Farleigh Hospice Food And Drink
Quizzes & Puzzles0 min ago
Are We All Muslims By Default
137 Answers
http://
Has PC gone too far?
Is there an alternative?
Has PC gone too far?
Is there an alternative?
Answers
Whatever the ins and outs of this and whether people care or not, the fact is that Halal-style slaughter would never have been countenanced had it not been for religious requirements in the same way that Sikh motor cyclists would not have been provided with an exemption from the crash helmet law but for religious requirements
16:54 Thu 08th May 2014
by that i mean many of the butchers in the capital are halal, supermarkets may be selling it, no label to say otherwise.
whatever the rights and wrongs, whether a prayer is said or the animal is stunned or not, the fact remains that we have had this foisted on us, with no word, comment, moan, criticism from the food agencies, animal rights brigades, perhaps its the fact they eat meat, cow, pig, sheep, lamb,
but not whales, bears, which i consider highly hypocritical - animal welfare means all animals, not a select few.
whatever the rights and wrongs, whether a prayer is said or the animal is stunned or not, the fact remains that we have had this foisted on us, with no word, comment, moan, criticism from the food agencies, animal rights brigades, perhaps its the fact they eat meat, cow, pig, sheep, lamb,
but not whales, bears, which i consider highly hypocritical - animal welfare means all animals, not a select few.
Jeza, if you go back to page 1 of this thread and read hc4361's post of 8th May at 11.06 you will see which of Waitrose's meat is or isn't halal.
More proof that religion encroaches on all our everyday lives.
"In June 2009 the EU passed a law recognising the validity of religious slaughter. Abbatoirs in the EU must stun all animals prior to slaughter unless they are being ritually killed for religious purposes.
The EU is considering legislation that would require Halal and Kosher meat products to carry a label stating that the animal was not stunned prior to slaughter. Both Jewish and Muslim groups oppose the proposal. They claim that it is discriminatory and challenge claims that their methods of slaughter are inhumane."
More proof that religion encroaches on all our everyday lives.
"In June 2009 the EU passed a law recognising the validity of religious slaughter. Abbatoirs in the EU must stun all animals prior to slaughter unless they are being ritually killed for religious purposes.
The EU is considering legislation that would require Halal and Kosher meat products to carry a label stating that the animal was not stunned prior to slaughter. Both Jewish and Muslim groups oppose the proposal. They claim that it is discriminatory and challenge claims that their methods of slaughter are inhumane."
'Fraid not jomifl.
Labelling any meat which identifies it as being different from other meat (from similar animals) will be seen as discriminatory. Such are the ridiculous knots into which various legal authorities have tied themselves. The fact that people are entitled to know the provenance of stuff they are eating is completely trumped by the discrimination industry.
Of course the proper answer to this is to remove the exceptions provided for religious purposes which would mean ritually slaughtered meat is illegal. As I said (much) earlier, if a law is made it is presumably made for a purpose and to provide exceptions for religious reason defies logic.
Labelling any meat which identifies it as being different from other meat (from similar animals) will be seen as discriminatory. Such are the ridiculous knots into which various legal authorities have tied themselves. The fact that people are entitled to know the provenance of stuff they are eating is completely trumped by the discrimination industry.
Of course the proper answer to this is to remove the exceptions provided for religious purposes which would mean ritually slaughtered meat is illegal. As I said (much) earlier, if a law is made it is presumably made for a purpose and to provide exceptions for religious reason defies logic.
NJ, how do you think Britain got into the state where a small minority of bigoted religious fantasists dictate to the reasonable and relatively tolerant majority. When did the rot set in? was it with Blair's multinational community, or the sikhs previously (remember the play that was closed because of the sword waving sikhs massed outside?) or the C of E's special position before that.
It's hard to say when the rot set in. I can think back to the Seventies when "political correctness" first reared its head as a phrase. Prior to that I cannot remember too many concessions being made for purely religious purposes. I suppose the crash helmet fiasco was the first high profile issue and that amendment was passed in 1976. In the Lords during a debate on the subject, Lord Monson said this:
"I see three possible dangers in this Bill. Granting exemption in respect of what I hold to be a religious custom rather than a religious obligation could lead to demands for exemptions on the grounds of religious obligations of a less innocuous nature. I am thinking of the possible demand for the right to carry the kirpan-that is, the kirpan as such rather than the symbolic indentation in the comb. Secondly, I wonder whether passing a Bill like this towards the end of a Session might not slam the door on the possibility of extending similar liberalising legislation to other members of the community who ride motor-cycles. Thirdly, I wonder whether it might not cause resentment among the majority of motor-cyclists, who are not Sikhs, and perhaps thereby contribute to a worsening of community relations, which I am sure noble Lords would agree would be highly undesirable."
