Saturday, December 13, 2008

Help the oppressed Sikhs

Cranmer has previously reported on compulsory halal meat in schools.

He received a request from a Mrs Jorawar Singh of Sikh Awareness to assist the Sikhs, who are finding that schools are imposing meat 'killed in the Muslim way' upon their children, despite it being kurahit (forbidden) by their own faith.

Dear Sir

Re: Halal only meat served at a public north London primary school

We are requesting your much required help

It has come to our knowledge that the school which our 3 young children attend have been serving halal meat as part of their school meals without the knowledge of parents. We recently were given a form requesting if our children would like to have Christmas dinner. We opted for the traditional Christmas dinner and when we submitted this form to the school office, we by chance mentioned halal, and we were told that Christmas dinner - turkey will be halal. We explained that we are SIKHS and so halal consumption is FORBIDDEN, to which the response was that our children would have to have the vegetarian alternative. Therefore we have started a petition. The petition simply requests that SCHOOLS MUST GIVE ADVANCE NOTICE OF THEIR SCHOOL MEALS POLICY AND THAT IF HALAL MEAT IS PROVIDED, SO SHOULD NON HALAL MEAT. This is not only because Sikhs are forbidden to eat halal on religious grounds but many non-Sikhs do not wish their children to consume halal meat.

Please sign our petition

We will inform all Sikh Gurdwaras in the UK and also world wide.

Thank you

MR JORAWAR Singh

26 Comments:

Blogger McKenzie said...

A million words spring to mind, but I know to voice any of them will be utterly futile, so these twenty nine will be all I have to say.

13 December 2008 at 10:28  
Blogger The Heresiarch said...

The Sikhs have a clear legal remedy. Under much-despised equality regulations, "service providers" cannot discriminate on religious grounds, any more than the can discriminate on sexual or racial grounds, against an individual or group. This would seem to be a clear case of (albeit unintentional) religious discrimination.

13 December 2008 at 10:35  
Blogger McKenzie said...

"unintentional"

I see you didn't forget your soma this morning.

13 December 2008 at 10:37  
Blogger McKenzie said...

I have signed that bloody Sick or seek or whatever petition and they have greyed out my comments, so I will repeat them here and see if freedom of speech still prevails.

"Christians don't seem to be getting anywhere, so I will try a foreign religion because after all, we do seem to bend over backwards to have everything alien inserted up our arses."

13 December 2008 at 10:50  
Blogger Christian-Jedi-Alliance said...

the Christians have explained to the Jedi Knights that they do not object to their alliance with George Lucas's fictional characters, but to have to be saved from idolatry by an alien religion in one's own land is wholly objectionable.

We would rather eat they said ritually slaughtered meat until a time comes that our fellow Christians discover their own spinal chord.

13 December 2008 at 11:08  
Anonymous Preacher said...

Your Grace.
although I have had little contact with the Sikh community I have found them to be a warm, courteous & friendly people, although we did not agree on matters of faith, the discourse we had was open & warm, I feel that it's wrong that their children should have to eat halal or vegetarian
food. this is active discrimination. If the muslim children were treated in this way the pc brigade would be up in arms & rightly so for once.
It is wrong that the quiet people should be marginalised or ignored, the Sikhs have as much right to practice their faith as anybody else.

13 December 2008 at 11:29  
Blogger McKenzie said...

Preach this preacher!

Jesus Christ died on the cross in order for our salvation.

Sikhs maybe warm people, but Christians are also being duped into eating ritually slaughtered meat. I am not sure I could make the ultimate sacrifice for anybody, but I do know that I will object on the grounds of being offended against what I believe about Christ.

Do you appreciate the full magnitude of what took place on the cross? If so is it proper to say to Christ I will tolerate idolatry against you and submit to Islam, but I will not endure them nice warm Sikhs, who are incidentally in err, to eat this meat?

Is Christ just some notion to you, or is he your savior? When people say where is the harm, do they not understand what took place, what is expected of us?

Mixed up deluded people satanists are, some quite warm and friendly, should I except every other religions indifferences and only be allowed to object when it upsets satanists?

If you don't care then fine, but I do. I see something else taking place on the cross, I am offended to have to tolerate all manner of bigotry against my faith, only to be called a bigot when I complain in the name of Christ.

Well complain I shall, LOUDLY.

you do not represent me preacher so shut thy blasphemous mouth

13 December 2008 at 11:46  
Blogger dizzyfatplonka said...

After the virtual eradication of our own native pagan culture we can suddenly find the dignity to aid a foreign one.

