Toby Foster and Harrow Halal meat

[hard2miss]

..as can non Muslim children eat halal meat.

That's not the argument though. Its whether its the most humane way to kill the animal and as we have given rights to animals about cruelty and unnecessary suffering then having to bend those rules for an imported faith does not go down well.

Most people here with or without faith recognise suffering and are compassionate about it, they do not recognise it to be ok just to please man's inability to think outside of a book.

 

Its the bending and tweaking of our laws and culture to suit others that sticks in the throats of people that can see the frailties of multiculturalism.

[boyfriday]

Its the bending and tweaking of our laws and culture to suit others that sticks in the throats of people that can see the frailties of multiculturalism.

 

As I suggested earlier, it's all smoke screens and innuendo designed to fuel the anti multicultural and particularly the anti Muslim agenda..bah humbug.

 

Most of the dissenters give bugger all about animal welfare, as long as they can stuff their faces with a curry (halal meat btw) on a Friday night and buy meat as cheaply as possible, that's all that matters.

 

Although Harrow LEA haven't issued a statement as yet, if they follow the guidelines of other councils, like Sheffield for example, the animals will be pre-stunned prior to being slaughtered, so in terms of 'suffering' the net effect will be the same, however the hapless creature will still have suffered since it will be stone dead.

[boyfriday]

The fact is, The Daily Star once again printed a daft headline, that wasn't true. That was all.

 

..and well done for challenging a story all too many are willing to believe.

[hard2miss]

As I suggested earlier, it's all smoke screens and innuendo designed to fuel the anti multicultural and particularly the anti Muslim agenda..bah humbug.

 

Most of the dissenters give bugger all about animal welfare, as long as they can stuff their faces with a curry (halal meat btw) on a Friday night and buy meat as cheaply as possible, that's all that matters.

 

Although Harrow LEA haven't issued a statement as yet, if they follow the guidelines of other councils, like Sheffield for example, the animals will be pre-stunned prior to being slaughtered, so in terms of 'suffering' the net effect will be the same, however the hapless creature will still have suffered since it will be stone dead.

I don't think you can be so dismissive, many people recognise cruelty with or without a view on multi culture, immigration or religion. What motive would the RSPCA have for being against it ?

If we make laws and then let them be flouted or amended to appease an out side culture then that also is legitimate argument that should not so easily be dismissed. Why do you have to be a dissenter to want to keep the values and culture of your own country ? Its words and arguments like that that fuel the fire and only strengthen resentment and prop up the arguments that the bias for multiculturalism is wrong.

[kabacha]

There's a hint of the "you didn't object to the Jewish community, so why do you object to us" argument in there.

 

Firstly, all the arguments made against Halal are equally applicable to Kosher, and the arguments are against religious slaughter as a whole not just one in particular.

 

Secondly there's is a reason why the secular community was a lot quieter in it's objections against religious slaughter 20 years ago, and Kosher in particular, and that's because there was a lot less of it about.

 

I have never seen an establishment in Sheffield advertising Kosher, and 20 years ago there was little Halal either.

 

There's very little data on the amount of ritual slaughter that actually occurs in the UK, the only tentative evidence I could find is from The Animal Welfare Review 2003 which reported on one week of slaughtering practices. In the period 1–7 September 2003, the following animals were slaughtered without stunning. It reported that 2446 were Kosher, and 16657 were Halal. It has been suggested that 20 years ago the numbers of Kosher and Halal slaughters were about the same, and in the last 10 years the numbers of Halal slaughters have increased 5-10 times. Kosher has remained steady during that time.

The word for it is 'business' my friend, do you object to the free market?

If the market is there then there will always be someone supplying it to make money and Muslims or Jews in that they are the same as money has no religion. I have noticed three excellent restaurants in London area owned by the English but selling Indian food, so should we start crying over that too?

I put forward an opinion, you made up a reason why I may have put that opinion forward and started arguing against your own forwarded reason. A bit scitso that isn't it?

[boyfriday]

I don't think you can be so dismissive, many people recognise cruelty with or without a view on multi culture, immigration or religion.

What motive would the RSPCA have for being against it ?

