SoylentNews

Vegetarian Café Refuses to Accept British 'Corpse Cash'

posted by on Tuesday December 06 2016, @03:27PM   
from the money-is-murder dept.

Phoenix666 writes:

The Rainbow Vegetarian Café in Cambridge, England, has announced that it will not accept the new £5 polymer notes, introduced by the Bank of England in September. Last week the British vegan community discovered that the notes contain trace amounts of beef tallow, which is animal fat, and are therefore unacceptable by their cruelty-free standards. A heated online controversy has resulted, including a petition asking the Bank to remove tallow from the polymer.

The Rainbow Café's owner, Sharon Meijland, told The Telegraph that her stance was announced last Wednesday, at the end of a BBC radio interview on the unrelated topic of Christmas food.

"We sponsor the Vegan Fair and announced on Wednesday we would not be accepting the £5 notes because they are dubious ethically. We have been providing food for vegans for 30 years and have tried to be as ethical as we possibly can...This is not just a restaurant, it's a restaurant where tiny details like this are really important."

Is any of our money cruelty-free?

---

Original Submission

• Re: they are being ideologically consistent Re: they are being ideologically consistent (Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 06 2016, @06:22PM

  by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 06 2016, @06:22PM (#437916)

  Next time argue in good faith or don't argue at all.

  I could say the same thing about you getting an actual damn username.

  Straight to ad hominems, eh? Talk about arguing in bad faith.

  Parent

  Starting Score:	0		points
  Moderation		-1
  Flamebait=1, Total=1
  Extra 'Flamebait' Modifier		0
  Total Score:		-1

• Re: they are being ideologically consistent Re: they are being ideologically consistent (Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Tuesday December 06 2016, @07:56PM

  by tangomargarine (667) on Tuesday December 06 2016, @07:56PM (#437987)

  You can't ad hominem someone who refuses to name themself. The entire meaning of ad hominem relies on you already knowing who they are.

  --
  "Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"

  Parent

  • ad hominem does not mean what you think (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 06 2016, @08:10PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 06 2016, @08:10PM (#437996)

    > You can't ad hominem someone who refuses to name themself.

    Apparently you don't know what word means.

    "You are wrong because you suck" is an ad hominem.
    It doesn't matter who you are, just as long the unrelated "you suck" is the basis for judging the validity of the argument.

    You said he's not arguing in good faith because he doesn't have a username, the two are completely unrelated. The argument stands on its own regardless of who makes it.

    And you might as well face it, nobody know who the fuck tangomargarine is either.

    Parent