active network espn
Community: Exchange advice in the forums and read running commentary Resources: Personal running log, calculators, links and other tools for runners News: Running news from around the world Training: Articles and advice about fitness, race training and injury prevention Races/Results: Find upcoming races and past results Home: The Cool Running homepage
Cool Running homepage  Search Cool Running Community
Click to view MathildePuppy's profile Amateur 9 posts since
May 4, 2005
16. Oct 25, 2006 4:47 AM in response to: mountmars
Hey Mars, the meals sounds truly delicious! It is a shame your vegan friend did not get the chance to eat it! But, you made something really good, and healthy and probably demystified the idea of vegan food being somehow wierd.

I wanted to visit the idea introduced by reboot that veganism is just a personal choice. It really is more than that. As others have pointed out, it is a philosophy and an expression of faith. It is more than about just deciding what to eat. It is the reflection of how a person feels about the world...and our place in it...bite by bite, meal by meal.

Well, that is how I feel about it anyway.
Click to view sixfeetsmall3x5's profile Pro 118 posts since
Apr 27, 2005
17. Oct 25, 2006 8:34 AM in response to: mountmars
quote:<HR>Originally posted by MathildePuppy:

I wanted to visit the idea introduced by reboot that veganism is just a personal choice. It really is more than that. As others have pointed out, it is a philosophy and an expression of faith. It is more than about just deciding what to eat. It is the reflection of how a person feels about the world...and our place in it...bite by bite, meal by meal.

Well, that is how I feel about it anyway.
<HR>


I agree. It's definitely more than a personal choice. Someone else mentioned not worrying about "cross-contamination". Most vegans I know would worry about this, and would not eat something that was cooked in the same pan as meat. I wouldn't even consider myself vegan (although I try my best)...I know when I eat at other people's house, I really appreciate it when people are considerate of my beliefs. I try to recognize other people's dietary needs and beliefs when visiting my house as well. Just having a "selection" of both vegan and non-vegan food isn't always the best option, becuse then I end up following the host around and asking "does this have eggs?" "was this cooked with chicken broth?" etc. Mountmars...I wish there were more considerate people like you around . It's no fun eating a lara bar out of my purse when visiting someone else's house when everyone else is chowing down.
Click to view banananutmuffin's profile Expert 56 posts since
Jul 8, 2004
18. Oct 25, 2006 11:22 AM in response to: mountmars
moutmars... can I come over for dinner some time?
Click to view reboot's profile Legend 398 posts since
Dec 14, 2007
19. Oct 25, 2006 11:27 AM in response to: mountmars
quote:<HR>Originally posted by sixfeetsmall3x5:
I agree. It's definitely more than a personal choice. Someone else mentioned not worrying about "cross-contamination". Most vegans I know would worry about this, and would not eat something that was cooked in the same pan as meat. I wouldn't even consider myself vegan (although I try my best)...I know when I eat at other people's house, I really appreciate it when people are considerate of my beliefs. I try to recognize other people's dietary needs and beliefs when visiting my house as well. Just having a "selection" of both vegan and non-vegan food isn't always the best option, becuse then I end up following the host around and asking "does this have eggs?" "was this cooked with chicken broth?" etc. Mountmars...I wish there were more considerate people like you around . It's no fun eating a lara bar out of my purse when visiting someone else's house when everyone else is chowing down.<HR>



The idea that veganism is a "religion in any way is ridiculous. Here are a couple of dictionary definitions of "religion":
1-A strong belief in a supernatural power or powers that control human destiny.
2-An institution to express belief in a divine power.

Veganism (BTW, a word I made up) has absolutely nothing to do with either the supernatural or divinity. It is not even a part of a religious belief in most cases, as are the dietary practises of Jews and Muslims. Regardless of how strongly one feels about the ethics of vegetarianism, it does not rise to the level of a religion in the eyes of most rational people.

It is, as I stated, a dietary preference similar to an aversion anyone might have toward certain foods. For example, most North Americans would express an aversion (even an extremely strong aversion) to foods like dog, cat, monkey, rats, almost all insects, some reptiles and even some vegetable products. Such aversions might be ethical, cultural, taste or simply ignorance. They may be every bit as strongly felt as the feelings a vegan might have for all animal products. Anyone expressing such an aversion in terms that attempts to elevate the feelings to to the level of a religion would likely be considered mentally unhealthy.

