7 ms·

It's still unelegant and inconsistent. If I claim my diet requires high-quality food determined by me daily, that gets ignored. I understand Kosher for commerc

It's still unelegant and inconsistent. If I claim my diet requires high-quality food determined by me daily, that gets ignored. I understand Kosher for commercial enterprises like airlines: with a minimum of effort, they can satisfy many customers. But governments should have consistent treatment of citizens.

rudolf0 12y ago
Even if a diet choice is voluntary, if the choice is grounded in religious or ethical reasons then it is an infringement of personal freedom to deny that. Yes, prison itself is an infringement of freedom, but some believe that certain freedoms should remain permanent.
- zanny 12y ago
  Well obviously the prisons disagree, and since they are fundamentally rooted in the denial of freedom then I don't think anyone involved in the prison industrial complex (even in Sweden) is going to care to hear arguments about how they should be nicer to prisoners.
  - DanBC 12y ago
    http://www.prisonersabroad.org.uk/uploads/documents/prisoners/Food_and_diets.pdf http://www.prisonersabroad.org.uk/uploads/documents/prisoner... There are plenty of people workig on makig prisons nicer for prisoners. This includes respecting their religion (as guided by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).
- Alupis 12y ago
  Well, religious diets are arguably not voluntary. I'd say it's far different to allow a Kosher meal than it is to plan, purchase, prep, and serve a special diet to one inmate who has a preference of diet because that is how they chose to eat on the outside.
  - rudolf0 12y ago
    I'm going to have to disagree with you there. Religious diets are not voluntary, but choice of religion is voluntary. Vegetarian/vegan diets adhering to an ethical philosophy are not voluntary, but choosing to accept an animal rights philosophy is voluntary. Either both are a choice or neither are a choice, depending on how you define your terms. Now, if the vegan diet was for personal taste or even for health reasons (as long as there was no significant health impact from going off of it), then it's a different story.
    - Alupis 12y ago
      > Religious diets are not voluntary, but choice of religion is voluntary. Agreed > Vegetarian/vegan diets adhering to an ethical philosophy are not voluntary, but choosing to accept an animal rights philosophy is voluntary. Not agreed. Your right to accept certain philosophies while in prion is forfeited upon conviction. This means, if you are not eating meat because you simply feel it's wrong -- well, the prison has no obligation to oblige you. If you are not eating meat because of your religion, that is different. Sure - one may "convert" to a new religion to obtain a certain preferred diet, but that is still applying the rule evenly and fairly. > Now, if the vegan diet was for personal taste or even for health reasons (as long as there was no significant health impact from going off of it), then it's a different story. This would be the foundation for an awful law which would be enforced with bias and randomness. How do you actually determine if a diet is being followed for pure taste reasoning, or if it's something based on personal ethics? You cannot, and therefore this cannot be a rule. Rules and laws must be based on a foundation that can be applied evenly and fairly to all, not left up to judgement by a sometimes-in-a-nice-mood-sometimes-in-a-bad-mood warden.
      - DanBC 12y ago
        > Not agreed. Your right to accept certain philosophies while in prion is forfeited upon conviction. There are a bunch of international covenants and agreements that disagree with you. This document talks specifically about food: http://www.prisonersabroad.org.uk/uploads/documents/prisoners/Food_and_diets.pdf http://www.prisonersabroad.org.uk/uploads/documents/prisoner... Your misrepresentations of the reasons some people are vegan or vegetarian are so severe it makes the conversation pointless. Some people have beliefs about eatig meat that are equivalent to religious belief.
PhasmaFelis 12y ago
> It's still unelegant and inconsistent. If I claim my diet requires high-quality food determined by me daily, that gets ignored. Wardens are not robots and are capable of applying common sense and judgment. If a prisoner claims that his morals require him not to eat animal products, he's likely to be telling the truth. If he claims his morals require Kobe beef daily, he's probably lying.
- MichaelGG 12y ago
  Why is my claim that I must have Kobe beef (because I'm divine, and I say so) any less valid than the claim I can't eat pork because God said so?
  - emidln 12y ago
    Higher weight is given to mass delusions compared to acute delusions.
  - PhasmaFelis 12y ago
    Because one of them is an earnestly held belief and the other is you lying to get special treatment, and humans are capable of telling the difference. See the bit above about using common sense and not being a mindless rule-applying robot. Also, because people who request kosher, halal, vegetarian, or vegan diets in prison aren't generally demanding higher-quality food, just different food. When accommodated, they generally still get low-grade prison fare. Thus there's little motivation to lie about it.
    - MichaelGG 12y ago
      So before I go to prison, I should earnestly develop a sincere desire for, say, pancakes every day, then it'd count? I understand that law interpreters are not mindless robots. However it seems very arbitrary to support kosher and halal, but not Pastafarian diets. It's as silly as only granting conscientious objector status to "real" Mennonites.
      - 12y ago
boomlinde 12y ago
> It's still unelegant and inconsistent. Yes, what a shame in such an otherwise elegant and consistent system.

