Of course not, we'd say. But this seems to be an issue that many vegans face in planning a wedding. Chelsea Clinton, a long-time vegan, chose to serve organic beef next to a mostly "vegan" menu. But many vegans feel that any animal products = not vegan.
Now the NY Times has taken up the issue about vegans. How much should vegans, or even vegetarians for that matter, compromise in the food department on their special day?
The pastry chefs Fernanda Capobianco and François Payard will serve meat at their wedding, though she is a vegan. (Photo Credit: Suzanne DeChillo/The New York Times)
The article states:
Traditionally, many vegetarians have served meat at their weddings, out of deference to their guests, an aversion to endless cracks about “rabbit food,” or simply because there weren’t a lot of caterers specializing in vegetarian food who could handle a 200-person affair, particularly outside New York or California. Another interviewee was "cognizant of the dampening effect that self-righteousness can have on a party."
But one foodie argues:
If your family loves you and wants you to have that special day, I think they can go one meal and not eat meat,” said Cecilia Kinzie, a vegan and food consultant in Petaluma, Calif., who served no meat at her 2009 wedding.
So what do you think is better? A compromising approach by having both vegan and meat-dishes, or a fully vegan menu? Check out the NY Times article on Vegan Weddings and weigh in on what you think.