Sam Bankman-Fried living on bread and water because jail won't abide vegan diet, lawyer says
nbcnews.com
The co-founder of failed cryptocurrency exchange FTX pleaded not guilty to a seven count indictment charging him with wire fraud, securities fraud and money laundering.
An attorney for FTX co-founder Sam Bankman-Fried said in federal court Tuesday his client has to subsist on bread, water and peanut butter because the jail he's in isn't accommodating his vegan diet.
You are viewing a single comment
SBF is in prison and has been relieved of his freedom.
The penal system must offer him a diet that satisfies his daily nutritional requirements because he is not free to do so on his own.
The state is not required to support his "ethical beliefs."
Just give the guy vegan food ffs. Fucking Americans are so obsessed with making life as shitty as possible for anyone any chance they get.
For anyone? Ever heard of this guy?
Yes, I have, he's a horrible person, but treating him poorly will not undoe what he's done. And this goes far beyond this one person. The entire us """justice""" system is based around this.
Well then, by that logic, nothing bad should ever happen to anyone regardless of what they do, meaning they're now free to harm others as they wish.
What the fuck are you even talking about? Are you a troll or are you just thick as pig shit?
He should be forced to eat the organs and flesh of animals, nothing green whatsoever, only flesh until the end of his days. He's a monster so he should eat what they eat and not pretend he's a fucking saint.
Lmao, okay edgelord.
I'd personally consider it pretty cruel and inhumans to force someone to violate their own ethics on a daily basis.
Then write your elected official if you have one. I don't really care if he gets to live his best life.
If it were up to me I would force him to watch slaughterhouse of animals being slaughtered then force him to eat meat from the same kinds of animals killed in the video, if it were up to me, he would never touch greens again as long as he's alive.
They are required in most civilised nations. You're just too used to America's punishment focused prison system, look at the prisons in Scandinavian nations and how they treat their prisoners.
I don't think SBF needs rehabilitation or whatever the europeans call it. He needs a prison cell, 3 peanut butter sandwiches, and an hour of rec time... everyday... for twenty years.
Only flesh and milk for him. Don't feed his made up vegan ethics nonsense, he needs to be miserable and eating meat that he despises is the perfect punishment for a little bitch like him.
My god dude you’re like a walking parody. Please stop giving the US a bad name.
I have no shame in the believing prison can be used as a punishment. Shouldn't be the only thing it's used for, but it's what this fella needs.
Oh for sure, punishment is historically a super effective solution after all.
Huh? Recidivism? What’s that?
If SBF would reoffend I'd gladly pay the taxes to give him another twenty years of sandwiches. I don't care about healing this man.
Good for you, but I’d rather my money not be wasted on petty spite and draconian bullshit. I’d rather it actually go towards something useful, like rehabilitating people so they can be better and contribute to society.
He stole 8 billion dollars from ordinary people. Maybe when he's rehabilitated you can let him manage your money.
You realize what rehabilitation means, right?
No one is obligated to or wants to rehabilitate him or people like him. We respect their agency to make their own choices, and in return they accept the deleterious consequences if they choose to do horrific shit. Like this fuck you're using to push your agenda.
Lmao who are you speaking for? No one wants to rehabilitate people because you say so? Who is this “we”?
And christ, man, accusing me of pushing an agenda? How cliche can you get? This is literally just my opinion - me voicing it isn’t “pushing my agenda”.
My guy, we need only read the thread to see that all of you brigading and concern trolling are in the minority. It's a fact. Specifically in this case because Sam Bankman-Fried is the perfect example of the two-tiered legal system we have in the U.S., a different set of rules and consequences based on wealth. The only reason he's even in jail suffering the way he should be is because he started stealing from other rich people.
Oh, excuse you?
You literally are out here parroting one-liners you memorized from shitty revenge movies and you're going to accuse me of pandering to cliches? Get the fuck out of here.
You're in here pushing evil, anti-justice apologetics to once again deny the American people the justice they deserve after so long and it's obvious. You don't care about what's right or what's good for Americans or what's good for morality or the world, you only care about what makes you personally feel better. And I won't fucking let you get what you want.
Hell yeah
Well, I'd rather my tax money not be wasted denying people justice just to satisfy authoritarian twits like yourself, but who am I to disagree with you? I'm just a lowly meat-eater while all he did was steal billions from innocent people, taking away their retirements, and we all know we lowly meat-eaters don't mean as much as the fluffy squirrels and singing birds you think are your friends.
So you agree that the is is solely about people wanting blood, solely out of spite, and doesn’t actually serve any tangible purpose? Glad we’ve got that figured out.
An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind, my friend.
Holy shit, did you dig that strawman from the set of a bad 90's action movie or are you just happy to see me?
Did you know that doing what's right has its own intrinsic value and needs to be done for its own sake, and that not everything has to have a tangible, materialistic value? And that our inner, intrinsic, immaterial needs are just as valid as, if not more important in many ways, than our material ones?
By your logic, we shouldn't have space programs either, because those are largely about national prestige and dick-waving competitions at the U.N.
By your logic, we shouldn't have art either, because art doesn't have any real tangible value or purpose aside from what people assign to it. It literally only exists to make people feel better, yet here you are, arguing that anything with an immaterial purpose is therefore invalid.
Should we have no history either? History doesn't put food on our plates or pays our rent either, and when pressed, history buffs can give only nebulous, vague allusions to intrinsic, immaterial value their field provides, too, yet here you are.
So you agree that you're just concern trolling, hoping that by stereotyping anyone who demands justice as some 90's revenge movie stereotype that you can smear and discredit them, so you can do away with the notion of justice?