When I made the statement, I was making the point that a dietary preference does not present the health dangers that an allergy might present nor does it even present any offence to a religious practise. Even a devoutly religious person would not likely say anything regarding inadvertent cross contamination if they were aware the host had made a conscientious effort to properly recognize the dietary requirements.

A gracious guest should not be so militant regarding an inadvertent cross contamination that they are compelled to say or do anything. As a gracious dinner guest where (for example) rat is considered a delicacy, one would not likely feel the need to interrogate the host regarding possible contamination, regardless of how repulsive one may think rat is as a food. Particularly true if the guest is aware that the host has gone out of her way to provide for the dietary peculiarities of the guest.

I suggest anyone who is so obsessive regarding the purity of their veganism that they must insist on absolute purity at all times, even to the point of offending a host, should refrain from accepting any invitation to a mixed dinner.

------------------
gotta run...
Click to view MathildePuppy's profile Amateur 9 posts since
May 4, 2005
20. Oct 25, 2006 11:55 AM in response to: mountmars
quote:<HR>Originally posted by reboot:

The idea that veganism is a "religion in any way is ridiculous. Here are a couple of dictionary definitions of "religion":
1-A strong belief in a supernatural power or powers that control human destiny.
2-An institution to express belief in a divine power.

Veganism (BTW, a word I made up) has absolutely nothing to do with either the supernatural or divinity. It is not even a part of a religious belief in most cases, as are the dietary practises of Jews and Muslims. Regardless of how strongly one feels about the ethics of vegetarianism, it does not rise to the level of a religion in the eyes of most rational people.

It is, as I stated, a dietary preference similar to an aversion anyone might have toward certain foods. For example, most North Americans would express an aversion (even an extremely strong aversion) to foods like dog, cat, monkey, rats, almost all insects, some reptiles and even some vegetable products. Such aversions might be ethical, cultural, taste or simply ignorance. They may be every bit as strongly felt as the feelings a vegan might have for all animal products. Anyone expressing such an aversion in terms that attempts to elevate the feelings to to the level of a religion would likely be considered mentally unhealthy.

When I made the statement, I was making the point that a dietary preference does not present the health dangers that an allergy might present nor does it even present any offence to a religious practise. Even a devoutly religious person would not likely say anything regarding inadvertent cross contamination if they were aware the host had made a conscientious effort to properly recognize the dietary requirements.

A gracious guest should not be so militant regarding an inadvertent cross contamination that they are compelled to say or do anything. As a gracious dinner guest where (for example) rat is considered a delicacy, one would not likely feel the need to interrogate the host regarding possible contamination, regardless of how repulsive one may think rat is as a food. Particularly true if the guest is aware that the host has gone out of her way to provide for the dietary peculiarities of the guest.

I suggest anyone who is so obsessive regarding the purity of their veganism that they must insist on absolute purity at all times, even to the point of offending a host, should refrain from accepting any invitation to a mixed dinner.

<HR>


I am going to weigh in again. Firstly, neither myself nor sixfeetsmall who you quoted said it was a 'religion'. We just said that it is more than a just a eating preference. Others on the board identified that it is an expression of faith similar to a religious obligation. Not a religion.

For me, I have beliefs about stepping lightly upon the earth and I have objections to the grotesque actions that are committed against animals so that we can eat or wear them. As an expression of those beliefs, i am vegan.

Incidentally, the religion of Jainism practices veganism (a word that is used in common parlance, actually) as an integral component of it. (Except they go further. If you are interested, then you can google it.)