Which seemed particularly prophetic.
Since then all manner of measures have been agreed which grant special privileges to members of some religions or ethnic groups - privileges not available to everybody else. This seems to lead in to Lord Monson's third point and I am sure there is considerable resentment amongst the majority for exceptions granted to minorities on religious grounds. The most serious of these recently in my view is the notion that somebody can give evidence in court whilst masked up. That it should even be considered is an absolute outrage.
No religious requirements - whether obligation or custom - should provide exemptions from UK law. People do not have to follow religious requirements or customs. They will not die or suffer harm if they don't and they should be compelled to temporarily alter their behaviour to accord with the law.
"I see three possible dangers in this Bill. Granting exemption in respect of what I hold to be a religious custom rather than a religious obligation could lead to demands for exemptions on the grounds of religious obligations of a less innocuous nature. I am thinking of the possible demand for the right to carry the kirpan-that is, the kirpan as such rather than the symbolic indentation in the comb. Secondly, I wonder whether passing a Bill like this towards the end of a Session might not slam the door on the possibility of extending similar liberalising legislation to other members of the community who ride motor-cycles. Thirdly, I wonder whether it might not cause resentment among the majority of motor-cyclists, who are not Sikhs, and perhaps thereby contribute to a worsening of community relations, which I am sure noble Lords would agree would be highly undesirable."
Which seemed particularly prophetic.
Since then all manner of measures have been agreed which grant special privileges to members of some religions or ethnic groups - privileges not available to everybody else. This seems to lead in to Lord Monson's third point and I am sure there is considerable resentment amongst the majority for exceptions granted to minorities on religious grounds. The most serious of these recently in my view is the notion that somebody can give evidence in court whilst masked up. That it should even be considered is an absolute outrage.
No religious requirements - whether obligation or custom - should provide exemptions from UK law. People do not have to follow religious requirements or customs. They will not die or suffer harm if they don't and they should be compelled to temporarily alter their behaviour to accord with the law.
Hang on chaps. As I understand it supermarkets are now selling both non-halal and halal meat ….. so if the complainers don’t want meat labelled at all how are they going to tell which is halal and which is not? It would appear that their only course of action is to stick to the halal butchers they’ve always used and leave the rest of us stuck with the unidentifiable – which is what I suspect they’ve been doing all along.
When religion threatens to encroach upon the lives of others we must say 'no'. Whilst I don't believe this has been purposefully instigated by Muslims in this country, but rather by greedy meat producers who want a bit of every market, I do think fundamentalists will see this as Islam making further inroads into the British way of life - a cause to them for celebration.
No halal, no labels and no compromise in the law to accommodate the foibles of religion.
No halal, no labels and no compromise in the law to accommodate the foibles of religion.
That is glib and shoddy.
Have you no concept in your heart of compassion for animals who share our journey on this planet, many species of whom have been here long before us?
When Iran finally unleashes it's Islamic nukes and Israel responds in kind to reduce the world to dust, and you primordialists are both NOT ascending to your heavens to consort with your virgins, guess what, these things you despise as being inferior, will still be here, long after us.
Maybe they will have a chance in the billions of years left before the sun encroaches to produce another sentient species that might make it to the stars.
On their behalf I hope they learn from our primordiality and become something vastly superior to us.
After all I'm sure the ample evidence of our insanity will serve them well in avoiding the mistakes we will keep on making until we become extinct.
Have you no concept in your heart of compassion for animals who share our journey on this planet, many species of whom have been here long before us?
When Iran finally unleashes it's Islamic nukes and Israel responds in kind to reduce the world to dust, and you primordialists are both NOT ascending to your heavens to consort with your virgins, guess what, these things you despise as being inferior, will still be here, long after us.
Maybe they will have a chance in the billions of years left before the sun encroaches to produce another sentient species that might make it to the stars.
On their behalf I hope they learn from our primordiality and become something vastly superior to us.
After all I'm sure the ample evidence of our insanity will serve them well in avoiding the mistakes we will keep on making until we become extinct.
Latest Posts
ChatterBank2 mins ago
Film, Media & TV2 mins ago
Crosswords3 mins ago
ChatterBank3 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.