Am I about to over-react?

legspin

doctoremma wrote: »

So, do you not eat food if someone has said grace?

If they won't eat mine if I don't say grace over it then I should not be expected to.
Again, the toleration is all in one direction.

18AD

You've self-imposed your own dietary restriction by not eating food that people with dietary restrictions expect you to also eat.

You wouldn't eat salads that vegetarians expected you to eat because they wouldn't eat meat.

This is amazingly complicated. Good job.

doctoremma

18AD wrote: »

You've self-imposed your own dietary restriction by not eating food that people with dietary restrictions expect you to also eat.

You're also in danger of ascribing meaning and importance to a ceremony that means nothing to you. I mean, the slaughterhouse man may as well have praised Santa as he killed the animal.

I understand that your concern is the lack of mutual tolerance. But you don't have any dietary requirements that need tolerating...?

MagicMarker

I'm still failing to see a problem here.

If you like chicken, and the home team serve chicken, then what's the big deal? Assuming you have no issue with the method of the slaughter then I think it's being incredibly petit to make an issue out of it tbh.

doctoremma

Can I also just clarify that it's the religious aspect that specifically bothers you? If you came to my house and I fed you vegetarian food (good veggie food, not butter sarnies), you would eat or object? And expect me to eat meat at yours?

Sulla Felix

I have to ask OP, to take doctoremma's previous example: If the team were Jains or Buddhists and only provided vegetarian food would you then be refusing to eat it as well?

legspin

18AD wrote: »

You've self-imposed your own dietary restriction by not eating food that people with dietary restrictions expect you to also eat.

No, I just expect the same level of tolerance from them as they expect from me.

18AD wrote: »

You wouldn't eat salads that vegetarians expected you to eat because they wouldn't eat meat.

This is amazingly complicated. Good job.

This has actually happened to me. I have cooked for vegetarians in my house food they like, the reciprecal tolerance has never been true. Indeed on one occasion I was denegrated for preparing a steak for myself while they were eating what I had prepared for them. In my own house.
The only vegetarian I know who has ever cooked me a steak is my wife.
If you come to my house and expect to be given food you want to eat the reverse must also be true.

18AD

legspin wrote: »

No, I just expect the same level of tolerance from them as they expect from me.

But you've still imposed your own dietary restrictions. There are foods you don't want to eat because of the expectations of the people who prepared it. Not wanting to eat particular foods is a dietary restriction whatever way you look at it.

You're not going to tolerate it until they do too? That's not really tolerant, is it?

This has actually happened to me. I have cooked for vegetarians in my house food they like, the reciprecal tolerance has never been true. Indeed on one occasion I was denegrated for preparing a steak for myself while they were eating what I had prepared for them. In my own house.
The only vegetarian I know who has ever cooked me a steak is my wife.
If you come to my house and expect to be given food you want to eat the reverse must also be true.

So you don't like vegetarian food? Kidding :P

robindch

MagicMarker wrote: »

I'm still failing to see a problem here.

legspin wrote: »

[...] the hospitality aspect of the game is important. No one expects that they would eat the sausage sandwiches that are traditional in my own club (and for which it it famed within North Dublin cricket as far as I understand) but other foods are provided. My objection is the lack of reciprocation.

Haven't read every post, but I think it's clear enough that legspin's problem is that while the club in north Dublin provides a range of food to visiting teams, the islamic-leaning clubs provide only one kind of food.

That's ok if there are good reasons for it, but I can't really think of any and, bearing in mind that hospitality is important, not catering to the visiting teams' needs seems, well, just not cricket.

Kooli

robindch wrote: »

Haven't read every post, but I think it's clear enough that legspin's problem is that while the club in north Dublin provides a range of food to visiting teams, the islamic-leaning clubs provide only one kind of food.

That's ok if there are good reasons for it, but I can't really think of any and, bearing in mind that hospitality is important, not catering to the visiting teams' needs seems, well, just not cricket.

