Londonistan, Eurabia

[Derec]

All it takes for going off pork to become a good economical move is a larger potential gain in type A costumers than what you're going to loose in type D costumers. This can be the case even when > 90% of the potential costumers fall into category C.

Or A1) Those that demand everyone else adhere to their superstitions and are best known for violent terrorism.

 

[Jokodo]

All it takes for going off pork to become a good economical move is a larger potential gain in type A costumers than what you're going to loose in type D costumers. This can be the case even when > 90% of the potential costumers fall into category C.

Or A1) Those that demand everyone else adhere to their superstitions and are best known for violent terrorism.

What's the point of derailing your own thread?

Nobody has been demanding that "everyone else adhere to their superstitions". This is not just the default position, it's also evidenced by the facts in your own OP: A large majority of Subway shops keep selling pork, without apparently getting into any trouble whatsoever for it other than, maybe, loosing a few costumers.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

All it takes for going off pork to become a good economical move is a larger potential gain in type A costumers than what you're going to loose in type D costumers. This can be the case even when > 90% of the potential costumers fall into category C.

Or A1) Those that demand everyone else adhere to their superstitions and are best known for violent terrorism.

I think you mean the Irish.

 

[Derec]

I think you mean the Irish.

At least their demands don't go as far as to demand eateries serve nothing but Irish Stew and Guinness.

 

[Derec]

Nobody has been demanding that "everyone else adhere to their superstitions". This is not just the default position, it's also evidenced by the facts in your own OP: A large majority of Subway shops keep selling pork, without apparently getting into any trouble whatsoever for it other than, maybe, loosing a few costumers.

If they can't eat pork it's a simple matter of not ordering pork. Demanding that a restaurant or a school or a workplace go all halal shows a demand that other people (if you object to "everyone") adhere to their religious superstitions.

 

[Jokodo]

Seriously, how are you guys reconsiling the fact that, according to the article linked in the OP, only 185 out of a total of around 1500 Subway outlets in the UK are going halal, with your claim that Muslims are "demand[ing] everyone else adhere to their superstitions"?

That leaves the UK with ~1315 Subway outlets that do serve pork.

 

[Jokodo]

Nobody has been demanding that "everyone else adhere to their superstitions". This is not just the default position, it's also evidenced by the facts in your own OP: A large majority of Subway shops keep selling pork, without apparently getting into any trouble whatsoever for it other than, maybe, loosing a few costumers.

If they can't eat pork it's a simple matter of not ordering pork. Demanding that a restaurant or a school or a workplace go all halal shows a demand that other people (if you object to "everyone") adhere to their religious superstitions.

No, it does not. It shows that they feel uncomfortable eating while someone else eats pork besides them. You can call that superstitious, but it's their right in a free society to bring their money to a place where they feel comfortable, and it's Subway's right to try and hold those costumers.

 

[Derec]

No, it does not. It shows that they feel uncomfortable eating while someone else eats pork besides them. You can call that superstitious, but it's their right in a free society to bring their money to a place where they feel comfortable, and it's Subway's right to try and hold those costumers.

And it is the right of everyone else to call that move cowardly dhimmitude.

 

[KeepTalking]

Nobody has been demanding that "everyone else adhere to their superstitions". This is not just the default position, it's also evidenced by the facts in your own OP: A large majority of Subway shops keep selling pork, without apparently getting into any trouble whatsoever for it other than, maybe, loosing a few costumers.

If they can't eat pork it's a simple matter of not ordering pork.

I think you have been informed more than once that this is not the case, as Halal requires their meat to be prepared and stored separately from non-halal meats. The Subway restaurants in question decided that it would be easier to go halal only, than to have to train their employees to keep the different meats entirely separate throughout the storage and preparation process. Please drop this canard, it does your side of the argument no good as it only shows that you are unwilling to learn anything about the topic of discussion.

 

[Derec]

I think you have been informed more than once that this is not the case, as Halal requires their meat to be prepared and stored separately from non-halal meats.

Halal also requires that animals be slaughtered in a manner inconsistent with animal protection laws.
I do not see why British businesses, British schools etc. should have to accommodate such superstition.

The Subway restaurants in question decided that it would be easier to go halal only, than to have to train their employees to keep the different meats entirely separate throughout the storage and preparation process.

So what's next? British pubs banning alcohol because the glasses they serve Muslim patrons can't be kept entirely separate from those alcohol is being served in?
Camel's nose, meet tent.

 

[Jokodo]

No, it does not. It shows that they feel uncomfortable eating while someone else eats pork besides them. You can call that superstitious, but it's their right in a free society to bring their money to a place where they feel comfortable, and it's Subway's right to try and hold those costumers.

And it is the right of everyone else to call that move cowardly dhimmitude.

Just as it's the right of everyone else to claim that the moon is made of green cheese, or that the US is the largest country in the world both by area and population.
If you care about being right, you might prefer to refrain from such claims, though.

Essentially, you are demanding that Subway refrain from making a move they expect to positively affect their bottom lines for the sole purpose of making a stand against Muslims. I think that fits the definition of "fundamentalist".

 

[Nice Squirrel]

I think you mean the Irish.

At least their demands don't go as far as to demand eateries serve nothing but Irish Stew and Guinness.

And who is demanding Subway change its menu?

 

[Nice Squirrel]

Camel's nose, meet tent.

Does he smell stereotyping and bigotry? Because I do.

 

[Jokodo]

Halal also requires that animals be slaughtered in a manner inconsistent with animal protection laws.
I do not see why British businesses, British schools etc. should have to accommodate such superstition.

