The French government issued a decree Tuesday banning the term “steak” on the label of vegetarian products, saying it was reserved for meat alone.
Do you buy [generic animal steak] or do you buy cattle, bison, buffalo, camel, goat, horse, kangaroo, sheep, ostrich, pigs, turkey, or deer steak?
In Italy (and as far as I remember even in France) they are divided into different aisles, so in a certain aisle you will find only meat from a certain animal.
People sometimes act like that the description of steak or milk (cow, human, goat, cat) is unambiguous. I have never seen plant based food which does not declare it like [plant based steak]
It is not the point, I also never see a plant based food not declared, but I think it is right to not be able to call “milk” what you get from a almond.
I am all in for clear description of food and a big label if it contains animal suffering and the destruction of the eco system or if it is plant based. If you don’t care which animal parts you buy as long as “meat” or “steak” is any death animal I think you are in the minority.
Or maybe we just think that words has a meaning.
Or maybe we just think that words has a meaning.
I guess you have a strong opinion on calling a bond between two man or two woman marriage?
Not particularly. For what I think is the marriage is, I simply don’t care and, oddly enough, the law about the civil marriage cite the words “husband” and “wife” only once, the other times it use the word “consorts” that here is neutral, and in the context it simply mean “both of you”. So even the law seem to don’t care (mostly) about the sex of the people getting married.
So it was always the way that same sex marriage was accepted and nobody had to fight against people who claim “but the bible …” “It is between a man a women and nothing else” “next you want to marriage you dog”, right? There where never people who fought to change the system because the system and the laws have always been perfect?
So it was always the way that same sex marriage was accepted and nobody had to fight against people who claim “but the bible …” “It is between a man a women and nothing else” “next you want to marriage you dog”, right?
That’s not what I said. I just stated what I think and what the law say in Italy. I am not responsible for what other people think.
There where never people who fought to change the system because the system and the laws have always been perfect?
If we are talking about the marriage, I can agree with you, in fact in Italy we have other forms of unions (which don’t make any difference between the sexes) to substitute the marriage which for the State are like a marriage. Note that even if conceptually they are the same thing, we call with different names exactly because in Italy the marriage is way too often identified with the religious one, which for the law is void (ie if you are only married relligiously, which means the 3 law article I cited are not read, then for the State you are not married). We have not tried to change the meaning of a specific word.
Has the defintion of unione civile changed?