What 'needs' aren't being catered for?

A need for non-halal food? And non-halal food not for any reasons of taste or ethics. Just for the sole purpose of putting the host team out to enforce some sort of manufactured unnecessary reciprocity?

I don't see why any reasonable person should have to cater to those 'needs'

Galvasean

Apaché pizza do halal meats don't they? I challenge the OP to order two pizzas; one with halal mean and another with non-halal meat. If you can taste the difference and prefer the non-halal meat pizza to an extent that the halal meat is unpalatable, THEN you have grounds for complaint.

Mark Hamill

legspin wrote: »

This has actually happened to me. I have cooked for vegetarians in my house food they like, the reciprecal tolerance has never been true. Indeed on one occasion I was denegrated for preparing a steak for myself while they were eating what I had prepared for them. In my own house.
The only vegetarian I know who has ever cooked me a steak is my wife.
If you come to my house and expect to be given food you want to eat the reverse must also be true.

You expect vegetarians to cook meat for you? While I agree that the people giving out to you for eating meat in your own house (while you prepared veggie options for them) are lacking in respect, I don't see why they should have to touch meat for you when you go to their house. Do all of your meals have to contain meat or something?

magicbastarder

christ almighty, you'd swear the visiting teams at legspin's home venue were being treated to a five course meal with waiters and champagne.
it's half time fuel. the debate about what they are duty bound to serve is farcical. especially given the boasts about the legendary sausage sandwiches.
if that's what your club has to offer, a halal kebab sounds far more welcoming and thoughtful.

Lapin

magicbastarder wrote: »

rasher sambos are way overrated. sausage sandwiches all the way.

Why not go the whole hog and pig out on a rasher and sausage sambo !

endacl

Lapin wrote: »

magicbastarder wrote: »

rasher sambos are way overrated. sausage sandwiches all the way.

Why not go the whole hog and pig out on a rasher and sausage sambo !

Such a sambo doth exist?!? In sooth, we liveth in wond'rous times!

Sambo should actually be called the 'hog & pig'.

wonderfulname

Would I be right in saying a strict Muslim cannot handle or prepare non-halal meat? Or am I thinking of a different religion?

I find this very silly, it's more comparable to complaining the meat is free range than vegetarian, the only arguments are ethical, and to be honest I doubt your sausages can claim significant superiority in that regard. A good host should provide for the dietary requirements of their guests, unless you can eat nothing but haram foods they are still doing that. The same principle is why a vegetarian doesn't have to cook you meat but you can't plate it up for them.

I now have a serious craving for suckling pig and cider...

ShooterSF

wonderfulname wrote: »

Would I be right in saying a strict Muslim cannot handle or prepare non-halal meat? Or am I thinking of a different religion?

I find this very silly, it's more comparable to complaining the meat is free range than vegetarian, the only arguments are ethical, and to be honest I doubt your sausages can claim significant superiority in that regard. A good host should provide for the dietary requirements of their guests, unless you can eat nothing but haram foods they are still doing that. The same principle is why a vegetarian doesn't have to cook you meat but you can't plate it up for them.

I now have a serious craving for suckling pig and cider...

Sounds elegant

wonderfulname

You just made me google to check I had my opposites right! Sure nothing screams elegance like a diet of vultures and roadkill...

MagicMarker

robindch wrote: »

Haven't read every post, but I think it's clear enough that legspin's problem is that while the club in north Dublin provides a range of food to visiting teams, the islamic-leaning clubs provide only one kind of food.

That's ok if there are good reasons for it, but I can't really think of any and, bearing in mind that hospitality is important, not catering to the visiting teams' needs seems, well, just not cricket.

I don't think that is the case. I think he has more of a problem with being expected to eat food that's prepared a certain way to keep in line with their "moronic superstitions".....

legspin wrote: »

I don't personally expect anyone to eat what I do but that they expect me to eat by their dietary requirements is beginning to really bug me. {........} Should I say nothing or am I right to object to being expected to eat by the dietary rules of a moronic superstition?