I'm referring more to the casual observer, than the RSPCA, who as far as I can see haven't commented on Harrow's school meals policy.

If we make laws and then let them be flouted or amended to appease an out side culture then that also is legitimate argument that should not so easily be dismissed.

Again as far as I can see no laws are being flouted, Harrow LEA are introducing halal meat to their school meals service, there's no indication that this meat will be supplied from slaughterhouses that dont pre-stun the animals.

 

Why do you have to be a dissenter to want to keep the values and culture of your own country ? Its words and arguments like that that fuel the fire and only strengthen resentment and prop up the arguments that the bias for multiculturalism is wrong.

 

Because the people who complain here are selective in their criticism, there are many examples of poor animal welfare on commercial farms and slaughterhouses that pass without too much comment...add the word Islam to it and it becomes a hot potato and suddenly an example of the 'frailties of multiculturism'-as I said earlier, folks dont moan when they're tucking into a chicken tikka massala at the Curry Centre.

 

If people are offended by the use of the word 'dissenter' that's really their problem, I was being charitable compared to the phraseology I would have preferred to use.

 

Finally, just for the record, I'm against the slaughter of livestock without pre stunning, but 'halal' and 'pre-stunning' aren't mutually exclusive.

[hard2miss]

So what your saying is what ? its wrong to want to use the most humane form to kill animals ? that people are just making waves for the hell of it and should keep stum and dismiss their concerns for the sake of religion and 'getting on' ?

 

Im not sure what your saying, please replace the word dissenter with a word more suitable to give us a better understanding.

[hard2miss]

folks dont moan when they're tucking into a chicken tikka massala at the Curry Centre.

Whats that all about ? how does that bolster your argument ?

 

If people who ate chicken had to eat it knowing that say they were now killed from having its head ripped off then Im sure people would raise 'legitimate' concern.

 

We need meat, we have to kill, but what we don't have to do is do it any other way than what we know to be the best practice, the argument is a moral one as much as anything else.

[spindrift]

Anyway, back to the - ahem - meat of today's story:

 

Brit kids forced to eat halal school dinners

Furious parents last night hit out at plans to serve halal-only school dinners.

 

Pupils will have no option but to eat meat slaughtered following Islamic teachings specifically for Muslims.

 

 

Use of words such as 'forced' and 'have no option' feed into the tabloid narrative about 'Britain' changing only because of them Muslims.

 

But the BBC version of the same story has a rather different take on how much this is going to be 'forced' on people:

 

A north London council is offering its primary schools the chance to serve only halal meat on its menus.

Nine Harrow secondary schools already provide pupils with meat prepared according to Islamic law in a scheme that has been running for two years.

 

Harrow Council said it had received "no complaints" about serving halal-only meat, with vegetarian and fish options.

 

Now 52 primary schools in the area will have the option of taking part in the same programme.

 

Harrow councillor Brian Gate said it would be the choice of individual schools as to whether or not they chose to use catering firm Harrison Catering Services, which serves halal-only meat.

 

"The decision about whether to use an individual provider is for schools to make, as the funding is delegated to them," Councillor Gate said.

 

 

So the schools can use a catering company that provides halal meat if they want or they can choose another firm altogether. (And presumably, kids still have the option of taking packed lunches.)

 

Yet the Star maintains:

 

all high schools in the London borough of Harrow have been told to provide only halal meat on menus.

 

 

Even the Mail, after covering all the usual 'fury' and 'outrage', admits:

 

The contract for providing meals to Harrow primaries is up for renewal and the council is planning to bring in Harrison's.

 

The council says primaries do not have to use its preferred caterer and governors are free to negotiate their own deals if they wish. Only two primaries have so far signed up.

 

 

And the local Harrow Observer, which originally broke the story, said:

 

Harrow Council has employed a catering company to only prepare Halal meat – to serve youngsters in Harrow.

 

Primary schools are free to opt in to the programme or look elsewhere for their meals

 

 

Star hack Gary Nicks fails to mention that it is optional anywhere in the article, thus leaving the completely false impression that it is being 'forced' on pupils.

 

 

The Mail and Star versions of this story are a pack of lies.

[spindrift]

Apologies Inigo montoya, missed your post.