So you agree that you oppose justice?
No one even said anything about an eye for an eye. Denying someone vegan meals in prison isn't ripping their eyes out. Neither would imprisoning that fat fuck for life either. Even killing him wouldn't be that.
You may be opposed to the idea and the cause of justice, but the rest of the world is not, and you need to seriously sit down with yourself and seriously reflect on what it is you're doing and what you hope to accomplish here, because what you're doing is wrong.
Something being "right" is entirely subjective, and personally I don't think that punishing people without purpose fits that definition.
My logic is that if an action needlessly hurts another, it shouldn't be done. Not sure how art hurts others. The same goes for your space example. And your history example.
Also, you realize that what you did just then was a strawman... right? Because I never made the argument that nothing is worth doing without having some tangible result. I argued that we shouldn't hurt people for no other reason than spite.
Wtf is concern trolling? Lmao just another weird label to dismiss opinions that differ from your own? Gotcha.
...you know that "an eye for an eye" doesn't mean literally just eyes, right? It means that revenge leads to nothing but further suffering.
Are you sure about that? Because the rest of the modern world doesn't have capital punishment. It's literally only us and some 3rd world countries. Clearly people are moving away from barbarism and draconian, ineffective punishments.
Yet here you are, pushing and needling and imposing your will upon others, demanding other people give up core values that make humanity what it is because you don't want to accept that what you're advocating for is wrong and harmful.
No, your logic consists of a long list of thought-terminating cliches you watched in movies or played in video games. You don't think. You haven't thought about what you're truly asking for and you haven't considered at all how it will harm other people because you simply don't care about all that. You only care about yourself. And your snakes.
You know why the suicide rate for rape victims is so high, for example? Because of evil monsters like you who protect their rapists from justice with the same tactics.
Actually, you are, because justice, like art and history and love, is a thing whose benefit is moral and intangible, and here you are demanding its repeal without one single fuck given for the consequences of it. It is the moral backbone that makes all social relations possible. Without it, you have no humanity. Yet here you are, demanding we give up our humanity because you saw a documentary about Sweden once, played The Last Of Us 2 and decided that was all you needed to know.
Here's some more blatant strawmanning from you. It's awfully telling you equate capital punishment with justice in a thread specifically about a man in jail and not being executed.
But what little can we expect from someone who doesn't even respect his fellow man enough to respect the value and necessity of justice?
He didn't murder it rape anyone did he?
He robbed people of their savings. Imagine losing your retirement?
Can the state require you to eat the body or bodily fluids of someone you affirm has rights to bodily autonomy, someone we know to be wholly innocent because they lack agency?
No.
They're required to make the offer. I believe the prison where he's incarcerated has even offered him the option of vegetarian meals to complement his PB sandwiches.
I think that's a very generous offer that's he's used his agency to reject because he's a fool.
That doesn't necessarily work at all. Vegans don't eat food that contain or are prepared with any dairy or egg product. It's very likely all of their vegetarian meals are not Vegan accessible.
Sounds like he will continue to enjoy peanut butter then :)
In case it wasn't clear, you're not corresponding with someone who cares if SBF is allowed to eat a vegan diet in prison.
It's the precedent set for prisoners in general that you should have a problem with. He just so happens to be the one in the public eye that is affected right now. Forcing him to either go against his beliefs or be nutritionally deficient is not okay. Your feelings about SBF are not at issue. We can end this chain on that note.
Currently only religious beliefs are supported by the prison industry. If he couldn't eat kosher, for example, I would agree that that's a problem.
What if he was pescaterian? Or on a Keto diet? It's this zone that I don't think the state needs to entertain. SBF happens to be vegan and vegan is in the region in my mind.
I guess my question is: Is there a limit to the extent which the state should go to satisfy your dietary preferences?
Veganism is not strictly a dietary preference. It is a stance against all forms of exploitation and commodification of animals. Comparing Keto or pescetarianism to ethical veganism is unsound. Veganism is about animal rights, bodily autonomy, & consent.
Are you sure SBF is an ethical vegan and not a dietary vegan?
Ethical vegans tend to describe people who are simplying choose a diet without animal products as plant based eaters. So that would not necessarily be Vegan as they could be exploitative in all other manner than food. Of the people who don't want to associate with veganism, they often also refer to their diet as plant-based rather than Vegan.
So while we can't know for sure if SFB is an ethical Vegan, the fact that he'd self-described as Vegan rather than as a plant-based eater is a very good indication of his beliefs. I am not aware of any text describing the particulars of his belief, but I think it's best to assume in good faith since he uses that exact word.
You're trying, I like it. The thing is, no one calls themselves "plant-based eaters." It's too many syllables...
Homie there are absolutely people who think vegans are crazy and eat plant-based. They don't want to be described as vegan. A lot of them are in the Gwyneth Paltrow goop crowd, you know, the crazy holistic people that like incense and hot yoga and shit. People who really really like the word journey when they describe things changing in their lives. People who think eating plant based is a personal choice just like they claim eating meat is a personal choice. They do it for health and some weird hippie superiority thing. Sometimes because its what God originally wanted people to eat in the Garden of Eden.
Those people exist. Idk why you're suggesting I'm lying.
I may not believe you, but I didn't call you a liar.
Well, none of them are here in this thread, so it's obvious you're just lying and dredging up excuses to help SBF avoid consequences for his actions. You're a despicable piece of shit -- though what can we expect from someone who prefers the company of snakes to human beings?
Veganism is not a dietary preference. Veganism is a philosophy and way of living which seeks to exclude—as far as is possible and practicable—all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for any purpose. Which happens to include food.
I don't think so, but it should, he totally deserves it.