The OP hasn't mentioned the lack of bacon or pork which are actual dietary restrictions imo. He just seems to have a problem with the halal food, which isn't restrictive in the slightest because it's no different to non halal food except the method by which the animal is killed, which again the OP doesn't appear to have a problem with. Also, there can still be plenty of selection such a chicken (in all it's juicy delicious forms) or lamb or even non meat dishes like rice and run of the mill sandwiches.

What exactly would the OP like for them to do? Cook two of every meat dish, one halal and one not? Because that just strikes me as being a dick when the end result is the exact same thing.

robindch

MagicMarker wrote: »

I don't think that is the case. I think he has more of a problem with being expected to eat food that's prepared a certain way to keep in line with their "moronic superstitions".....

Well, as above, I think the legspin's problem is the one legspin mentioned "My objection is the lack of reciprocation".

In a club environment, I'd have expected reciprocation of terms and conditions for hosting and visiting teams to be normal practice. That's what sailing clubs do, and I'd expect the same for cricket club. It's got little or nothing to do with religion, though seeming to restrict reciprocation for religious reasons probably doesn't do much to help the optics.

Reciprocation -- legspin, can you confirm, plz?

MagicMarker

Well, Legspin is the one who brought up religion and started the thread in the A&A forum, so I think that has a lot to do with it.

But I'd be curious of how he'd like them to reciprocate in that case.

doctoremma

Legspin, I CAN see why you're annoyed, I think it would register as an annoyance for me too, I'm just not sure what you should do really.

It is incumbent on a host to provide for guest's needs. However, it is also incumbent on a guest to be as gracious as possible when receiving hospitality.

It's plausible that the provision of halal meat has not registered as potentially problematic for visiting teams (and there are also rules regarding preparation, use of cutlery etc). I'd be almost certain it's not a defiant gesture in any way. And having been on the receiving end of Muslim hospitality, I can only say that the hosting abilities of the people I have had dinner with far outstrip my own - "dutiful" and "conscientious" don't begin to cover it. I was even provided with a mini-bottle of vino on one occasion! My needs were paramount.

I would be inclined to view it as an oversight and one which, if brought to the attention of the host, might cause some embarrassment. For that reason alone, and given you don't have an ethical objection, I'd put aside my own discomfort for the sake of my hosts'.

Sarky

Restaurant near me is spitroasting a whole pig this weekend. It'll be glorious. I'll let you know if any Muslims show up.

legspin

Both Robin and Dr.Emma have the right of it. The hospitality aspect IS the crux of the matter.

However, I would be lying if the question was not originally prompted by a religion, the hospitality allowed by that religion, and the demanded tolerance of me to that religion. The food is just a small facet of it that directly impinges itself into my life.
As regards what I am supposed to do, well that's why I asked the question in the first place.
As has been pointed out this is the Atheist and Agnostic forum. If I can't ask a question about the treatment I am expected to tolerate by people who don't identify as that where can I ask it?

Telling me to put up and shut up though.... Haven't we all been doing that for long enough now at this point?
I did say that I was going to do nothing but having read most of the responses here I feel ashamed that I am going to do nothing and allow this particular death cult to get away unquestioned. Ye should be as well. This is how they get away with the **** they pull in other circumstances

Yet again I must iterate the taste of the food is completly unimportant but rather more what that food represents.

Mickeroo

legspin wrote: »

Both Robin and Dr.Emma have the right of it. The hospitality aspect IS the crux of the matter.

However, I would be lying if the question was not originally prompted by a religion, the hospitality allowed by that religion, and the demanded tolerance of me to that religion. The food is just a small facet of it that directly impinges itself into my life.
As regards what I am supposed to do, well that's why I asked the question in the first place.
As has been pointed out this is the Atheist and Agnostic forum. If I can't ask a question about the treatment I am expected to tolerate by people who don't identify as that where can I ask it?

