Prisoner loses challenge to an Australian state’s ban on inmates eating Vegemite
j / k
|
Down or up a comment |
h / l
|
Previous or next link |
?
|
This help |
We bend over backward for religious dietary restrictions.
Why not sincerely held secular dietary restrictions and convictions? I also suspect the ruling would have been deliberated more if this wasn't an Australian inmate requesting Australian foods.
Because if it's just 'australian people like to eat X, I'm australian, thus it's morally wrong to deny me 'X', I don't see how that's reasonable. It's also a strong australian cultural norm to not be confined to a small cell every day for the rest of your life, but that norm was knowingly taken away as part this inmates' conviction and sentencing. Surely eating vegemite is a much smaller concern compared to the imprisonment.
Religion is culture. If you doubt that, go to country X and ask them about god(s) then go to every other country and ask the same. Even if one of them got it right and is following the word of god, it would still mean every other country has got it wrong, and _theirs_ is just culture.
Now, if we bend for one cultural norm, why not another? I'd say it's not that his culture shouldn't be treated like religion, it should! It's just that religion shouldn't be treated specially in the first place.
This argument appears to me unjustified. This equating between culture and religion seems especially unworkable in modern times, where cultural groups don't have single religions at all. Eg in america there is in my opinion a single shared american culture, shared across people of different religions. If we were to equate these two things, does that imply that there is no shared american culture? I just don't see how this interpretation doesn't lead to a single stretched 'culture' term which basically ends up subsuming everything about people, and don't see how it is a useful term or how it aids in thought or understanding.
In this case, the point really isn't 'culture' vs 'religion' it's 'moral' vs 'preference'. Consuming vegemite is not a moral mandate for anyone, it's just a preference, like mayonnaise, fashion, or coke.
I think you might've convinced me of this just with your comment.
Also, flip "religion" and "culture" and the post still (mostly) works, though I don't think that proves anything.
The moral/preference idea is closer, but you get a lot of gray areas like sports teams and Sunday roasts (complete with threat of excommunication for non-adherence).
In the US, we often make an exception for the former but not the latter. Sometimes we do both.
For example there is a conscientious objector exemption from the military draft.
Buddhism is actually a great example, because it shows how one can choose their religion just as they can their cultural preferences.
Like the flying spaghetti monster?
Describe that single culture.
It's Vegemite, FFS. Not caviar.
The yeast could be used to brew alcohol, and the viscosity and strong smell could be used to hide drugs and misdirect sniffer dogs.
That might be their explanation but IMO it doesn't make sense.
This seems a little different. This seems more about “enjoyment” as opposed to a sincerely held belief.
Some places also respect that. Famously, the Norwegian terrorist who killed 77 people demanded, and received, a PlayStation 3. And if this jurisdiction had similar laws as Norway they probably would have provided vegemite.
Note that U.S. law is less progressive on this than many European nations.
Also, it’s called a sincerely held “religious” belief but it doesn’t need to be religious at all. It does lead to bad news headlines when a certain ethical belief passes the threshold in a court of law that amount to “XYZ is a religion”.
They do make single-serving portions, so I don't see why it couldn't be securely acquired from a supplier and doled out single-packet-by-packet and ensuring they've actually ate the Vegemite?
They’ve asked for “proper foundations”.
Also the jar lid can and will get stuck on dried Vegemite, so at the same time you have to open it frequently, so as to prevent that.
The *mite hate comes from people trying to spread it like Nutella because they think brown = chocolate. One must apply it like sunscreen or thermal paste. My last jar of Vegemite similarly glued itself irretrievably shut towards the end even with a quarter of its contents left. I treated it as a metaphor for existence and discarded it with spiritual indifference.
I have pulled such a prank on a person at least once, yes.
Ok, so this appears to be a surströmming type of situation - people (including me) trying to eat it straight from the jar/can and being surprised by the foul taste and smell, whereas to those who grew up with it it's like eating mayonnaise straight from the jar - not illegal, just weird.
I've reopened mine twice already, but each such instance increases the rate at which, for lack of a better expression, coagulates.
https://www.technewstoday.com/best-pattern-to-apply-thermal-...
> serving a life sentence for murder
Well which is it?
Well yes, but you can brew alcohol out of almost anything.
Also, everything “potentially” impairs sniffers dogs ability. Including attention. The question is, does it actually?
You do need yeast though, right? Even if it's just naturally present e.g. as on the skin of grapes or other berries. Though I'm sure there are probably ways to extract yeast from other foods, like bread.
1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PvrJu9dLmtA
2. https://www.reddit.com/r/prisonhooch/
+1
I've never set foot in either Europe or Australia, but I liked both Marmite and Vegemite the first time I tried them.
i guess this is the most aussie thing about me. i lost my accent ages ago but i still crave a vegemite sandwich from time to time.
And the court actually found Vegemite to be a cultural right, just not important enough of a right to overrule the prison system, so there's the problem with the headline.