Hacker News Reader

Comment by ptah | Hacker News Reader

This is pretty egregious for vegans and other with protected religious beliefs that prohibits consumption of meat/beef. what is the legal recourse?

View on HN

From what I understand. If you unknowingly ate it your religion doesn't count that as bad. On the topic of legal recourse...I once knew a person who got a piece of a glove with blood on it on their burger and the bun from a Burger King. A lot of lawyers refused to help her citing "the fear of contracting a disease isn't enough for compensation."

Not for vegans as the harm to the animal will still weigh on one's conscience. It's about the spirit of the rule that you are voluntarily submitting to.

So why are they eating in a restaurant that contributes to that harm? Their dollars pay the bills of restaurants that serve meat.

they are tolerant of others choices not intolerant. are you opposed to tolerance

That's quite the jump you made...

not a jump, as you are implying that establishments that are not purely kosher/halaal/vegan but have options should be shunned by practitioners. this is intolerant and a form of pressuring others to conform to one's personal beliefs

by your logic kosher and halaal people should not share restaurants or tables with non-kosher and halaal people

Religious Jews and Muslims don't eat in non kosher/halal restaurants because of the lack of properly prepared and sourced meats. There's a specific set of rules surrounding kosher/halal meats, it's not just abstention from pork...

I personally don't care where anyone eats, but if a Jew/Muslim eats in a non-kosher/halal restaurant, they're already compromising...

If you're giving money to a restaurant that serves meat is is hard avoid the idea that you're funding a restaurant that contributes to "harm".

if an establishment wants to cater to both jews/muslims/vegans and non , they should do it properly. there are many that do this already. it is not considered a compromise by the tolerant ones as what others do is not a concern, just personal observance

Not even remotely the same thing.

Vegans are opposed to eating meat because of animal cruelty, so it is hypocritical for them to eat at a place where 99% of the menu is meat-based.

Kosher/halaal is just a specific requirement for preparing meat for consumption. There is nothing hypocritical about Jews/Muslims eating at a restaurant that also serves non-kosher/halaal meat because those restrictions don't apply to people of other religions.

I wouldn't say that's hypocritical. A vegan doesn't eat meat, that's still a good contribution to the cause of animal welfare without the need of isolating oneself from the human community. It's simply preposterous to ask people who have ethical convictions to apply them to the (usually very unpleasant) extreme or being branded incoherent or hypocritical.

On the other hand, I don't think it should be a big issue to eat some meat once in a while by mistake. The impact on the general cause is negligible.

How is it hypocritical to eat the vegan options there and show that there is demand for the vegan options? Is it also hypocritical to hire non-vegan employees, or get an Uber from non-vegans? Is it hypocritical to pay taxes which will go towards defense spending (I know that Israel has vegan options for military uniforms and diet, but I'm not sure about the US). It's about practicality.

(I can't remember if the impossible burger is vegan or not, but I remember that they don't cater to vegans)

Could be considered an undeclared ingredient. There’s plenty of recalls from that every year, although most have to do with unlabeled ingredients being allergens.

This is kind of what I feared would happen when you take something that’s so similar to real meat and let fast food workers try to sort it out.

What are you trying to get out of the legal recourse

Get rich ?

Financial Punishment? It’s not going to put a dent in their revenue

Name and shame ? It’s happened

What would the legal basis be for having any recourse?

IANAL, but it seems possible that intentionally or negligently selling someone a product that definitely isn't what they thought they were buying could constitute something like fraud or misrepresentation. They might be liable for the cost of the hamburger, at least, because you did not get what you paid for.

I also wonder if there might be punitive damages. Here's a random example of a case where there were punitive damages for a business-to-business negligent misrepresentation case: http://www.obrlaw.com/commercial-litigation.php?Third-Circui...

And I'd also wonder if there could be something like pain and suffering or emotional distress. I doubt it would work to demonstrate actual harm (health effects, etc.) in unwittingly/unwillingly eating meat, but I think it'd be pretty easy to argue that someone might feel a lot of distress from being forced to experience something they have deeply-held beliefs against.

Why would there be a legal recourse?

If someone has a strong religious aversion to a product, why are they eating in a restaurant that serves that product? Furthermore, their religion dictates they only eat meats blessed by a cleric of their religion, last I checked non-halal or kosher restaurants aren't sourcing halal/kosher meats. And vegans aren't a protected religious group.

because the restaurant advertises that is has options for them

vegans are protected in the UK

Protected from what?

I took 20 seconds to Google "vegans protected UK" and find this article for you:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/vegans-discr...

Your 20 seconds of googling got an article that talks about "may get" and doesn't really explain how that would apply to this situation.

Just being protected and getting the wrong food at a restaurant doesn't necessarily follow that you've got legal recourse to do anything.

> Your 20 seconds of googling got an article that talks about "may get" and doesn't really explain how that would apply to this situation.

That wasn't part of your question.

Do you typically rely on others to read your mind, while asking questions?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com