Telling me to put up and shut up though.... Haven't we all been doing that for long enough now at this point?
I did say that I was going to do nothing but having read most of the responses here I feel ashamed that I am going to do nothing and allow this particular death cult to get away unquestioned. Ye should be as well. This is how they get away with the **** they pull in other circumstances

Yet again I must iterate the taste of the food is completly unimportant but rather more what that food represents.

What **** have these lads you play cricket with been pulling in other circumstances exactly? They're part of a death cult now are they? Maybe you should be calling the police?

Sound like this runs a bit deeper than the food they were serving.

robindch

Mickeroo wrote: »

Sound like this runs a bit deeper than the food they were serving.

As legspin says, this is about reciprocation. If his club is fixing two meals for visiting teams, while some other clubs are only fixing one, then frankly, that isn't reciprocating hospitality. Like for like and all that?

legspin wrote: »

As regards what I am supposed to do, well that's why I asked the question in the first place.

As above, if you want to go ahead with doing something about this, I'd approach your own club board more formally and say that you're not best pleased with the food in some other places. No need to mention any specific reasons, but just simply suggest that there's been grumblings down the mill about the limited selection on offer and that perhaps it's not to everybody's taste.

If the board agrees, perhaps putting it to a members' vote or perhaps also chatting with other members of other clubs to see if the feeling's the same elsewhere to establish a general consensus, then one solution is for your club and any others interested to make it generally known that they're going to ask visiting teams to express their meal preferences, say offering two or three possible choices. Each other club will then be honor-bound to offer something similar. In terms of optics, this could be expressed as a wish to cut down on food waste while increasing choice.

Another option, perhaps more risky but probably more effective, is just to bring along your own sandwiches to the one-meal club and politely decline anything except tea, and provide a polite, plausible reason like that you're allergic to curry or whatever.

schemingbohemia

legspin wrote: »

Both Robin and Dr.Emma have the right of it. The hospitality aspect IS the crux of the matter.

However, I would be lying if the question was not originally prompted by a religion, the hospitality allowed by that religion, and the demanded tolerance of me to that religion. The food is just a small facet of it that directly impinges itself into my life.
As regards what I am supposed to do, well that's why I asked the question in the first place.
As has been pointed out this is the Atheist and Agnostic forum. If I can't ask a question about the treatment I am expected to tolerate by people who don't identify as that where can I ask it?

Telling me to put up and shut up though.... Haven't we all been doing that for long enough now at this point?
I did say that I was going to do nothing but having read most of the responses here I feel ashamed that I am going to do nothing and allow this particular death cult to get away unquestioned. Ye should be as well. This is how they get away with the **** they pull in other circumstances

Yet again I must iterate the taste of the food is completly unimportant but rather more what that food represents.

You're completely off the wall here. As an atheist, vegetarian cricketer I can speak with a bit of knowledge here.

First things first, do the "Muslim" team ever ask you if the meat in the sandwiches you're providing is Halal? I would seriously doubt it, never been my experience that that has happened, if so aren't they showing some leeway to you and your club? So they are reciprocating on that front, your house your rules.

I'm fairly sure that the prohibition on eating certain foods pre-dates certain religions (especially islam, I'm fairly sure Saudi Arabia wasn't full of pig farmers prior to the advent of Islam) so it's more of a cultural situation than religious.

Thirdly - "death cult" don't really like the sound of that, pretty offensive.

I think we've come a long way from the days where most clubs automatically put out ham & cheese sandwiches for the opposition which left me and other veggies, muslims and jews starving (or at least having to just eat cake and buns!).

Mickeroo

robindch wrote: »

As legspin says, this is about reciprocation. If his club is fixing two meals for visiting teams, while some other clubs are only fixing one, then frankly, that isn't reciprocating hospitality. Like for like and all that?

