578
submitted 2 years ago by kinther@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Today@lemmy.world 28 points 2 years ago

What about the extra charge for gluten free buns? Or vegan chese? Or impossible burgers? If I can't ride my bike up big hills can i get an e-bike for the same price? If I'm very tall can i get an airplane seat upgrade for free?

[-] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 16 points 2 years ago

gluten free buns

For people with gluten intolerance, they'd have a similar case. Lactose intolerance isn't a choice just as much as gluten intolerance isn't a choice.

Source: I've had a friend who has had celiac disease his whole life. I was jealous of him in high school because he was always so skinny, and I didn't know he had it. Not fucking jealous anymore.

[-] Today@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago

Yeah. I have a friend who can't have onions, garlic, dairy, or gluten. At least dairy and gluten have decent subs now. Losing onion and garlic would be miserable!

[-] mp04610@lemm.ee 7 points 2 years ago

I have Celiac Disease and let me tell you, I would love to see gluten free items cost the same as regular foods. The only thing you apparently can do is to include an itemized list of GF items you've bought over the year and include it in your tax return. However, the amount of bureaucracy is probably a great deterrent for people like me to not do this and just eat the extra cost.

[-] SirSamuel@lemmy.world -4 points 2 years ago

If I can't ride my bike up big hills can i get an e-bike for the same price?

If you have a disability you can get a mobility scooter

If I'm very tall can i get an airplane seat upgrade for free?

Neither the very tall (nor the obese for that matter) are part of a protected class, and their relative sizes are not considered disabilities. However those physical conditions can lead to disabilities (heart and joint issues for example) which then lead to reasonable accommodation.

Your straw men are cute, but this isn't Kansas, we don't need them here

[-] reassure6869@lemm.ee 4 points 2 years ago

Appreciate the Kansas side burn

[-] glimse@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago

Can you explain why the examples they gave are different than the case at hand? I think they have a point but I'm interested in hearing the opposing viewpoint (yours) before I form an opinion on the situation.

[-] SirSamuel@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago

TBH, not much, except that in the case of dairy and gluten intolerance there's a case to be made for reasonable accommodation under the ADA. The rest of his comments were increasingly silly

Also there's many things wrong with American disability law, social safety nets, and the complete dysfunction of what passes for "healthcare". Splitting hairs on what constitutes a disability is emblematic of these failings.

[-] Today@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago

I was just 90 percent goofing and 'what abouting.' It's only an issue because we have milk alternatives. Dairy bothers me but i don't care for the alt milks so i mostly order tea. If i really want a coffee i get a small splash of milk and deal with the consequences. Also, there's a whole thing with whether it's milk sugar or milk fat or A1/A2 that bothers people - so sometimes skim milk or A2 milk is less upsetting and no more expensive.

[-] SirSamuel@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

Lol okay sorry if i came on too strong

[-] glimse@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago

Hmm with all due respect I'm leaning towards not liking this lawsuit. Similar to splitting hairs on what constitutes a disability, I think calling an allergy a disability cheapens the system.

I think what would be "most fair" in this scenario would be for healthcare to cover lactaid like it does with epipens, etc.

For the record, I am pro-ADA and pro-nationalised healthcare. I just feel like this lawsuit is frivilous

this post was submitted on 17 Mar 2024
578 points (96.0% liked)

News

36384 readers
839 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS