So, your “religion” entitles you to do something that is accepted as being cruel. Not exactly new knowledge of course, but a pity that it has to be enshrined in British law:
How much “religious tolerance” is acceptable? We tolerate circumcision of boys, so why not girls? I note that Harriet Harman is quiet on this point.
Tories renege on fox-hunting ban repeal …..
So, yet another promise ditched. I’m not personally in favour of fox-hunting, but it does seem surreal to allow the very “un-British” obscenity of HALAL meat (including that sold to non-Muslims WITHOUT THEIR KNOWLEDGE) but to ban the centuries-old British tradition of fox-hunting.
No doubt the most vociferous anti-hunt townies are only too eager to tuck into their burgers and chicken legs. So much for “caring for animals” then …. OK as long as we kill them humanely? (GOTO sentence 2, clause 2).
Supposing humans were only species n°2 on the planet, and the n° 1 species fed on US? Would that be OK as long as they killed us humanely? More PC of course to slit our throats first and let the blood drip out …
I’m beginning to wonder if these lunatics walking about with sandwich-boards proclaiming “The end of the world is nigh” are on to something after all ….
Multi-faith chaplains to make House of Commons more inclusive
They are completely mad. Who is PAYING for this? The taxpayer? Oh, it is said “They won’t receive a salary.” Are they doing it out of charity then? Will they get expenses? These of course can be a nice little earner; MEPs having just got NINETY-ONE THOUSAND POUNDS WORTH without any need for receipts.
Why have we gone insane? Is it a sign of the beginning of the end of the world? Where is it safe to get away from this?
I thought the Coalition was supposed to be bringing sanity to British life after the last 13 years? Is this a JOKE? I thought that was April 1st?
Of course, the shambles the country is in there is dire need of every bit of help we can get, and if prayer is the answer …. But can’t one just pray on one’s own? It works for me … I prayed for the departure of Brown and it eventually worked …. mind you, I pray for the liberation of Cuba, but that’s a tougher nut, even apparently for God. I mean, Brown we could eventually vote out, but they don’t vote in Cuba – you’re stuck with the Castros . Funny how these dictatorships go with the family ….
But surely, if the HOC can have a multitude of mediums why not the whole country? Are we going to have legislation to put a couple of hundred imams, bishops, shamans, rabbis and so on in EVERY company in the country? And of course, there are the local COUNCILS – can’t leave THEM out …
And if the Moonies and Jehovah’s Witnesses aren’t on the list I shall be applying to the European Court of Human Rights for a start. The HOC is the LAST place where we should permit discrimination. Perhaps all the unemployed can become priests with all this demand?
Dawkins is right. The Pope’s message is – perhaps sadly – nonsense, bereft of any grounding in rational thought.
He said that: “God always keeps his promises, but he may do so in a way that surprises us.”
Well, he certainly promised us World War II, because there have been wars since time immemorial, presumably with his agreement, since he is all-powerful.
However, what surprised us was that 6 million Jews would be murdered by the evilly unhinged. Certainly, that was a novelty. Well done, God.
Or does “Original Sin” mean it was our fault? None of us are innocent, even children? It is all NONSENSE.
Mind you, they are all at it. The Archie of Canterbury has just said:
What does he MEAN? These are two young people getting married. In what way is that a “symbol of hope”. I’d have cited the fact that African leaders have told Gbagbo that if he doesn’t step down they will attack him with a joint African and UN force to restore democracy. THAT IS WHAT I CALL HOPE.
Some more “hopes”:
These are REAL HOPES. Please, Archie, don’t bore us with the royal marriage as “a symbol of hope”. Good luck to them, but “symbol of hope” as a headline is just silly.
This is in the category of “unbelievable but true.” From “The Daily Mail“:
“Killing an animal by cutting its throat without stunning is, in fact, illegal in this country. However, there is a legal loophole allowing this if it is being done for religious reasons — in other words, for the production of halal or kosher meat.”
Not only is this practice illegal except in the case of religious discrimination, which I thought was also illegal, but Halal meat is served clandestinely in many public places that have nothing whatsoever to do with religion; a blatant deception of the public, most of which undoubtedly finds the practice obscene.
It is also of course not only cruel but also stupid. The idea that God would prefer cruel, barbaric Halal killing to the British humane slaughter method is ludicrous. What sort of God is that, then?
It is of course an utterly shameful capitulation to PC idiots and religious claptrap. It is almost impossible to find the words to adequately express my disgust for all the above reasons. But once again, these things are foist on us without anyone ever asking if we want them. May I ask WHY there is this insane grovelling to ISLAM?
Of course, it is not only ISLAM. I am also at a total loss to understand why it is legal for Jews to mutilate their male children? Don’t we believe in FREEDOM and CHOICE? As for the latter, many people have NO CHOICE about whether to eat Halal meat, as it is often served to them by deceit. And what choice do Jewish boys have in the mutilation of their penises?
I was recently told that “Banning the burkha would not be British”. I would really like to know what about Halal meat and penis mutilation of babies is British?
Copying French ban on burqa would be un-British, says minister
Really?
If people really want to cover up their faces then they should live in a country which is 500 years behind the march of history. There is no lack of choice.
It is I believe illegal to walk about naked, but I would find this far less offensive than the burkha.
Does this soppy Minister even understand what being British is?
PS Is Italy now more British than Britain?
What sort of religion is it which discriminates against particular animals? What sort of God would pick out ONE particular animal to be unclean? Where is the rational thought behind these mediaeval beliefs? How can Man move on to a higher level when stuck in a time-warped mindset, which in itself is derived from illogical assumptions and a total lack of evidence? Prove to me that “God” made a dog “unclean”. For that matter, PROVE to me that God exists in the first place.
No dog ASKED to be born; a dog is just one more of “God’s creatures” if you like. In fact, dogs like us evolved over millions of years. At what point in this long, long process is God supposed to have decided that of all his creations (which as we have noted – but I repeat just to make sure it is clear - took MILLIONS of years to evolve) a DOG would be selected to be unclean and not, for example, a camel? The two creatures in fact have well over 90% the SAME GENETIC MAKEUP.
Why would God (even assuming there IS a God is a big step – where is the proof?) make an “unclean” animal ANYWAY? What was his POINT? What does he have against dogs? Snakes, I can understand – after all, a snake is supposed to have started all this religious claptrap in the Garden of Eden, but DOGS? Are we in Britain supposed to teach our kids that the concept “Dogs are unclean” is in any way rationally, morally, intellectually or culturally acceptable? As opposed of course to totally moronic? Are we supposed to agree it is NOT moronic just because is it part of a “great religion”?
The whole thing is POTTY. W
hy cannot our “ELITE” say the truth about these nutty religions? Why are we PANDERING to mediaeval beliefs, in particular when they have NOTHING to do with our own culture and traditions? Is it because a “big” religion is unattackable? Is this the religious equivalent of banks? If the Moonies came out with this guff they’d be ridiculed as a lunatic sect. I would guess that this is a very widespread reaction to all this nonsense, so WHY are they all so scared to tell the truth?
For goodness sake – we had the Enlightenment three centuries ago; let’s move on, IN PUBLIC at least, even if people have the right to warp their minds in private.