With a swig of Soma pee and a fly around the heavens on the back of Blitzen, even I would question that one :D

13 December 2008 at 11:53  
Blogger len.allan said...

It seems you can have any old religion you want and all the rights that go with it!.
however,
To be a christian is to have no rights, to be despised thought a crank,to be un-politically correct.WHY?
Because to be a christian is to be a threat to satan,you have invaded his territory,you know the truth, he hates you christian and will do all he can to undermine you, to threaten you, even to kill you if he can,he hates you because you carry inside you the one who defeated him on the cross at calvary!.

13 December 2008 at 14:42  
Blogger McKenzie said...

It is now the afternoon and things have calmed down considerably.

Do I say things I later regret, yes I do.

C.S Lewis once said that we either believe that Christ was who he said he was, or we have to believe that he was a mad man. Ultimately this statement has to be correct, but at the same time it is fundamentally flawed.

Let me explain. Often I question myself, and say, "Vincent, in your heart of hearts, do you really and truly believe this shit?" (This is how I speak to myself, no disrespect ,but I have to reach in there).

And quite often the answer is "I don't know". But in my heart of hearts I cannot say that I do not believe in this shit, and while there is doubt, there is hope. Then of course there are the days when I am utterly convinced of it, and it is quite far from being shit, if you get my drift. In fact it reduces me to tears and I can be faced with the ugly side of myself and wish that faith could be a permanent quality.

So why should it be black or white, I say. It is a great mystery, a mystery which actually brings great peace and happiness, a mystery which is ineffable for the most part, but until I am done with it, I will keep it in a very prominent position and guard it ferociously, until I am done with it, or it is done with me.

All I can say is don't attempt to bully me into making my mind up one way or the other. It is a journey, a pilgrimage, and like I said C.S Lewis is correct in one respect, but if I am to make a snap decision one way or the other, well he can go to hell.

So, yes I do have a lot to say about the subject because it means something, it means a lot.

13 December 2008 at 14:50  
Anonymous martin sewell said...

We ought not to forget that many might object to Halal or Kosher meat on animal welfare grounds because there is no pre stunning of the creature before the slaughter.

This is one point where the Politically Correct have a problem in pleasing both religious minorities and the animal rights movement.

Did not someone once say that you cannot serve two masters?

13 December 2008 at 16:32  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Halal Christmas Dinner? Corker

"Carry On Jihading"

Till we have built Islamabad
In England's green and peasant land

13 December 2008 at 16:37  
Anonymous shaven-headed tattooed knuckledragger said...

The Muslims shout 'Allah Akhbar' as they cut the animals' throats, just as they do when they cut kaffirs' throats in the Jihad Snuff videos (the only artistic genre invented by the Islamic world).

Parents of all peaceful religions, do you want your children eating food that has been dedicated to the bloody-thirsty demonic idol of a vicious dark-age murder-cult?

13 December 2008 at 16:52  
Anonymous bodica said...

The Muslims in the local deli were high after their EId feast and telling everyone their food was Halal. I said no thanks, I don't eat Halal. The methods are too cruel. He said "You eat meat..." I said, "Unfortunately, I must, but it has been stunned..." Well they all started talking animatedly in arabic. One of them started repeating Halal,halal, and his eyes almost popped out. If I were to direct such a scene exactly as it occurred,the left would accuse me of stereotyping.
The hyper demeaner, exopthalmia, agitated speech, seemed to conjure up a bloodlust, an excitement for the bloodletting to come later that night.
I left feeling rather sick.

13 December 2008 at 17:39  
Blogger Wrinkled Weasel said...

Martin Sewell said, "This is one point where the Politically Correct have a problem in pleasing both religious minorities and the animal rights movement.

Did not someone once say that you cannot serve two masters?"

May I draw his attention to this piece (published by Tom Harris MP on his blog as "Comment of the Week"

http://tomcharris.wordpress.com/2008/12/12/comment-of-the-week/

Here is an extract:

At the moment, we have an interesting dichotomy. The perceived demands of one group (e.e.Muslims) are in conflict with those of another (e.g.Gays). This is just one example of how this philosophical hook upon which local govts. hang their policies will ultimately break down. They cannot serve the demands of both communities when those communties have diametrically opposed agendas....

What will be interesting to watch is to see society fragment even more, when the very minorities that have been championed start fighting like ferrets in a sack.

13 December 2008 at 17:41  
Blogger Miss Snuffleupagus said...

If ever there was a scenario to portray the absurdity of the various religions' eating requirements, then this is it!

13 December 2008 at 18:43  
Anonymous dilys said...

McKenzie said...
It is now the afternoon and things have calmed down considerably.

