I care about companies not making moral judgements on behalf of their employees.
I guess this particular restriction aligns with your morality closely enough that you are happy to give it a pass. What if instead, a company morally objected to halal slaughter and refused to reimburse employees for halal meals? What if they decided coffee production was too likely to have involved child labour and so that's off the list too. Surgery deserts make people fat and can lead to diabities, can't go paying for that either.
For what it's worth 3 of my sister's are vegan. My mother has been vegetarian since the age of 9. So it's fair to say I've eaten my fair share of meat free meals.
I think as a company there are a whole bunch of things you could do to promote vegetarianism without alienativing 90% of the population. An easy one would be offering a similar range of vegetarian alternatives as they do normal meals.
"I care about companies not making moral judgements on behalf of their employees."
This is absurd. Of course companies need to enforce some form of morality among its employees, for instance by having an anti-murder policy or by firing employees who shout racist epitaphs at quarterly meetings. The question is just where to draw the line.
"What if instead, a company morally objected to halal slaughter and refused to reimburse employees for halal meals? What if they decided coffee production was too likely to have involved child labour and so that's off the list too. Surgery deserts make people fat and can lead to diabities, can't go paying for that either."
Sounds terrifying. One day, those fascist may ask people to quit drinking on the job, enforce a no-drug policy, ask people to adhere to a dress-code, and prohibit them from carrying firearms on their desk job. Or wait, did I just take your slippery slope fallacy in the wrong direction?
"For what it's worth 3 of my sister's are vegan. My mother has been vegetarian since the age of 9. So it's fair to say I've eaten my fair share of meat free meals."
For the sake of your health, I sure hope you have eaten meals without meat every once in a while.
> This is absurd. Of course companies need to enforce some form of morality among its employees, for instance by having an anti-murder policy or by firing employees who shout racist epitaphs at quarterly meetings. The question is just where to draw the line.
Those things aren't the responsibility of the employer. They are illegal.
I don't actually think my argument was the slippery slope. It was my attempt to show that other things could equally be considered immoral that perhaps don't align quite as neatly with your militant vegetarianism.
Anyway, I doubt anyone else is actually reading this 2 week old thread so I'll leave it at that. Have a good weekend.
Again you are factually wrong. As long as it is not threatening, it is not illegal in the USA to express racism. That's why companies take a stricter stance against racism than the law does.
>It was my attempt to show that other things could equally be considered immoral that perhaps don't align quite as neatly with your militant vegetarianism.
I don't think you know what the word "militant" means.
Also, your argument remains absurd. Just because there is no universal agreement on morality, it does not mean that morality is relative and it certainly does not mean that companies should not have policies based on their morals and their values.
As a matter of fact, your line of argument is so ridiculous that I doubt even you believe in what you are saying. I think that this company's policy made you feel hurt and attacked for visceral reasons (the do-gooder derogation effect) and you are trying to justify that feeling for yourself by dressing it up as a political argument.
>Anyway, I doubt anyone else is actually reading this 2 week old thread so I'll leave it at that. Have a good weekend.
It sounds like a good idea that you leave. I hope that you learned something here and wish you a pleasant week.