rudolf0 12y ago

Even if a diet choice is voluntary, if the choice is grounded in religious or ethical reasons then it is an infringement of personal freedom to deny that. Yes, prison itself is an infringement of freedom, but some believe that certain freedoms should remain permanent.

zanny 12y ago
Well obviously the prisons disagree, and since they are fundamentally rooted in the denial of freedom then I don't think anyone involved in the prison industrial complex (even in Sweden) is going to care to hear arguments about how they should be nicer to prisoners.
- DanBC 12y ago
  http://www.prisonersabroad.org.uk/uploads/documents/prisoners/Food_and_diets.pdf http://www.prisonersabroad.org.uk/uploads/documents/prisoner... There are plenty of people workig on makig prisons nicer for prisoners. This includes respecting their religion (as guided by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).
Alupis 12y ago
Well, religious diets are arguably not voluntary. I'd say it's far different to allow a Kosher meal than it is to plan, purchase, prep, and serve a special diet to one inmate who has a preference of diet because that is how they chose to eat on the outside.
- rudolf0 12y ago
  I'm going to have to disagree with you there. Religious diets are not voluntary, but choice of religion is voluntary. Vegetarian/vegan diets adhering to an ethical philosophy are not voluntary, but choosing to accept an animal rights philosophy is voluntary. Either both are a choice or neither are a choice, depending on how you define your terms. Now, if the vegan diet was for personal taste or even for health reasons (as long as there was no significant health impact from going off of it), then it's a different story.
  - Alupis 12y ago
    > Religious diets are not voluntary, but choice of religion is voluntary. Agreed > Vegetarian/vegan diets adhering to an ethical philosophy are not voluntary, but choosing to accept an animal rights philosophy is voluntary. Not agreed. Your right to accept certain philosophies while in prion is forfeited upon conviction. This means, if you are not eating meat because you simply feel it's wrong -- well, the prison has no obligation to oblige you. If you are not eating meat because of your religion, that is different. Sure - one may "convert" to a new religion to obtain a certain preferred diet, but that is still applying the rule evenly and fairly. > Now, if the vegan diet was for personal taste or even for health reasons (as long as there was no significant health impact from going off of it), then it's a different story. This would be the foundation for an awful law which would be enforced with bias and randomness. How do you actually determine if a diet is being followed for pure taste reasoning, or if it's something based on personal ethics? You cannot, and therefore this cannot be a rule. Rules and laws must be based on a foundation that can be applied evenly and fairly to all, not left up to judgement by a sometimes-in-a-nice-mood-sometimes-in-a-bad-mood warden.
    - DanBC 12y ago
      > Not agreed. Your right to accept certain philosophies while in prion is forfeited upon conviction. There are a bunch of international covenants and agreements that disagree with you. This document talks specifically about food: http://www.prisonersabroad.org.uk/uploads/documents/prisoners/Food_and_diets.pdf http://www.prisonersabroad.org.uk/uploads/documents/prisoner... Your misrepresentations of the reasons some people are vegan or vegetarian are so severe it makes the conversation pointless. Some people have beliefs about eatig meat that are equivalent to religious belief.

PhasmaFelis 12y ago

> It's still unelegant and inconsistent. If I claim my diet requires high-quality food determined by me daily, that gets ignored. Wardens are not robots and are capable of applying common sense and judgment. If a prisoner claims that his morals require him not to eat animal products, he's likely to be telling the truth. If he claims his morals require Kobe beef daily, he's probably lying.

MichaelGG 12y ago
Why is my claim that I must have Kobe beef (because I'm divine, and I say so) any less valid than the claim I can't eat pork because God said so?
- emidln 12y ago
  Higher weight is given to mass delusions compared to acute delusions.
- PhasmaFelis 12y ago
  Because one of them is an earnestly held belief and the other is you lying to get special treatment, and humans are capable of telling the difference. See the bit above about using common sense and not being a mindless rule-applying robot. Also, because people who request kosher, halal, vegetarian, or vegan diets in prison aren't generally demanding higher-quality food, just different food. When accommodated, they generally still get low-grade prison fare. Thus there's little motivation to lie about it.
  - MichaelGG 12y ago
    So before I go to prison, I should earnestly develop a sincere desire for, say, pancakes every day, then it'd count? I understand that law interpreters are not mindless robots. However it seems very arbitrary to support kosher and halal, but not Pastafarian diets. It's as silly as only granting conscientious objector status to "real" Mennonites.
    - 12y ago

boomlinde 12y ago

> It's still unelegant and inconsistent. Yes, what a shame in such an otherwise elegant and consistent system.