Yeah I got what they meant in that regard, but the last post kind of made me think all they really wanted to do was kick up a fuss for no other reason than the guys are muslim.

robindch

I don't get the impression at all that this is about kicking up a fuss because some guys assert the existence of allah or whatever.

As far as I can make out, this is about some clubs who are unwilling to reciprocate, partially on account of religion.

magicbastarder

legspin wrote: »

Telling me to put up and shut up though.... Haven't we all been doing that for long enough now at this point?

you're reading far too much into this.
eating the food they prepare is not a tacit approval of targetting salman rushdie, or any other (non-halal related) actions of the muslim community.

eating their food, and enjoying it, and being thankful that you're enjoying a bit of multiculturalism with your cricket does far more credit to you than being annoyed that the food you're happy to eat is provided as an insult to you, rather than in the spirit of hospitality it is almost certainly intended.

MagicMarker

legspin wrote: »

Both Robin and Dr.Emma have the right of it. The hospitality aspect IS the crux of the matter.

However, I would be lying if the question was not originally prompted by a religion, the hospitality allowed by that religion, and the demanded tolerance of me to that religion. The food is just a small facet of it that directly impinges itself into my life.
As regards what I am supposed to do, well that's why I asked the question in the first place.
As has been pointed out this is the Atheist and Agnostic forum. If I can't ask a question about the treatment I am expected to tolerate by people who don't identify as that where can I ask it?

Telling me to put up and shut up though.... Haven't we all been doing that for long enough now at this point?
I did say that I was going to do nothing but having read most of the responses here I feel ashamed that I am going to do nothing and allow this particular death cult to get away unquestioned. Ye should be as well. This is how they get away with the **** they pull in other circumstances

Yet again I must iterate the taste of the food is completly unimportant but rather more what that food represents.

What would you prefer these people do for you? How would you like them to accomodate you?

Mickeroo

robindch wrote: »

I don't get the impression at all that this is about kicking up a fuss because some guys assert the existence of allah or whatever.

As far as I can make out, this is about some clubs who are unwilling to reciprocate, partially on account of religion.

I thought that too until they said this:

Telling me to put up and shut up though.... Haven't we all been doing that for long enough now at this point?
I did say that I was going to do nothing but having read most of the responses here I feel ashamed that I am going to do nothing and allow this particular death cult to get away unquestioned. Ye should be as well. This is how they get away with the **** they pull in other circumstances

As for the reciprocation thing. Well, if they're devout Muslims are they allowed to prepare non-halal meat? I wouldn't expect a vegan to prepare me a steak regardless of how daft I think their reasoning for being a vegan is for example.

Galvasean

robindch wrote: »

I don't get the impression at all that this is about kicking up a fuss because some guys assert the existence of allah or whatever.

As far as I can make out, this is about some clubs who are unwilling to reciprocate, partially on account of religion.

Reciprocate with what though? Any omnivore can eat halal meat. Should the Muslim cricket club be made go through the hassle of sourcing another, but identical tasting, source of meat just because one person decided that they didn't want to eat halal meat despite the fact that it is perfectly palatable for them? Asking them to 'reciprocate' when there is nothing wrong with the food they are providing just screams of pointless tit-for -tat.

haulagebasher

You could just not eat their meat and then bring your own sandwiches with your own meat?

I think it is very poor reflection on the club that they automatically expect you to comply with thier dietary rules even though you are not of their religion.

I bet if the show was on the other foot and it was the GAA demanding that all players not eat red meats on Fridays the PC brigade would have a field day with it but since it's Muslims imposing their religion on others they won't go near it because its not PC to criticise islam.


Personally I would not eat hallall meat anyway because the animal is killed in a cruel and primitive way and many of the hallal "abbatoirs" leave a lot to be desired for hygeine and proper refrigeration.