You really didn't read the article you linked in the OP, did you? It says quite explicitly that there are different schools of thought within Islam as to whether meat is still considered halal when the animal has been stunned, and the meat that will be served in Subways is from animals that have been stunned (as indeed a large majority of the meat sold as halal in Britain).

There are thought to be around 12 abattoirs dedicated to unstunned slaughter in the UK, while hundreds practise stunned halal slaughter.
A Subway spokeswoman told MailOnline all halal meat served in the participating branches is from animals who were stunned prior to slaughter.

The Subway restaurants in question decided that it would be easier to go halal only, than to have to train their employees to keep the different meats entirely separate throughout the storage and preparation process.

So what's next? British pubs banning alcohol because the glasses they serve Muslim patrons can't be kept entirely separate from those alcohol is being served in?

I'm sure there are coffee houses in Britain that don't serve alcohol. If there's demand for more, more will open up. That's not going to ever lead to a shortage of pubs serving alcohol, though - there's going to be an equilibrium point pretty soon where opening a new pub is going to be more profitable than opening a new teetotaller coffee house.

Also, am I correct in assuming that you're writing from a country where Christians are successfully undermining everbody else's right to an alcoholic drink in many a place? Don't you think a local government banning the sale of alcohol countywide is a tiny bit more outrageous than a pub deciding that their economic interests are better served by catering to teetotallers?

I can assure you that the UK isn't going to look like this anytime soon (red=dry counties; yellow=semi-dry counties, source: Wikipedia).

 

[angelo]

We should not allow religious ritual killing in any way.

Nor should the majority bend over backwards as many are to the demands made by moslems or any other minority.

 

[KeepTalking]

Halal also requires that animals be slaughtered in a manner inconsistent with animal protection laws.

Which, if one were paying attention, is not the case with the Subway Halal meats, as they are stunning the animals before slaughtering them. Apparently some versions of Halal allow this, which you would know if you were fucking paying attention to this thread, which you started.

I do not see why British businesses, British schools etc. should have to accommodate such superstition.

This thread is not about British schools, but British businesses are free to accommodate whatever superstitions they like.

The Subway restaurants in question decided that it would be easier to go halal only, than to have to train their employees to keep the different meats entirely separate throughout the storage and preparation process.

So what's next? British pubs banning alcohol because the glasses they serve Muslim patrons can't be kept entirely separate from those alcohol is being served in?

Well, since there is also an Islamic prohibition against drinking alcohol, I doubt that any devout Muslims frequent British pubs. But if a British pub wanted to do so in order to cater to the Muslim customers they don't have, who the fuck are you to tell them they can't?

 

[The Paul]

Derec, you just spent 10 pages wailing about what a fucking outrage it is that Subway should dare to serve halal food in stores in Muslim communities. Then...

However, this thread is not about me objecting to halal food being offered.

IT DOESN'T WORK LIKE THAT!

WE ALL SAW THE LAST 10 PAGES!

 

[Derec]

Derec, you just spent 10 pages wailing about what a fucking outrage it is that Subway should dare to serve halal food in stores in Muslim communities. Then...

No the outrage is that they would serve nothing but halal food in stores where there are some Muslims (15% in the case of Easton, Bristol) in the communities.
That you consider a community with 15% Muslim population a "Muslim community" is quite telling.

 

[Sabine Grant]

Due to Islamist pressure, many Subway stores across UK and Ireland are banning porn products and are only carrying meat from animals slaughtered according to Islamic religious precepts (aka "halal").
Subway removes ham and bacon from nearly 200 stores and offers halal meat only after 'strong demand' from Muslims

I think this is bullshit. This is directly restricting choices for non-Muslims just so Muslims are not offended by having to sit next to someone with bacon on their sandwich. Giving them choices they like (although halal slaughtering is very problematic in itself) is one thing, restricting choices of others is quite another.

Out of 1,734 Subway outlets in Ireland and the UK, 200 will only serve halal products while excluding pork. If they did not exclude pork from their menu, it would necessitate special training for their employees to avoid contact between pork products and halal products. Separate utensils, separate counters to prepare the food, separate refrigeration sections etc... That decision to dedicate 200 stores to halal only appears to be based not on "Islamist pressure" rather the customer demand based on demographics per location. It makes sense that Subway would provide a service compatible with the predominant cultural profile directing the consumer demand in each location.

As to objections to the halal slaughtering, Subway communicated that all their halal meat comes from halal slaughtering houses who use stunning prior to slaughter. As to "restricting choices of others", considering that there are still over 1200 Subways serving non halal products, how much "restriction" are you assuming will affect non Muslim consumers in the UK and the Republic of Ireland?

Stunning the animal is no longer a halal slaughtering method. Halal methods are a ritual killing of the animal while it's still alive and concious. a Dedication to their god.

Again, from the article linked to in the OP :

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...and-Muslims-eat-Halal-meat.html#ixzz30NWrWK96

There are thought to be around 12 abattoirs dedicated to unstunned slaughter in the UK, while hundreds practise stunned halal slaughter.
A Subway spokeswoman told MailOnline all halal meat served in the participating branches is from animals who were stunned prior to slaughter.

If the Subway's claim is correct, there should be no further concern based on the suffering of the animal being kept conscious during the slicing of its throat.

 

[Keith&Co.]

Halal also requires that animals be slaughtered in a manner inconsistent with animal protection laws.

What animal protection laws are you referring to? The halal meat sold to these subway outlets is consistent with the UK animal protection laws. Legally, for all meat sold for human consumption in Britain, the animal must be stunned before slaughter.