Do I say things I later regret, yes I do.


Have you thought of not rising before the afternoon, McKenzie and then spending the day without regrets?

13 December 2008 at 20:17  
Blogger McKenzie said...

Dilys,

I have and I do. but I don't.

I need a woman in my life to distract me, like they do. You'll be rid of me soon, I have a two week away job over Christmas, then I am crossing my fingers for a 6 month assignment into the unknown.

In the mean time...GRRRRRRRR

13 December 2008 at 22:03  
Blogger killemallletgodsortemout said...

Miss Snuffleupagus should win the t-shirt.

13 December 2008 at 23:22  
Anonymous shaven-headed tattooed knuckledragger said...

Insidious attempt to lure innocent English children into a paedophile-worshipping murder-cult: http://www.tes.co.uk/article.aspx?storycode=6006225&navcode=94

Mark 9:42 recommends ropes, millstones and a one-way cruise to the Mariana Trench.

13 December 2008 at 23:50  
Anonymous Preacher said...

McKenzie.
Apologies for not responding earlier, been away. I was an atheist until age 30, and was the least likely person to be a Christian since the apostle Paul, so yes I do know full well the cost of the cross to God & my response to His love & sacrifice is to emulate Him by trying to reach sinners of all creeds or none. This means I havee to go to places that other Christians do not go. I will not eat anything I know has been offered to idols & while knowing the sin I believe that I have to move into their territory to preach the gospel. The unsaved do some despicable things I do not deny, but it's not my place to condemn them, God will do that. Equally every person has rights and these must be respected & protected, as long as they don't affect another i.e abortion is a case in point. I've found certain groups more ready to listen & yes respond to the gospel than others, the Sikhs were among the latter. My remit is to save as many lost souls as possible, for that I make no apology. I respect your passion, a rare commodity nowdays, I think it was D.L.Moody that said "with an angry man I can do something, witha sleeping man I can do nothing" so I'll keep preaching & you keep blogging'n growling. Good luck with the job.

14 December 2008 at 17:55  
Anonymous Voyager said...

Surely only halal butchers can supply halal meat meaning that the EU Directives on open procurement in public tendering are being breached.

Further halal pork does not seem to be available rendering reduced choice for consumers and limiting sausages and bacon on menus.

There are significant issues in the preferred supplier route which are anti-competitive, anti-social, breach considerations of animal welfare, and marginalise the native population in taxpayer-funded provision of goods and services

15 December 2008 at 07:45  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

We have fought long and hard for civilised treatment of animals in this country -I don't care what religion any one holds but if they come to this country they should live by the rules.

As a christian I believe we are responsible for the welfare of all life and it greatly offends my beliefs that halal meat is allowed anywhere in my country (for which my family fought and died)
Sokhs are civilised, courteous, gentle and law abiding why should their and my beliefs be trampled on?

15 December 2008 at 10:59  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If our politicians are determined to follow the route of recognising the needs of one minority religion, then all minority religions should be given the same level of consideration and respect......

Providing they do not compromise the laws and religion of the country they have chosen to move to.

15 December 2008 at 19:44  
Blogger ZZMike said...

Preacher quotes Paul as an authority for not eating "meat sacrificed to idols", but that is exactly what Paul did NOT say:

1 Cor 8 summarized: we know that idols represent nothing, so it's OK to eat that food.

More specifically:

1 Cor 8:8 Now food will not bring us close to God. We are no worse if we do not eat and no better if we do.

Paul's only concern is that if "someone weak" sees you eating it, they may be fooled into thinking that the idol sacrifice is real. Paul's only reason not to eat idol-sacrified food is because it might lead someone not grounded in faith astray.

On the bigger point, where the Sikhs cannot eat it, and the Muslims must, there's clearly a conflict.

An even bigger question is, why in the name of all that's holy, is halal food served at a London public school? That's a religious practice, and if any religious practice is to be followed in British schools, it ought to be Anglican. (Anyone know why?)

Just as an aside question, what's the difference between halal slaughter and kosher slaughter? (I'm asking because I don't know, though it seems on the surface that they're fairly equivalent.)

17 December 2008 at 01:05  
Anonymous Preacher said...

ZZMike.
Thanks mate but I didn't quote Paul as an authority for not eating meat sacrificed to idols, I said that I would not knowingly do so as this as you rightly say could stumble a weaker person. It's like not drinking alcohol when someone may be struggling with a drink problem and sees my action as a green light to go back to their previous sad state.
with regards to your other questions, I'm sorry but I don't know.

17 December 2008 at 21:15  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older