It's odd that the cricket club is mostly muslim as it's a primarily British sport. I would have thought it would be mostly CoI or CoE.

MagicMarker

The OP is not being forced to adhere to dietary restrictions any more than someone who likes the chickens from Dunnes being served one bought in Tescos.

doctoremma

haulagebasher wrote: »

It's odd that the cricket club is mostly muslim as it's a primarily British sport. I would have thought it would be mostly CoI or CoE.

It might be worth remembering the breadth of the globe covered by our great empire....

Green Diesel

haulagebasher wrote: »

It's odd that the cricket club is mostly muslim as it's a primarily British sport. I would have thought it would be mostly CoI or CoE.

Cricket is amazingly popular in India, Pakistan and much of the rest of the empire.

Nodin

legspin wrote: »

Thanks for the replies folks.

Now I have seen the answers I do believe it would not be right for me to object but that won't prevent it from rankling with me.

As Endacl pointed out I have no problem eating halal when it is by choice (and indeed when it is a kebab, if it's not halal it's not a proper kebab imo). It is the choice aspect that I have an issue with. If I go to eat a kebab that's my decision. Expecting me to eat a kebab because that's what you want to do would raise an objection here

I'm not sure though that saying I'm merely being churlish because of the religious aspect of the food is correct. Religion, in all it's varying levels of stupidity and ignorance needs to be countered. Saying that one can't eat a certain food because a god would be angered makes me boil. Life is hard enough without having to add that level of crass idiocy on top.

Hospitality is a two-way street though. If you have certain expectations as to how you want to be treated in my house, you had better return the favour if I'm in yours.

So essentially you're pissed off because its "halal" - not the taste, not the actualy methodology of the slaughter or anything else. Totally pathetic, weak and an excuse to intellectualise whatever grudge you have against them.

robindch

Galvasean wrote: »

Reciprocate with what though?

Another choice of food! Just so that they're offering a range of food that's roughly equivalent to what they're receiving when they visit elsewhere.

That's what reciprocation means unless there's something I'm missing!

haulagebasher

doctoremma wrote: »

It might be worth remembering the breadth of the globe covered by our great empire....

Yeah.Covered. It explains why Queenie looks so pissed of these days:

Galvasean

robindch wrote: »

Another choice of food! Just so that they're offering a range of food that's roughly equivalent to what they're receiving when they visit elsewhere.

That's what reciprocation means unless there's something I'm missing!

It sounds to me that is exactly what they are doing but the OP just does not like that it happens to be halal (and not for any flavour or animal rights reasons).
I must agree with MM's analogy:

MagicMarker wrote: »

The OP is not being forced to adhere to dietary restrictions any more than someone who likes the chickens from Dunnes being served one bought in Tescos.

al28283

legspin wrote: »

Yet again I must iterate the taste of the food is completly unimportant but rather more what that food represents.

What does the food represent to an athiest? What does an athiest care about a blessing?

If they offered an identical meal slaughtered in the same way without the blessing would that stop you being annoyed?

Have you asked them to provide something without meat?

schemingbohemia

robindch wrote: »

Another choice of food! Just so that they're offering a range of food that's roughly equivalent to what they're receiving when they visit elsewhere.

That's what reciprocation means unless there's something I'm missing!

You are missing something - as a cricketer in most clubs the players themselves prepare sandwiches or cakes for themselves and the opposition, there's usually no "meal" per se.

As a vegetarian I usually make either cheese and pickle sandwiches or egg mayo, others would usually make ham and cheese or meat sandwiches. A good few years ago I was playing for Civil Service against North Kildare which would have been a predominately muslim team (lads working in Kepak) and most of our lads had made Ham sandwiches so the opposition just had to eat the cakes etc (apart from my sandwiches).

The club members were mortified at the oversight (I think it may have been the first year that North Kildare were in existance) and it didn't happen again - in fairness the lads from North Kildare didn't complain or anything, it was just an oversight.

