That for some people, just living in France really will send you to hell!
For the non-Francophones among my readers, it's a story that reports some schools in France are threatening to expel Muslim students if they refuse to eat non-halal meat provided by the school canteen. Now, I have some sympathy with the headscarf law, provided it is applied uniformly (and that means I am in favour of banning Christmas trees from schools in France, provided that you accept the tree as a religious symbol...). However, that is because these schools are secular institutions, and the headscarves are more a symbolism of the religion. Eating halal meat, however, is clearly forcing students to violate their religion. That surely can't be considered acceptable? Even a militant secularist should accept that people have a right, within limits, to their own religion and act in accordance with those beliefs. This sort of act does nothing to help convince the moderate Muslims that liberal democracy is compatible with Islam.
The schools should be secular, not the pupils or teachers.
ReplyDeleteThat is all I have to say on the matter.
The Not-so-anonymous poster
The students were not threatened with expulsion. This situation is clearly just one of the school being concerned about providing a nutritional diet to its students but failing to account for religious dietary restrictions. It's nothing more than a small bureaucratic snafu.
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure that's right, at least from the article itself, which states that the kids could be excluded from school if they refused to eat the meat. And I don't think the concern about a balanced diet really held out either - because they were saying they should eat it even in a small quantity. I can't see how only eating a small quantity of the food provided is a balanced diet any more than refusing to eat the meat itself. Really, the kids' parents should just be allowed to
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure that's right, at least from the article itself, which states that the kids could be excluded from school if they refused to eat the meat. And I don't think the concern about a balanced diet really held out either - because they were saying they should eat it even in a small quantity. I can't see how only eating a small quantity of the food provided is a balanced diet any more than refusing to eat the meat itself. Really, the kids' parents should just be allowed to provide their own food for their children if they like.
ReplyDelete(Sorry about the double post, pressed publish too early by accident)
From Mike Power:
ReplyDeleteGiven the size of the Muslim population in France 'failing to account for religious dietary restrictions' is more than a 'small bureaucratic snafu', it's
a disgrace. What does this have to do with nutrition? Don't they have
vegetarians in France? I'm prepared to accept that this has been blown up by bureaucratic ineptitude and petty officialdom (it IS France, after all!) but these
things always betray a deeper malaise lurking somewhere.
Remember last year, when the story in this country was the complete opposite
- trying to persuade non-Muslims, in largely Muslim schools, to eat Halal meat for the sake of efficiency and economy. What was the outcome, by the way?
I'm not sure about the attempts regarding getting non-Muslim children to eat halal meat (although is there that great a difference between meat and halal meat, other than the way the animal is killed?). But I do know that the solution in France is blindingly obvious. Just allow the kids to opt out of the meals! I'm with you totally on this one, Mike, it's a ham-fisted piece of legislation from the French and it's a disgrace. There's no need to trample on the rights of Muslims like this. I wonder what sort of stories from the west will be filling the Middle Eastern newspapers now?
ReplyDeleteFrom Mike Power:
ReplyDeleteI think the school meals service just served it up with no problems until someone objected to the way the animals were slaughtered (Jeez! they should visit some farms and slaughterhouses). And yes, that is the only difference.
The trouble with ham-fisted legislation is that, eventually, it impinges on everybody. The wearing of Crucifixes, carrying prayer-beads, wearing Yarmulkas, you name it, until we all end up living under a regulatory tyranny.
A disgrace, yes, and madness too.