I would think that most vegans would truly appreciate if a non-vegan host goes to the trouble to cater to their needs.
Click to view sixfeetsmall3x5's profile Pro 118 posts since
Apr 27, 2005
21. Oct 25, 2006 12:16 PM in response to: mountmars
Reboot, firstly, I don't believe veganism is a religion. It's not. I do however believe it's more than a personal choice. I believe in non-harming, as part of the 7 limbs of yoga, and that includes non eating any animals or animal by-products. It's not a "preference", I don't prefer to not eat animals the same way I prefer grapes to apples. I don't eat animals. There is no difference between that and someone who is allergic to dairy or nuts or whatever. I'm not going to sacrifice something I have done a lot of work to get to just to be "gracious" to my host. I'm not going to accept an invitation to some random person's home to eat dinner, and I know that my friends respect what I believe. If they can't respect that, they probably aren't my friends anyway. I don't see how politely asking my host if something contains eggs is being rude. If it does, I can polietly choose to eat something else off the table. I wouldn't be offended if someone else is at my house and they prefer not to eat eggplant or seiten or something I made that's a little off the beaten path. I certainly don't expect anyone to go out of their way to feed me at their home, which is why I carry food with me in my bags, and also if I'm attending a party, I will bring a dish to share with everyone anyway (which is just polite). You'd be surprised how delightful cakes, cookies, and ice cream can be without eggs and dairy.
Click to view banananutmuffin's profile Expert 56 posts since
Jul 8, 2004
22. Dec 26, 2007 3:36 AM in response to: mountmars
No one ever said that veganism was a religion. It IS, however, very much a part of some religions, similar to "keeping Kosher" for Jewish folks. Many Buddhists and Seventh Day Adventists, for example, adhere to veganism because of their religions.

I stated earlier than veganism, for many folks, is similar to a "religious obligation," and I stand by that statement.

For myself personally, it is very much a religious obligation and something I feel God has called me to do.

quote:<HR>When I made the statement, I was making the point that a dietary preference does not present the health dangers that an allergy might present nor does it even present any offence to a religious practise.<HR>


Wrong. As I mentioned, eating meat/dairy DOES present an offense to certain religious practices, most notably those of some Buddhists and Seventh Day Adventists.

quote:<HR>Veganism (BTW, a word I made up)<HR>


Wrong again. I can assure you, you did not make up this word, as anyone with even a modicum of knowledge about this topic would know.



http://This message has been edited by banananutmuffin (edited Oct-25-2006).
Click to view Ariann092's profile Legend 681 posts since
Jan 4, 2005
23. Oct 25, 2006 3:24 PM in response to: mountmars
Also to respond to reboot: Is Buddhism a religion? There are many organized religious paths that do not necessitate a belief in a conscious divinity, but rather in the wholeness of the universe or the interconnectedness of all things - these are religious beliefs and beliefs in the supernatural - they are faiths. They are often the basis of a general ethic of compassion and treading lightly on the earth. And they can certainly entail food restrictions.

I am vegetarian because of JUDAISM - I consider it the only valid expression of kashrut (keeping kosher) in the world as we live in it today. Many vegetarian Jews agree with me. Whatever your personal totally uneducated opinions about the subject, veganism and vegetarianism are often expressions of a faith (unorganized) or a religion (organized). Believe it or not, you don't get to decide why others do what they do, particularly in the face of our expressions to the contrary.
Click to view teetime's profile Legend 459 posts since
Aug 17, 2002
24. Oct 25, 2006 4:22 PM in response to: mountmars
quote:<HR>Originally posted by reboot:

Even a devoutly religious person would not likely say anything regarding inadvertent cross contamination if they were aware the host had made a conscientious effort to properly recognize the dietary requirements.
<HR>


I just adore how you speak so freely for the masses. Tell this to the hasidic Jew who discovered his/her host wasn't keeping a truly kosher kitchen.
Click to view reboot's profile Legend 398 posts since
Dec 14, 2007
26. Oct 27, 2006 10:34 AM in response to: mountmars
It seems certain extremist vegetarians feel minor and inadvertent/accidental cross contamination of their food is on a plane with the very dangerous health risk an allergic person might experience or the risk to the mortal soul a religious person could experience.

Personally, I believe most rational people will not agree. I fully expect that the insistence on such extremist attitudes will never result in the dietary preference known as vegetarianism being elevated to anything more than a simple dietary preference. It will however, very likely result in the evaluation of the proponents being elevated from ?vegetarians of conviction? to extremist vegetarians with an obsessive attitude that approaches a mental illness.