I subsequently played with Dundrum who had a largely Indian (and Hindu) membership, they usually prepared mostly vegetarian and chicken sandwiches, never heard any compaints.

I'm sure from the OPs subsequent comments that this is about other issues he has with muslims and nothing to do with dietary issues.

Mark Hamill

legspin wrote: »

Both Robin and Dr.Emma have the right of it. The hospitality aspect IS the crux of the matter.

How is it inhospitable for them to offer their own ethnic food (that you have no dietary or ethical reasons not to eat?) Lets say you got an invite to play a cricket match in Pakistan or something, would you complain that the food there is all halal? For a lot of people, being hospitable to a foreigner would include showing them their cuisine and lifestyle. It would be pretty boring if every time you went to someone's house for a meal, you just ate the same food you ate at home.

legspin

Mark Hamill wrote: »

How is it inhospitable for them to offer their own ethnic food (that you have no dietary or ethical reasons not to eat?) Lets say you got an invite to play a cricket match in Pakistan or something, would you complain that the food there is all halal? For a lot of people, being hospitable to a foreigner would include showing them their cuisine and lifestyle. It would be pretty boring if every time you went to someone's house for a meal, you just ate the same food you ate at home.

True, but surely the same must hold in the opposite direction. It doesn't though and that is not right. They won't eat our ethnic food. Claiming a religious exemption just doesn't wash with me.

I do have issues with islam, massive ones. As an atheist how can I not? However, those issues apply to all other religions as well.

There are several people here whose opinions and comments I respect on other matters who have basically told me to get a life. Perhaps they are correct. The more I think on it there might be something else other than a belief in sauce for the goose behind my objection.
I suppose my objection then is ethical to a certain extent. I realise that I was being unthinkingly hypocritical when I mentioned kebabs earlier. If I am to be true to what I think to be right I can never eat another one.
And before anyone thinks I'm just being petty for the sake of it I don't expect anyone to agree with me, this not being Atheism +. However, as far as I am concerned all religious practices are dangerous hooey and I must fight against them as I can (as a relatively powerless individual) and I won't cherry pick. To do anything else would be to deny what I am and what I hold dear. I'm sure Zaytoons will not lose so much as a minute of sleep over the fact that they have just lost a customer but meh, it is what it is and I must assuage my conscience.

Seriously though folks thanks for the opinions and comment. I won't trouble you further in this thread.

Nodin

legspin wrote: »

True, but surely the same must hold in the opposite direction. It doesn't though and that is not right. They won't eat our ethnic food..

They won't eat spuds? You'd prefer if they ate a cow that had been slaughtered with a hurley?

legspin wrote: »

Claiming a religious exemption just doesn't wash with me..

But you claiming an exemption over nothing save the fact they approve of the food is supposed to wash with them?

legspin wrote: »

There are several people here whose opinions and comments I respect on other matters who have basically told me to get a life. Perhaps they are correct. The more I think on it there might be something else other than a belief in sauce for the goose behind my objection. ..

I'd say there is, allright.

legspin wrote: »

I suppose my objection then is ethical to a certain extent...

Not in the bloody slightest. Something along the "cutting off the nose to spite the face" lines.

Sulla Felix

legspin wrote: »

However, as far as I am concerned all religious practices are dangerous hooey and I must fight against them as I can (as a relatively powerless individual) and I won't cherry pick. To do anything else would be to deny what I am and what I hold dear.

Unbending adherence to principles, however innately legitimate or passionately held, is something that I've seen this forum and atheists generally, point to as one of the chief reasons that religion is a cause for ill.

I can see where you're coming from with all this, even if I don't agree with it, but really in any ethical tug of war, battles have to be picked so that the war can be won. On any issue, generally the best results are made when the most glaring transgressions are fought first.

For example, one of the reasons PETA are held in such low regard, even in the relatively cosy world of animal rights movement is because they have such an unyielding approach to each and every incidence of maltreatment.

