have serious objections to taking a vaccine developed with human embryos. Ruling that veganism was not a religion would have left it more open for Catholics on the business necessity/reasonable accommodation prong.
March 8, 2010 at 3:37 pm
They face discrimination from me. I think that they're detached and terrified of nature and their appropriate place on the food chain. Oddly, they mask their fear with a worship of nature. Human beings are endlessly marvelous in this way.
March 8, 2010 at 4:41 pm
Hmm…I'd not thought of vaccines. It seems I must scale back on my snide remarks.
I considered veganism to just pertain to the consumption of food, if you include medicine, cloths, skin care products, or such, there could be a wide array of areas in which a vegan could be forced to use an animal derived product.
March 9, 2010 at 2:42 pm
Actually, Christina, there are quite a few adherents to the Jedi way in England.
The Force is With Jedi British Police
Strange but true…
March 11, 2010 at 12:23 am
I think veganism can be construed by some as religious as it often consists of having a strong moral belief that defines how you live your life.
Religion does not have to have an authority, Buddhism is a pretty big example of that.
I've found that among many circles, acting a certain way that differs from the norm is often respected and considered pious if for religious moral reasons, but belittled and condemned if you choose to not eat meat for mainly ethical reasons. It may not exactly be a religion, but this type of moral is deserving of the same respect and tolerance that religious actions receive from some, even if you do not have the same belief.