As an example, let me point out that the minor cross contamination, that is thought so objectionable, was not created as a result of any uncaring actions by the host. Indeed, the host in this case had gone out of her way to accommodate the vegetarian. The rejection of the contaminated food would do absolutely nothing to minimize the impact of the vegetarian on the earth. It is entirely possible the food would be wasted and the vegetarian would then have to consumed additional food in order to conform to her radical vegetarianism. The wasting of some food and consuming alternative food can only result in an excessive impact on the earth.

Even if the rejected food is not ultimately entirely wasted (perhaps it is fed to the family dog the next day), it?s rejection has zero positive effects and can serve only to make some extremist point to the host and/or guests. Making such points, as a guest at a dinner party, is not what most people would consider polite behaviour.

The complete absence of any possible harm, the uselessness of rejecting the food, and the potential insult to others are the reasons I suggested minor and inadvertent cross contamination would likely be overlooked. Individuals are at liberty to adopt any attitude they wish but radical extremism is generally found to be repugnant regardless of whether it is in radical fundamentalists Christians, Islamic jihadists, skinhead racists, militant animal rights advocates, or vegetarians.


------------------
gotta run...
Click to view banananutmuffin's profile Expert 56 posts since
Jul 8, 2004
27. Oct 27, 2006 1:12 PM in response to: mountmars
Dude... you seem to totally be missing the point.

Cross-contamination isn't the issue here.

It's whether or not veganism is more than a personal dietary preference.

Numerous posters here have shown in numerous ways how vegetarianism can be linked to religious and spiritual beliefs.

You can refuse to believe that, if you'd like. But I think it's rather close-minded and presumptuous of you to assume that you know the motives behind every vegetarians' choice.
Click to view banananutmuffin's profile Expert 56 posts since
Jul 8, 2004
28. Oct 27, 2006 1:14 PM in response to: mountmars
quote:<HR>Originally posted by reboot:
...or the risk to the mortal soul a religious person could experience.
<HR>


How many times and in how many ways does it have to be pointed out that vegetarianism is part of the obligations and beliefs of many different religions? Are you totally missing that or what?
Click to view sixfeetsmall3x5's profile Pro 118 posts since
Apr 27, 2005
29. Oct 27, 2006 3:46 PM in response to: mountmars
First, I'm really sorry that you don't understand what it is like to have strong convictions toward something (if you had strong convictions toward ANYTHING, you would at least understand, even if you still disagree, which is fine by me). I feel it's a really important part of life to believe in something, to stand strong, and to do what you think is best for yourself, for the earth, for other beings, and for other people.

I think you are missing the point...no one is being fanatical or "militant" here. It's a part of our belief structure.

As for being rude to your host - a good host, would not pressure their guest (in ANY situation) to eat the food that they made. If it was made in violation of someone's religion, ethics, morals or principles, I don't care who you are - you don't expect the person to eat it. A good host would consider this a learning experience to learn more about what they can cook their friend when they come over.

The rejection of the contaiminated food would not minimize the impact of the vegetarian on the earth, you are correct. However, for some, vegetarianism/veganism is not about the impact on the Earth - it's the impact on the animals that concern is about (I actually fall into both camps, with the impact on animals being first for me). As for the excessive impact on the Earth, as a whole, vegetarians and vegans impact the Earth much less than omnivores, therefore the wasting of the food still does not compare to the damage that a omnivore does. This isn't about wasting, it's about principles.

I feel there is a positive effect to any rejection. If the rejection is done in a quiet, polite and civilized manner, such as "I'm sorry, but I'm unable to eat that because of (insert contamination reason here). However, thank you so much for considering my choices when making the meal - I really appreciate it", that opens up the lines of communication of how, what and why the vegetarian/vegan eats. It also allows the host and the other guests to try something different, therefore becoming more educated. I've never been to a dinner party where if the host is aware of my being vegan, I couldn't at least eat a salad or vegetables, so its unlikely that the person would be sitting at the table doing nothing and making everyone uncomfortable. Whenever we can learn from each other, I consider that a positive effect, so I respectfully disagree, and I'm very sorry that you are unwilling to open the lines of communication and learn something about other people.

Acceptance is key and if they feel as though vegetarians/vegans are too "extreme" for their liking, then don't socialize with them. Just because you find them repugnant doesn't mean that the person's beliefs are any less valid than your own.