The small section of the population that even cares to begin with only has a limited threshold of attention it will give to any theme, so if we waste time trying to get the keeping of buderigars in cages of <10m3 outlawed and making small ethnic cricket teams serve both halal and haram food, then we'll find we don't have much of an audience when it comes time to demand that battery chicken farms be shut or that the church relinquish some of grasp on our childrens education.

There is a hierarchy of importance. All the issues are important, but some are more important than others.

schemingbohemia

legspin wrote: »

True, but surely the same must hold in the opposite direction. It doesn't though and that is not right. They won't eat our ethnic food. Claiming a religious exemption just doesn't wash with me.

I do have issues with islam, massive ones. As an atheist how can I not? However, those issues apply to all other religions as well.

There are several people here whose opinions and comments I respect on other matters who have basically told me to get a life. Perhaps they are correct. The more I think on it there might be something else other than a belief in sauce for the goose behind my objection.
I suppose my objection then is ethical to a certain extent. I realise that I was being unthinkingly hypocritical when I mentioned kebabs earlier. If I am to be true to what I think to be right I can never eat another one.
And before anyone thinks I'm just being petty for the sake of it I don't expect anyone to agree with me, this not being Atheism +. However, as far as I am concerned all religious practices are dangerous hooey and I must fight against them as I can (as a relatively powerless individual) and I won't cherry pick. To do anything else would be to deny what I am and what I hold dear. I'm sure Zaytoons will not lose so much as a minute of sleep over the fact that they have just lost a customer but meh, it is what it is and I must assuage my conscience.

Seriously though folks thanks for the opinions and comment. I won't trouble you further in this thread.

What rubbish are you spouting now? They do eat our ethnic food, they have certainly done so at every cricket club I've played at, I've never heard any muslim ask if the chicken or beef was halal, they just ate it anyway.

Really your prejudices are really showing now when you blatantly lie about this situation.

Shenshen

legspin wrote: »

There is a minor issue in my own life that is beginning to trouble me.

I play cricket. Now please don't laugh but within the game, the tea interval is an integral aspect of the social aspect of the game (not to mention an opportunity to refresh oneself from an arduous afternoon of standing in a field on a pleasant summer's afternoon....). As those in the know will understand there is a fair number of muslims from the sub-continent playing it. In some clubs there is a large majority of them and in a small number of them they set up the clubs for themselves and are 100% muslim. Recently, I have found that these clubs in particular are serving only halal food at the tea interval. I don't have a problem with the taste of food but with the assumption that I would be willing to eat it at all. I don't personally expect anyone to eat what I do but that they expect me to eat by their dietary requirements is beginning to really bug me. I have said nothing yet (apart from the occasional mutter to my captain) and the season has just finished so it won't be an issue again untill next year.

Should I say nothing or am I right to object to being expected to eat by the dietary rules of a moronic superstition?
I must add that the problem is not limited to halal. If the food was kosher the objection would be the same but there isn't that many jews playing cricket here since Carlise stopped playing as a club back in the nineties.

Of course, I don't have to eat it, but like I said the hospitality aspect of the game is important. No one expects that they would eat the sausage sandwiches that are traditional in my own club (and for which it it famed within North Dublin cricket as far as I understand) but other foods are provided. My objection is the lack of reciprocation.

Am I over-reacting?

Maybe a little bit...
Just to put it into a different context : How would you feel if, say, a group of vegetarians got together and started their own cricket team? Would you insist that they still serve you meat?
Personally, I would have a bit of a problem with halal food, same as I would have with kosher, due to the way the animals are being slaughtered. I regard this as highly inhumane. But I don't think I would complain, it's their club, their rules. I simply would either avoid eating the meat served, or be diplomatic and bring my own food.

robindch

schemingbohemia - there's no need to throw around accusations of dishonesty in this - please calm down.