I saw it this morning as it came up on my facebook page (I joined a vegan group) the link was to the article in The Telegraph with the heading:
Vegans should be protected from discrimination, says equality watchdog
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/religion/7392222/Vegans-should-be-protected-from-discrimination-says-equality-watchdog.html
and as a newly vegan vegan, I was intrigued to know what it was all about and how I might be being discriminated against. I agree with this part here:
It makes it a legal requirement for public authorities, including schools, to consider the impact of all their policies on minority groups.
But the guidance explains: “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.”
Singling out vegans as meriting protection from religious discrimination, it says: ‘A person who is a vegan chooses not to use or consume animal products of any kind.
‘That person eschews the exploitation of animals for food, clothing, accessories or any other purpose and does so out of an ethical commitment to animal welfare.’
A spokesman from the commission explained: ‘This is about someone for whom being vegan or vegetarian is central to who they are. This is not something ‘thought up by the commission’.
In that schools should be educated on what a vegan is and why they are what they are and do what they do, just the same as why some people don’t eat meat for religious reasons. This is quite personal to me because I often have trouble finding food to eat if I don’t cook it myself just because the area I am in is a bit short on vegetarians in general and now being vegan is even more difficult. I told my mum I was now vegan and I may as well have said “I’m a vulcan” as she had no clue what that meant.
Christmas is always difficult because I don’t eat meat, but my sister served me up prawn cocktail at xmas dinner because that wasn’t meat! Now it’s going to be worse because I’ve stopped eating dairy. It’s my birthday next week and usually she has a birthday meal for me, plus it’s mother’s day so it’s even more likely there will be a family meal, and this will be the first one as a vegan, and I’m dreading it because I really don’t think there will be anything for me to eat (including the m & s birthday cake she usually buys) and basically none of my family take it seriously.
It’s a choice I have made, it’s not based on any religious beliefs and I don’t have any allergies to food that would prevent me from eating these things so they just don’t see why I have to be “difficult”. If I were to be lactose intolerant or allergic to seafood or something then they would take it more seriously and make sure they didn’t serve up those things to me, but since it’s a choice I’ve made, they just think it’s a bit stupid.
I think a lot of people probably feel the same, and there needs to be more education especially for people who are providing meals – restaurants, school dinners etc. As an example, my neighbour said that the school canteen had “baked beans” on the menu as the vegetable of the day!
I think it’s probably similar in some restaurants where it’s normal to cook with butter or add milk, or eggs or worcestershire sauce or whatever, and not be required to wonder if it’s suitable for a vegetarian. That’s normal chefing to use those ingredients but then to be asked for the meal to be cooked without butter or egg or whatever just because someone doesn’t want to eat it for ethical reasons, is hard to accept.
I think I had a point when I started but got off the track a bit lol
There was something I read last week about having VEGAN legally defined in the EU and it was probably related to this. And I did think surely we already know what it means but apparently it is more for products for sale so that the labelling will be clearer etc.
So do I need to be protected from discrimination because of what I choose to eat or don’t eat? I’m not really sure at this stage if I do or not, but I think it would make life easier if it was legally defined and more recognised. Maybe so people would understand that most people who choose to be vegan do so for ethical reasons and ethical/moral reasons are just as important as religious reasons… and maybe my sister will make me a vegan birthday cake next week
*watches pigs flying past window*
People who are completely full on vegan and not just regarding what they eat, also will not take certain medicines because they contain animal products and that could make things problematic if they were suddenly taken into hospital. I think you would almost have to wear a vegan medical bracelet or something. Not to mention could the hospital kitchen come up with some vegan meals? Some of their ideas about vegetarian meals are a bit iffy lol
Under the legislation, people with philosophical views such as pacificism and humanism could also seek protection from discrimination.
However, the Commission has insisted that scientific or political beliefs such as Marxism and fascism would not be covered. People for whom abstention from alcohol was a way of life would also be protected.
It worries me that they seem to be going all out to protect everyone from discrimination and yet at the same time not covering people for their political views. There is also the issue of taking political correctness too far to the point of absurdity, so that soon everyone will be protected and you will be getting sued every time you open your mouth.
If people laugh when I tell them I’m a vegan can I now sue them for discrimination?
another article…
Now vegans are covered by Harman’s equality law By Kirsty Walker
Under Harman’s controverisal new equality laws, Vegans are to be given the same protection against discrimination as religious groups
Vegans, teetotallers and atheists are to be given the same protection against discrimination as religious groups, under Harriet Harman’s controversial new equality laws.
People who do not eat products and refuse to wear leather have been singled out for inclusion under the new legislation by Labour’s super-quango – the Equalities and Human Rights Commission.
Official guidance issued by the body points out that the ‘ethical commitment’ of vegan’s to animal welfare is ‘central to who they are’.
The code of practice explains the legal implications of the equality bill states that religions need not be mainstream or well known for their adherents to gain protection.
The Equality Bill, masterminded by Labour deputy leader Harriet Harman, is due to come into force this Autumn.
It makes it a legal requirement for public authorities, including schools, to consider the impact of all their policies on minority groups.
But the guidance explains: “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.”
Singling out vegans as meriting protection from religious discrimination, it says: ‘A person who is a vegan chooses not to use or consume animal products of any kind.
‘That person eschews the exploitation of animals for food, clothing, accessories or any other purpose and does so out of an ethical commitment to animal welfare.’
A spokesman from the commission explained: ‘This is about someone for whom being vegan or vegetarian is central to who they are. This is not something ‘thought up by the commission’.
‘Parliament makes the law, the courts interpret it and the commission offers factual and proportionate guidance to organisations where necessary. We are providing guidance on the implications of the equality bill.’
The legislation also covers ‘any religious belief or philosophical belief’ and even ‘a lack of belief’.
This means that members of cults and “new religions” such as Scientology, whose supporters include the film stars Tom Cruise and John Travolta, would also be offered protection, as would atheists.
The official guidance has already caused controversy after warning that schools which force girls to wear skirts may be breaking the law – because the policy apparently discriminates against transsexuals.
It claims the dress code may breach the rights of girls who feel compelled to live as boys.
Religious leaders have condemned Miss Harman’s equality laws for sideling religion to promote a false idea of ‘tolerance’.
The Archbishop of York has warned that Christianity risks being wiped out from public life in the name of equality.
The Pope has also described the Bill as ‘unjust’, restricting religious freedom and violating ‘the natural law’.
Under the legislation, people with philosophical views such as pacificism and humanism could also seek protection from discrimination.
However, the Commission has insisted that scientific or political beliefs such as Marxism and fascism would not be covered. People for whom abstention from alcohol was a way of life would also be protected.
The watchdog also warns that advertisements giving preferential treatment to men or women could be illegal.
This could mean the end of “ladies’ nights” at clubs, when women receive cut-price drinks or free entrance but men pay full price.
