Dominos pizza & pizza express - halal

[FiendishJack]

To support animal welfare, or feminism, or any cause.. but only when it's as a specific reaction to islam or foreigners or brown people seems to me to be a little ill-judged, hypocritical or at the very least short sighted, and I would've thought it obvious how it could make you seem a little racist. To bring it back to the original issue, it's the "subtle" difference between saying "we shouldn't allow halal meat" and "I believe all meat should be pre-stunned, without religious exemption."

Although I'm probably also hamstrung by my "self loathing and liberal sensibilities", so what do I know..

 

[kyoto49]

To support animal welfare, or feminism, or any cause.. but only when it's as a specific reaction to islam or foreigners or brown people seems to me to be a little ill-judged, hypocritical or at the very least short sighted, and I would've thought it obvious how it could make you seem a little racist. To bring it back to the original issue, it's the "subtle" difference between saying "we shouldn't allow halal meat" and "I believe all meat should be pre-stunned, without religious exemption."

Although I'm probably also hamstrung by my "self loathing and liberal sensibilities", so what do I know..

Thats a fair point, but I struggled to find a white Christian country that subjected women to the same human rights abuses that Pakistani women are routinely subjected to, hence the mention of Pakistan. Unless you can find a white Christian country where the abuse of womens' human rights are so widespread and documented? which I will of course be happy to also make an example of!

 

[Gramaisc]

Thats a fair point, but I struggled to find a white Christian country that subjected women to the same human rights abuses that Pakistani women are routinely subjected to, hence the mention of Pakistan. Unless you can find a white Christian country where the abuse of womens' human rights are so widespread and documented? which I will of course be happy to also make an example of!

Pakistan was under European rule for around 200 years, until the very late 1940s.

 

[kyoto49]

Pakistan was under European rule for around 200 years, until the very late 1940s.

As was Sri Lanka:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ambas...hona/sri-lanka-advancing-gende_b_3991231.html

Your point??

 

[Gramaisc]

As was Sri Lanka:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ambas...hona/sri-lanka-advancing-gende_b_3991231.html

Your point??

'We' didn't seem very bothered when 'we' were in charge - we stopped Hindus burning live widows, but that was about it.

 

[kyoto49]

'We' didn't seem very bothered when 'we' were in charge - we stopped Hindus burning live widows, but that was about it.

Maybe true, but I'd like to think our expectations and values have improved. It used to be acceptable to ship children from childrens homes in England off to Australia, or to remove Aborigine children from their parents; we weren't bothered about that in the 1960's & 1070'2 either. Thankfully times have changed.

 

[andy w]

I'm still struggling to see how a country such as Canada can be banded with countries like Pakistan, Iran, Saudi Arabia etc. OK there's a danger of Bears and you could die of the cold ( or boredom for that matter) but I doubt very much there's much chance of being stoned to death, publicly flogged or beheaded in Canada.
There is a clear link to how liberal a country is to how much freedom and equality women have ( the same applies to men) but this seems to be lost on the Leftards who have allowed extremists to import practices that undermine our liberal based democracy.

 

[Gramaisc]

I doubt very much there's much chance of being ....... beheaded in Canada.

It does happen, though not often and not necessarily for religious reasons - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Tim_McLean .

 

[tek-monkey]

Maybe true, but I'd like to think our expectations and values have improved. It used to be acceptable to ship children from childrens homes in England off to Australia, or to remove Aborigine children from their parents; we weren't bothered about that in the 1960's & 1070'2 either. Thankfully times have changed.

I love how we can judge everyone by our standards right now while ignoring our horrific past. To do so implies that other countries must be at the exact stage in social development that we are right now, whilst missing the social concious of being a cock to every nation on the planet and torturing/raping/pillaging/religifying* our way across the planet in the name of our almighty God so that it was OK. We are who we are because of our past, but we judge everyone on our present because we're semi enlightened smug bastards. Less than a century ago we chemically castrated gays, that is milliseconds in the grand scheme of things but because we don't do it right now we are allowed to chastise those that still do.

If the Western world had a consistent policy of dealing with abuse in foreign lands maybe I'd feel differently, but the fact is we only 'free' the countries we can profit from so however you look at it we're full of shit. Look at every country we invade in the name of freedom and there are ten where the locals are suffering worse but there are no natural resources to plunder. Jut like religion we pick and choose what to be offended by and what to ignore as it doesn't fit our ideals.

This was a party political broadcast on behalf of the cider party.



* You know what I mean

 

[Gramaisc]

I suspect that there's a lot of 'savages' around the world that think we're a bit weird for jailing a chap for six years simply because he doesn't conform to our dress standards - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Gough .

 

[proactive]

I love how we can judge everyone by our standards right now while ignoring our horrific past. To do so implies that other countries must be at the exact stage in social development that we are right now, whilst missing the social concious of being a cock to every nation on the planet and torturing/raping/pillaging/religifying* our way across the planet in the name of our almighty God so that it was OK. We are who we are because of our past, but we judge everyone on our present because we're semi enlightened smug bastards. Less than a century ago we chemically castrated gays, that is milliseconds in the grand scheme of things but because we don't do it right now we are allowed to chastise those that still do.

If the Western world had a consistent policy of dealing with abuse in foreign lands maybe I'd feel differently, but the fact is we only 'free' the countries we can profit from so however you look at it we're full of shit. Look at every country we invade in the name of freedom and there are ten where the locals are suffering worse but there are no natural resources to plunder. Jut like religion we pick and choose what to be offended by and what to ignore as it doesn't fit our ideals.

This was a party political broadcast on behalf of the cider party.



* You know what I mean

I get your point. But what should we do then? Just sit by and watch it all go on without saying anything?

I'd feel somewhat uneasy if our leaders didn't condemn the proposed stoning of that lady in Sudan for changing her religion and abandoning Islam just because our country was guilty of doing more or less the same thing hundreds of years ago.

 

[tek-monkey]

It depends how you look at it. Are we in charge? Do we have the right to tell another country what to do if they disagree with our way of thinking? If so what if another country decides we are wrong, and why do we moan about losing power of state to Brussels?

I believe that we should cut all ties with any country we disagree with, we should pull out our lucrative industries that rape their natural resources and we should leave them to their own devices even if it does cost us a lot in lost profits. I don't believe that we should interject except in the most abhorrent cases, or if they have oil.